35:06

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

networks, cybersecurity, data, happening, regulation, iot, technology, ai, talk, cases, domains, companies, privacy, security, great, secure, put, device, framework, absolutely

SPEAKERS

Moiz Baig, Debbie Reynolds

Debbie Reynolds  00:00

Personal views and opinions expressed by our podcast guests are their own and are not legal advice or official statements by their organizations. Hello, my name is Debbie Reynolds; they call me "The Data Diva”. This is "The Data Diva" Talks Privacy podcast where we discuss Data Privacy issues with industry leaders around the world with information that businesses need to know now. Our very special guest all the way from Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, Moiz Baig; is a cybersecurity adviser for Nokia. Welcome.

Moiz Baig  00:40

Thank you, Debbie. It's a pleasure to be on your podcast. I'm looking forward to our conversation. Absolutely.

Debbie Reynolds  00:46

So, you and I connected on LinkedIn; I love your name. I was really excited about some of the things you do and also the things that you comment on on LinkedIn. So, I would love for you to give a bit of your background in cybersecurity and how you ended up in this career path.

Moiz Baig  01:06

Sure. So, as I've been in telecoms, or I would say journey networking for over 20 years now, I've had a passion for technology growing up; my father was more of a mechanical engineer, used to tear cars apart and build them back again, I don't think the mechanical aspect was that much appealing to me. But just the engineering aspect was quite appealing. Growing up in the age of satellite communication, and satellite television, I think just the idea of having to be able to communicate across the world using these domains was something that I thought was really exciting. So that's how I stumbled upon doing my undergraduate in electrical engineering with a focus on telecommunication. And the rest of it is history. In short, I've had about a little over 20 years’ worth of experience; I started off my career more on the networking side, coming from a core network/ IP network background where I was responsible for some of the early 3G networks. And also to a certain extent, 2G networks on building the backward connectivity, later on have been part of some of the early 3G rollouts that were happening, the third generation mobile communication both in Europe and North America, before moving over to the region here where the focus has been more on services. And for the past almost four or five years, I've been pretty much eating, breathing, and sleeping cybersecurity as a topic. As we know, with the advent of things like 5G network virtualization, it is becoming a very, very important topic. And I personally thought that while creativity is great, I think there's an aspect of security in diplomacy that needs to be brought into the picture. So in short, that has been my journey. And that's how I ended up in cybersecurity.

Debbie Reynolds  02:59

That's great. Oh, wow. Well, you and I have something in common. So, my father was also a mechanical engineer. That's why I think I like to like to tear things apart and break them.

Moiz Baig  03:11

Likewise. Absolutely. Yeah.

Debbie Reynolds  03:14

I want to talk about 5G. It's so funny. So when you hear people talk about certain technologies, when they come out, there's this obvious hype cycle that happens where people are talking about that one topic at that one moment a lot, right? And then people get interested in the next shiny thing, and then they forget about it. So I've heard people say, Well, 5G is over with, is not going to happen. I'm like, do you know nothing about technology whatsoever? Tell me what's happening right now.

