Thank you for the question, Mrs. Romanado.
It doesn't happen often with partners on the cyber front because they understand our mandate when it comes to specific threats regarding the personal identity of members. It's not coming from a lot of instances because usually our interactions with partners are through our mandate specifically. As you know, some of these agencies have specific mandates, and they only interact with us when it matters to Parliament specifically.
We take information from various partnerships. When we speak in the in camera portion, I can allude to this more. Any information coming to the parliamentary cybersecurity team would be triaged and handled. We would look at the level of risk tied to the threat specifically. If it is a physical threat, we would liaise with my colleague the Sergeant-at-Arms. If it is foreign interference or that type of scenario, we would go to our Sergeant-at-Arms specifically.
Most of our relationships, from my perspective, are on the technology side. When it comes to technology elements, we very rarely get an interaction specifically targeting someone. It's mostly targeting infrastructure—these types of scenarios.
In general, that's probably the best answer I can give in public. Maybe Stéphan can add something.