Netnod response to foreign ownership of critical services
In response to: Proposal regarding foreign ownership of critical services
Netnod sees several problems with introducing yet another definition of critical and important services. Rather, there should be fewer and better definitions which can be reused and referenced from all relevant legislation.
In particular NIS, NIS2, CER, directives for foreign ownership, and the protective security act should be streamlined in terms of definitions relating to important and critical services and operations.
Netnod also notes that the suggestion does not define either digital services or digital infrastructure as important or critical.