Moiz Baig  03:49

I totally agree with you, Debbie; look, I think the technology, to most people, I think it's about what use cases or what problems it is actually solving for them. Correct. So, coming from a background, I think both of us have seen the dial-up Internet times. And then some of the early deployments on the mobile networks, the second generation, the CDMA, and then 3G or 4G, where these speeds have been relatively increasing. In my view, I would say the inflection point has been the creation of the iPhone, right? I mean, in 2007 and 2008 when Steve Jobs came up with this brand new device that looked like an iPod but had a lot more options. So most of the people like ourselves, who were used to the Motorola Razor phones, or the Nokia, brick phones were great phones with our Tetris games and playing Snake and all that. But that really changed the entire ecosystem of how people would use this device on a daily basis for a multitude of applications. So that use case drove, I think, a lot of innovation in that space and also drove the connectivity. I tell a lot of people that if it was not for Steve Jobs, I think 3G networks would have been a graveyard, right? Because the use cases weren't there. I mean, there were a lot of companies testing things like video conferencing or video calling and 3G. But really, there was no killer use case. So, in short, I think that was a big inflection point in our technology domain, where we see a huge uptake of people really connecting in a way they had never done before. What has happened since then with 4G LTE, and now 5G, is it has taken a multifocal, I would say, increase in terms of what applications can be put into play? So, to your question, Debbie, what is happening in 5G? I think that is a multibillion-dollar question that most CEOs are asking on a daily basis. Look at the US, for example, AT&T, T Mobile, Verizon, and so forth; we have the other market. They have invested a lot of money to meet the requirements for the licenses, which they got to go out to buy the networks. They have spent a lot of money with vendors like Nokia, Ericsson, and some others to deploy these sorts of networks. And at the end of the day, I think there's still a big question mark on how they monetize these networks. I mean, where is money coming from? Right? Then there's been this whole debate about the OTT players, which is the over-the-top players who are coming in with their applications, be it the likes of WhatsApp or Telegram or Facebook and kind of using the pipe connectivity, but have been provided by these IOC operators being on a 4G or 5G network and take the revenue side away from them. Having said that, there has also been 5G, a lot of talk about use cases in the industry 4.0, which means how do you digitalize traditional industries like agriculture, health care, and transportation, with things like smart cities with things like dedicated networks slices, or use catered on ports, or in certain factories to drive automation. And I think that's where the low latency, which we talked about, in layman’s words, is the time it would take for you to send a request with your phone, and the response you get back has been the lowest in 5G. So besides the great speeds that we get, it's also the lower latency of 5G, which has been driving a lot of business cases, using cancers in the things we wear, or watches or glasses, or, you know, devices we use at home, or cars that are not connected. So I think that has really driven that ecosystem. But if you ask me, honestly, I think that killer use case is still somewhere on the horizon. And I think that would really drive the mass adoption of 5G in a way which it was intended to, because otherwise, it basically becomes a G, like you said, the technology, which may give you access to download Netflix movies in 10 seconds, compared to a couple of minutes in LTE. But besides that, I think it really, really needs that strong driver. And you've been talking on a lot of domains on that. And I'd be happy to share more details on where we see 5G going in the future. Absolutely. I work on a lot of use cases around IoT. Maybe IoT and 5G suffer from the same problem where there was this huge hype cycle, and people got excited about the new shiny thing. And they're like, oh, IoT is over. I'm like, everything that we're doing right now thinking about all the smart devices and things like that. And so I tell people, what are these new innovations? What they're doing is creating more capability for people to be able to connect things to the internet and do things that they weren't able to do yet. But I agree that there isn't sort of that one use case; it just blows everything out of the water; maybe it'll be just a bunch of little niche use cases, precisely. That, combined together, will create a huge impact. But I think that the sleeping giant, in my view, is probably IoT in the way people are using it. You gave an example about smart cities and something, I work on as well. I walk around, I drive around, and I see more devices on poles and different things. The cities are trying to do that maybe people aren't paying attention. And maybe that's good. Maybe it's good that people feel like their city operates in a way that is not true sue to them. But then also that brings in a lot of cyber and privacy issues as well. What do you think?  Absolutely. I couldn't agree with you more on that Debbie. And IoT as a topic is very close to my heart. So I think something I didn't mention in the beginning is I took a two-year career break in 2013 and 14, where I was so excited about IoT and, at that time, machine to machine or MTM that I thought that was a domain to work in. I signed up a couple of companies that I would present at the channel partner here in the region and also developed some of the use cases while it was still early days. And like you said we'd be hearing multiple numbers in our 50 billion devices by 2020. 100 billion bytes amount that I think we have adopted IoT in a way we don't really recognize it. In the context of smart cities, the things we use on a daily basis, you know, with the Apple Watch or the trackers that we have in our health scales, or things like Alexa, these have become so integrated into our daily lives that we don't even think twice about. Okay, is this really a secure device? I mean, who else has access to my Alexa recordings? Is this device listening to my conversations with my kids, or is my spouse there when I go out, and I have all this data on my electric car winter data going? So we've kind of adopted that in a way where we embraced it like anything else. And I think the disclaimers that most companies put out there with the data, I think it's more about what are you opting in versus opting out? Right, I think that's where you talk a lot about how this data is being used and to what level it needs to be restricted. What are some of the frameworks and regulations that need to be in there? And as we talk about AI and other things coming into play, it's going to be a very, very interesting, at the same time, a very difficult proposition, both from a consumer perspective, as well as from these companies are offering the services, how do they ensure the Data Privacy, you in your recent podcast, talk about what's happening in California, which is probably one of the most mature States when it comes to regulating these, right? But again, I mean, there are more countries that need to probably embrace something similar and do it at a national level, State level and have this private, public enterprise, I will say partnerships, that needs to really work together to be able to make sure we don't have a scenario where we have a massive data breach, or we have other civil lawsuits happening down the road because both me and you know him and the writing has been on the wall for a while. And I think we're just lucky; we don't see at that scale, but it's probably a matter of time, right?

