ii. Member States should be encouraged to reach an agreed common definition of what constitutes “critical infrastructure”, with a view to agreeing, as appropriate, on prohibiting any act that knowingly or intentionally utilizes offensive ICT capabilities to damage or otherwise impair the use and operation of critical infrastructure. iii. Member States should be urged to consider the exchange of information on ICTs-related vulnerabilities and/or harmful hidden functions in ICT products and to notify users when significant vulnerabilities are identified. c. Capacity Building: the principles of capacity building should include the following: i. The provision of assistance and cooperation should be demand-driven and made upon request by the recipient State, taking into account its specific needs and particularities. ii. All efforts should be exerted to fully protect the confidentiality of information related to the recipient State’s policies and measures to protect its national infrastructures and the confidentiality of its ICT emergency response plans in order to avoid any possibility of jeopardizing such information or undermining the effectiveness of these measures and plans. iii. The principle of shared but differentiated responsibilities should be applied with regard to the provision of capacity building. d. As for the “Regular Institutional Dialogue”, the pre-draft proposes that “the 76th session of the General Assembly of the United Nations convene a new openended working group..”. We believe that waiting until the 76th session may undermine the existing momentum and waste precious time. We prefer such a decision to be adopted at the 75th session of the General Assembly. e. On a final note, we discourage the repetition of establishing parallel processes that have almost identical mandates. Such a course of action leads to duplication of efforts and waste of scarce UN resources as well as undermining the credibility and consistency of the UN efforts and the Disarmament Machinery. 3