The information that's communicated to us is highly technical in every case. In a way, it's an analysis issue where we have to determine whether someone in particular has been targeted or if a group of individuals or a specific infrastructure has been targeted. The intervention level is then determined based on the risk level of the situation.
As Mr. Aubé said, if the information shows that someone is being targeted by a threat that's defined in the policy on acceptable network use, we will directly inform the MP's office of that threat. I could cite you examples of direct actions that the cybersecurity team takes. In one of those cases, one of the members of that team telephoned the MP's office to validate specific aspects of the information that was received.
That's more or less what the protocol associated with that type of situation looks like. We examine the effectiveness of the defence mechanisms. Then, if there's still a residual risk, we inform the MP's office directly.