Debbie Reynolds  12:02

Absolutely. Well, the thing that you brought up about IoT in general makes me think about the symbiotic relationship between privacy and cybersecurity; give me your thoughts about how those two domains work together.

Moiz Baig  12:19

Right, if you would allow me, I'll talk in the context of what my domain is, which is mostly working with the telecom or, as we call it now, the mission-critical networks because they are regarded as the critical infrastructure of any nation, right? And Traditionally speaking, in the early days, where we had these networks, which were very close boxes, by 2G, 3G, and to a certain extent coaching as well, where there had a lot of proprietary, I would say, controls regulated by some of the regulations like PGP and DFMA. And how they would store the user data and how they would get access to certain parts of the network; the use cases were very few. So you could probably have a voice call, send an SMS, or do a proxy or something of that sort. But it was very UK. So, the whole ecosystem was very close in terms of who gets access to it. And the threat landscape was very, very left. What has happened in the advent of open 5G, and 5G is the whole concept of open Run, multiple vendors coming in the codification and a context of IoT devices that may not be following a certain standard getting access to your network rights. So, how do you ensure the privacy of these users who are part of your network, and how do you want to secure them? So the older ways of, you know, assuming that you have a black box network and, to a certain extent, you put some firewalls on the perimeter, and you hope that nothing goes wrong? I mean, that approach is no longer working. When we talk to our customers, when you talk to our mission-critical networks, we are servicing. One of the top concerns is what is the threat landscape. I mean, do I really know what devices are looking to access my network? Are they following a certain standard? How do I know there is not an employee who has left the company is getting access to my network? I mean, how do I manage that, you know, access control to the critical network elements of networks. So this whole topic of cybersecurity governance comes into play where you're not only expected to secure this expanding threat landscape but you're also expected to make sure that your in-house cybersecurity hygiene is up to the mark. You have the right policies, you have the right people, processes, and tools, and you have the right training for your own employees because, as what we know, Debbie, about 70% of the incidents happen because of insider threat, right? Because of employees not following a certain, I will say, policy, or the passwords being left on sticky notes, or the same password being shared by three or four users or your third-party contractors when you give access to the court at certain times. So, this whole concept of zero trust becomes more and more important. So, to give you a short answer. To sum it up, I think Data Privacy and cybersecurity go very strongly hand in hand, as we both appreciate that. But in the context of 5G, it becomes more important because of the fact that I've mentioned, and I think it's about making your own house in order and making sure you have the right processes that you need to follow; you need to have the right strategy to like training your people. And of course, you need to have the right tool set. I mean, there are a plethora of tools out there that can help you solve certain use cases, but the tool is only as good as what you put it to. So I think if you are looking to really have this interlinking of cybersecurity and Data Privacy, and you are not going to be open to be exposed to certain reaches, which we are still seeing in mature countries, right, you need to make sure that your cybersecurity hygiene is in check, and you are ensuring the data that you are collecting from your users is safe and secure, which is going to be a difficult challenge as we go into this 5G and IoT journey.

Debbie Reynolds  16:05

I agree; I want your thoughts on something that I feel has been happening since the very beginning of the Internet days and how people use data. This is, to me, one of the biggest issues that we have, and privacy and cybersecurity, and it is the notion that people are creating security through obscurity, right? So it used to be like, well, no one's going to do that. We're going to create this path that the users can go on, and no one's going to go look outside; no one's going to travel off the path, right? And so what we have now, so many more capabilities we didn't have before. And so if we're still thinking about using security through obscurity really doesn't work. In my view. That's also one of the reasons why people have a challenge around cryptography because they say, okay, well, you go on the website and say, okay, your password is strong, and it won't be cracked in like 5000 years, or something like that. But then we get cloud computing; it doesn't follow those rules now. So I can do that in like three seconds instead of thousands of years. So, what are your thoughts about security through obscurity of a challenge?

