I can only speak to what's been published factually so far. I'm not going to speculate on anything other than that. The official investigation report hasn't been finalized.
What I can talk about, which seems obvious based on the testimony from the Transport Canada team, is that they were not aware of the changes when they validated the aircraft. In fact, it seems that the FAA may not have been aware of that. It's very difficult for a validating authority to be able to identify an area as a risk area for validation review if the certifying authority and the airframer don't do that initially. They would have been trying to find a needle in a haystack, and there's limited time to do that.