doesn't cause property destruction loss of life, doesn't cause significant economic consequence? the same commensurate level of damage as would trigger article five implications for a connecticut attack. ., ., ~ ., , attack. you would know better than most. — attack. you would know better than most. i — attack. you would know better than most, i don't _ attack. you would know better than most, i don't want - attack. you would know better than most, i don't want to - attack. you would know better than most, i don't want to be l than most, i don't want to be too crude about it but is this talk rather than action? you step forward and say things about how cross you are that there has been another cyber attack or can something be done about these attacks? the government _ about these attacks? the government on _ about these attacks? the government on each - about these attacks? tue: government on each side about these attacks? tte: government on each side can deliver a stronger messaging about than importance of nations not using cyber against civilian infrastructure. that is an important message to send. the private sector needs to invest more in its own defence. cyber hygiene still goes unaddressed. government can also help share information better with the private sector.