Moiz Baig  17:20

You bring up a very, very valid point. I think definitely companies, actually the legacy companies, I think they've been playing catch up. Right. So I think it's always reading a blog, and I'll share that with you maybe after the call that they were talking about why security is not a great business to be in, I think it was kind of cynical sort of an article. But I think the point that this person is trying to make is there's always a catch-up that's happening in the cybersecurity space because the technology evolution is so quick that you're always catching up to secure, I will say the controls and you know, putting in the right sort of measures. And with the evolution of AI and things like quantum, I think it's going to become more and more difficult for companies to be able to play the catch-up game because they correctly said, you know, you will need to have a Tor browser, you go on the dark web, and there's a lot of services for hire, then you can hire and just for fun or be an actual criminal intent, or we see a lot of the State-sponsored attacks as well happening. So depending on which category you fall in, I think the motivations are different. But the end result is actually a huge destruction. We have seen networks where the entire core network has been held to ransom. Where we have seen networks in Australia, for example, which was public news, like Optus, which had a massive cyber security breach last year; they had a configuration issue with the CEO who had to step down. So cybersecurity, I think, in the traditional way people should think about ROI. And okay, if I want to invest in cybersecurity, what kind of return am I getting? But I think right now, it's been linked to really your top line; it's been linked to your reputation. And it's been linked to your, I will say, compliance, right? Because more and more countries are requiring these critical network infrastructure providers to really report any breaches that happen to the regulator, right. Funny enough, there was a breach that happened in one of the domains in the US, I believe; I need to look that up. But where did they actually demand ransomware? And the company refused. And we actually went to the regulator and said, By the way, we hacked this company, and they have not reported it, right? So you see all these funny things going on right now where you really need to be on top of your game. And like you said, with quantum all the encryption that we've been used to in the past, do we need to have a completely fresh look on how we interlink this data sovereignty and link it to governance, right? Because I think that's going to become more and more important as we kind of go to a more strictly regulated kind of space where the governments are becoming more serious, and the regulators are really enforcing these companies to really upped their game.

Debbie Reynolds  19:59

Absolutely. You mentioned something that I think is fascinating. I don't think I've had anyone on the show to talk about this. And this is critical infrastructure. So because telecom is critical infrastructure, you are subject to a lot more regulation, on top of the stuff that all of us have to do in regulatory spaces, but what is your thought about how you are dealing with trying to stay ahead of the curve, because you are in this highly regulated space?

Moiz Baig  20:33

So, to give you a better perspective, the way the networks are secure is actually a three-layered approach, right? So when we talk about security, we ask our customers to think about security or the three-tiered approach. So we have the regulations, which are 3GPP, for example, which is a Third Generation Partnership Project is liquid CSMA. They define what sets of features need to be rolled out in these networks with 4G, 5G, and beyond. And they have releases that come in every year or so, and more define this to varied levels of detail. Then there's every vendor like Nokia; we have about 200 plus products, and every product goes through a process called dev sec, or designed for security, which means security is embedded as part of a development process to make sure that the basic hardening is done. And the last level is that when these network, I will say components are shipped out and deployed in an actual unit production zone or production setup, they need to be secured. Right. So basic things you used to have in it like, how do you segment the traffic? How do you define zoning? How do you define the user control pain? Segregation? How do you make sure the data is secured, both addressed in ledger or transit? So that requires all these mission-critical networks to be able to have an end-to-end design for security. That's where we often see a lot of gaps because of multiple reasons. So, despite the regulations, every vendor implements that BGP a bit differently. A lot of things are left optional, which really opens a threat landscape to potential attackers or hackers. So as the CSPs, or the critical communication providers are deploying the networks, there is an absolute need to make sure they have an expert who really understands the end-to-end security, the regulatory framework when it comes to what has been defined from standards, and for that respective country in terms of what is their local regulation, and how does that fit into the global framework, like NIST cybersecurity framework, or NESIS, or GSMA. And pick the best of breed to make sure that we do a compliance check, we do a baseline and we put in a risk strategy that fits in with their short to medium and long term goals. Right. So I think that is where we see a lot of work being done. I think that's a major part of my job is to be able to educate the customers that this is a very, very important area for them to focus on and how we can support in building this end-to-end security view, where it's not a question of if they are hacked, but when they are hacked. What is the response strategy? Do they have the right controls in place to minimize the damages? And how would they recover? So that is kind of what we sit down with these key customers and develop a long to medium-term strategy, which brings into the framework which brings into the regulation and brings in our expertise to be able to put all those things together and give them a security design, which is not only a default off the shelf, but customized to their specific environments.

