In drawing up this proposal, the recommended cooperation model would be beneficial to public and private institutions. It would also force hacked corporations to institutionalize communication mechanisms to law enforcement agencies and their clients. Cross vectors between population (in general), municipalities, police and corporations, whether listed or not.
This complexity reflects the diversity of threats and vulnerable objectives. We are aware that the implementation of this recommendation is contrary to many stakeholders, including corporations (no wonder) and the (surprising) enforcement of the law. In any case, this cooperation was taken up with scepticism as a model of collective security, combined with a component of self-defence (in both cases derived from international law).
Corporate resistance reflected, as competitive advantages, concerns about possible loss of income and other unwanted effects. On the other hand, law enforcement emerged from two logics: the unwillingness of federal police to collaborate with local agents and the lack of means to deal with cyberattacks.
How to get a corporate model? There are several alternatives and alternatives, which in some cases replace voluntary measures and in others replace those resulting from legal taxation.This certainly imposes unwanted and sometimes unjustified costs. However, the risks and threats arising from cyber attacks justify the search for mechanisms to enforce cooperation. In other words, if voluntary cooperation is not possible, the debate should be open to the possibility of cooperation being compulsory.

• It urges the Federal Government to publish the good practice paper in the framework during the reporting period. Institutions will thus be able to use best practice to better defend their cyber-infrastructures.
• Identifies the uses of the cyberthreat indicators and measures authorized by the federal government, limiting the disclosure, storage and use of information.
• Authorizes entities to exchange indicators and cyber threat measures, including and with the Department of Security, in order to protect against legal risks.
• Protects Personally Identifiable Information (PII), urging entities to remove all PIIs from information transmitted to the federal government. Any federal agency that receives information with PII must protect PII from unauthorized use or disclosure. The United States Attorney General and the Secretary of the Department of Security will give instructions to help meet this requirement.