Thank you.
In the technical field of cybersecurity, I think this amendment could be considered dangerous for some reasons. One reason is that it would prevent proactive defence. I would be very happy if the experts could speak to that briefly before we move on.
Effective cybersecurity relies on identifying and mitigating near misses and the smaller technical threats before they escalate into a national crisis. If the law is restricted to only material threats, which I read as significant, the government could be legally barred from acting against early-stage vulnerabilities. I think it's important. We need to act against early-stage vulnerabilities that have not yet caused immeasurable harm. A material threshold might even prevent the government from addressing a major attack targeting a single service provider if the attack is not yet considered material to the entire Canadian telecommunications system. By forcing the government to wait until the threat is significant, in using the word “material”, this amendment effectively prioritizes reactive measures over proactive protection.
Could you please briefly talk about near misses and how important it is to detect them before they become material threats? Thank you.