Debbie Reynolds  23:37

Absolutely, thank you for that. I want to talk about AI. So Artificial intelligence has completely taken over the conversation about almost any technology, and everyone thinks they're doing AI right now. But how is AI impacting you in a cyber security or privacy sense?

Moiz Baig  23:59

So I think the tip of the iceberg on that, Debbie, I mean, I've been following a lot of influences like yourself on LinkedIn; I'm part of a review course that I'm doing for Stanford on ethical AI. I could not join the course because they were probably full, but they were kind enough to let me review the content. And I think you have people we know in common who are part of the course which are talking about ethics and AI, which is a very, very important topic. I think we have taken for granted this uptake for IoT, I think we are doing the same for the AI as well. So it's got two aspects, right? I mean, one is for people like myself, for you. We want to use AI and these machine learning models to improve our productivity, where often the more we may find ourselves compelled to putting some documents or some text on to these models to get some insights or run some tests without being assured on how the data is going to be used. Right. That's the biggest question, and secondly, for the enterprises like telecom, which are rolling out these AI tools for their own activity like automation? And how do they ensure that the data that they are using is going to be really kept for themselves? Or it's not going to be shared with other companies in a similar domain? How do you make sure there's no data poisoning happening? How do you make sure there's no data biases? Right? So, some of the frameworks that I've looked at I think Miss did a great one recently called the NIST I was a risk management framework, or the NIST RMF. You've seen in the past couple of weeks, actually, a lot of these regulations coming from the White House, I think, you know, Biden did something. We've seen something in the UK as well; regulations are catching up. But do we really believe that the technology would follow the regulations? I think, how do you enforce that? When a company is embracing a certain AI to automate the use cases, they are being forced to comply and run an assessment based on a framework? So I think that becomes a question: while it's important to have a free hand as you're deploying technologies, especially AI, for your use cases or for your own productivity, how do you make sure you do it responsibly? And I think we are still collectively looking to find an answer to that question because a lot of people are still on either two sides, which one side is okay, we need heavy regulation, nothing was passed before we passed it. And the second side is probably saying, we don't care about it; we are going to go ahead, we are going to deploy these models, we are going to make them more efficient, we are going to have what we saw with Gemini coming in, which is now the context of the video and the voice and all that. But how is that data being stored? How's that being used? I mean, that's a big question mark. And I think somewheres, this needs to be checked. And I think there has to be part of a dialogue that needs to happen between the public and the private companies to see where we draw the line is okay; it's a great tool to have. But are we ready to really roll it out to the mass public? I mean, do we have the right Data Privacy controls that make sure that the data is not leaked to other users or companies? Nothing? The same applies to enterprises, right? When are they embracing these tools and technologies? How do they make sure that their data is secure? How do they know that these tools are really ethical and that there are no biases built into them? So, it is a long debate, but I think, in short, I see it as being a catch-up to the technology that is being rolled out and frameworks while there. And I've seen a lot of them, I'm sure you see probably every day a new framework being posted. But how good is that framework? If it's not being enforced? I think the question I'm still struggling to answer for myself is how do you enforce that? And I think that's going to be a million-dollar question.

Debbie Reynolds  27:49

I agree. I agree. I think people misunderstand regulation. So regulation always, unfortunately, is the result of, or almost always the result of something bad that happened already. Right? So regulation can't really keep up with technology. And I think, with advancements in AI, what we're going to start to see is more of that gap between regulation and what's happening in technology; it's only going to get bigger because the innovation is happening a lot more rapidly. So it's like hard to keep up. But then flipside of that, I feel like if there's regulation, or if they're frameworks and things like that, it really needs to hone in on the harm to humans, right? Because to me, that is the key issue, like how harmful is it to someone's privacy? How harmful is it to their security if XYZ happens? And so to me, if we think about it in a harmful way, focusing on that human centricity, you can get to the bottom of the issue, I feel, and it makes it something that could be more evergreen, as opposed to us playing a cat and mouse game, right? With regulation like, oh, well, we don't have to do that, because it's not in the regulation. But it's like, especially, well, this harms your customer. To me, this has a bottom-line impact in some way because customers will find other services they want to use. So they feel like your organization isn't really taking their safety or security and privacy seriously; what do you think?

