Thank you very much for the question and the clarification.
We are an organization that considers itself very much a learning organization, so we continue to look for ways to improve. This is part of that learning, to be able to see where we can improve our processes, in addition to all the external review bodies and various reports that are going on with regard to other issues, like foreign interference.
We will continue to learn from this to improve those processes and work with the House of Commons to identify a better way forward.
In general, though, when it comes to identifying an individual who may be impacted by a cyber-incident because we learned of it from a foreign source, we pass on that information in general to the service, as I mentioned earlier, for the reason that then it becomes a domestic issue and is not within our wheelhouse. It is also not the way in which we function with respect to our act. Sometimes the RCMP will be engaged, especially if it's going to be something that requires a law enforcement lens. In this case, we did pass it on to the House of Commons as well as to CSIS, so that they could pass on the information to the necessary MPs.