Moiz Baig  29:34

100%? To look at an example of what happened during this whole surveillance that started on 9/11. Right? I mean, there was a whole talk about to what level you would put surveillance that would impact civil liberty. Right. So I think similar things are happening now in terms of to what level we need to regulate this without really inhibiting on some of the rights that people have and I think people over the years have become more and more mature and tech-savvy and more aware of their rights in terms of what is out there publicly available, owned by these companies, and what is being used to monetize. So I mean, as they say, you know, with all these great tools that we have, or the great services we have, I mean, if you're not paying for a product, then you are actually a product yourself. Right? So I mean, we, me, you use all social media, LinkedIn, and similar data tools. And we know that the posts have a lot of data, some of it, that is great, but again, we don't know how that data is being used, right? And the same applies for these other tools that we currently have access to. And you're my God. I mean, we see about 20 AI tools coming every 10 minutes, right? It's even hard to keep up to kind of try and test out what these tools are. So what kind of worries me more is our next generation as they embrace and see this happening naturally, like to certain so we have seen cases of IoT, and M to M is how do they perceive their Data Privacy? I mean, are they really going to be as vigilant and as aware, we hope that that would be, but that's a whole different debate on you know, the Gen Z, and you know, how they will take up this but absolutely agree with you, what you said is the importance of regulating things like AI and making sure we are doing it in a way which doesn't inhibit advancement of technology, at the same time making people aware that they have options that they always have options to opt-out, or to limit the data that is being shared on their behalf. I think that has to happen. And I think that has to happen very, very quickly. Otherwise, we will probably be in this never-ending cycle where we will be exposed to these technological advancements. Without really realizing how much value we are giving away or being a product of these technologies, you're not really getting their hand

Debbie Reynolds  31:54

I love the fact that I talk to technologists all over the world like you and me, and I have not heard one person say, let's just innovate and forget about the responsible use everyone that I talked to, regardless of where they are, they are talking about doing it responsibly because they understand what the harm could be if we do it the wrong way. Absolutely. If it were the world, according to you, Moiz, and we did everything that you said, what would be your wish for either privacy or cybersecurity anywhere in the world, even if it were technology, regulation, or human behavior?

Moiz Baig  32:34

Right. I mean, so I think that's a great question and probably a great moment for us to end this; despite of all the challenges I think we have technologists are very optimistic on what technology has to bring to the table, right, the great sort of advancement that has brought already in the great, I would say new use cases in healthcare and fintech and smart cities and multiple other domains that would come in the future. And we are seeing a lot of them realize and contemporize I think in an ideal world, we probably need to see very strong public-private partnerships that would promote funding cybersecurity greats of the critical infrastructures like the one that I work in, right, with companies like ourselves can be very strongly embedded in rolling out these networks in a secure way, right, where we have technology-neutral frameworks that these governments can put into place and basically have very strong collaboration and commitment to things like resilience, we can enjoy these technologies safely. In the way that it makes it reliable, it makes it integrated to be able to roll them out in a secure way. And of course, in the bigger context of things. We have a prosperous digital economy, even societies of scale that can really be replicated across multiple regions and geographies thing. In short, that'd be my vision on how to see this somehow panning out.

Debbie Reynolds  33:59

I love it. I love it. I agree. I agree. I think that resilience is really, really important. And I know innovation will not stop. So we know that's definitely going to go forward. But being able to do it in responsible, ethical ways is very, very key to people being able to really adopt these things going forward. So yeah, thank you so much for joining us from Dubai. It's really early here in Chicago. But I'm happy to have this call with you. So it's been great to have you on the show. Thank you so much.

Moiz Baig  34:32

Thank you very much for your time. I really enjoyed the conversation and would love to host you in Dubai to follow up with a face-to-face dialogue and to see a bit of what this beautiful country has to offer. So looking forward to that.

Debbie Reynolds  34:44

Oh, I would love to come to Dubai. Alright, thank you so much.

Moiz Baig  34:51

Thank you Debbie. Take care. Bye bye.