Karsten Wenzlaff, Advisor
August 26th, 2025
July 20, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Cybersecurity And Fraud, Artificial Intelligence And Data, Risk Compliance And Regtech

On July 20, 2026, Neo emerged from stealth with US$100 million in combined seed and Series A financing from Andreessen Horowitz, Bessemer Venture Partners, Craft Ventures and Merlin Ventures.
The Boston cybersecurity company was founded in 2025 by Nick Warner, Shlomi Salem and Eran Shirazi. Note that it's unrelated to Calgary based Neo Financial. Warner previously served as SentinelOne president and COO, Salem led detection engineering and threat research at SentinelOne, and Shirazi previously co-founded EasySend after leading vulnerability research in Israel’s Unit 8200.
Neo is building what it calls an agentic software control layer. The platform gives security teams an inventory of AI agents, AI enabled applications, plugins, extensions, MCP servers and traditional software that has gained agentic capabilities. It then maps permissions, attributes actions and applies policy before software reaches sensitive data or systems.
The company plans to use the financing to expand engineering and go to market operations. Neo hasn't disclosed revenue, customer counts, named customers, valuation or the allocation between its seed and Series A rounds.
Enterprise security was built around human users, known applications and recognizable data flows. AI agents can act differently. They may inherit a user’s permissions, call several tools, reach files and credentials, communicate with other agents and continue operating without a conventional interface.
That means risky activity may not even resemble a conventional intrusion. An agent can use valid credentials and approved applications while still exporting too much data, reading a secret, pushing code or initiating an action that exceeds the authority its operator intended to grant. NCFA’s analysis of AI agents gaining identity and wallet access shows how quickly this issue reaches financial APIs and real infrastructure.
Neo’s platform combines four functions. It finds AI software, checks what it can access, shows who or what is behind each action, and lets security teams allow, block or pause that action for approval.
Threat's aren't limited to deliberately malicious agents. ShadowLeak demonstrated how hidden instructions could manipulate an AI agent and expose private information without a user clicking a malicious link.
Its Neoverse knowledge base maps the capabilities, risks and behaviour of agentic software before it enters an enterprise environment. Neo says enforcement occurs natively at the endpoint, where the software can intercept tool calls, API access, credential reads and data transfers before the action is completed.
Neo combines software inventory, posture intelligence, attribution and endpoint enforcement across agentic and traditional applications.
Check Point is developing a wider AI security control plane covering employee AI use, AI applications and agentic systems.
SailPoint is extending identity governance to AI agents and other non-human identities.
Existing endpoint security providers already control devices, files and processes, but may not yet map the permissions and chained actions occurring inside agentic software.
Cloud and application security companies can govern models, APIs and data access, creating a competitive question around whether customers will buy a separate agentic control layer or expect existing security platforms to absorb the function.
Banks and other regulated organizations will need more than a list of approved AI tools. They need to know which person authorized an agent, what credentials it inherited, which systems it can call, what information it can export and when human approval is mandatory.
Neo’s opportunity is to show who or what can access each system and enforce clear limits on what they can do. Its challenge is that endpoint, identity, cloud and network security companies are all pursuing parts of the same problem. Large institutions may prefer one more specialized control layer, or they may demand that existing suppliers add agent governance to products already deployed across the organization.
Financial institutions are adopting AI while remaining accountable for privacy, cybersecurity, third party risk, operational resilience and auditability. An agent that can access customer information, initiate a payment, change code or communicate externally will need authority limits that security, risk and compliance teams can understand.
Neo has the capital and founding team to compete early, but the category is still forming. Enterprise adoption, integration depth and the quality of its policy enforcement will matter more than the size of the launch financing.
Will enterprises buy a dedicated control layer for agentic software, or will endpoint, identity and cloud security providers absorb the function before the category becomes independent?
Nick Warner, Shlomi Salem and Eran Shirazi founded Neo in 2025 to build security controls for enterprise software gaining autonomous and agentic capabilities.
Neo SecurityEnterprise cybersecurity company focused on agentic software
FormationExperienced operators assemble before the public launch
Early Institutional BackingSeed and Series A allocation not publicly disclosed
Enterprise SecurityAI driven software environments
SecOps TeamsLarge organizations adopting AI enabled software
Operator ExperienceFounders previously built and scaled enterprise security companies
Neo begins with founders who have built cybersecurity products and commercial organizations before. That lowers some execution risk, but it does not yet establish enterprise adoption.
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
July 17, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Regulation And Policy, Wealth Investing And Trading, Risk Compliance And Regtech

On July 9, 2026, the UK Financial Conduct Authority reported the results of its finfluencer enforcement campaign. A coordinated week of action involving 9 international regulators produced 3 arrests, 6 criminal proceedings, 11 warning or cease and desist letters, 50 warning alerts and 650 social media takedown requests.
Canadian regulators weren’t watching from the sidelines. The Alberta Securities Commission, Autorité des marchés financiers, British Columbia Securities Commission and Ontario Securities Commission participated in the June 2025 operation. Earlier analysis asked whether finfluencers were facing a crackdown or clearer regulation.
The FCA’s latest figures show that enforcement has now become repeatable. Investigators can identify illegal content, connect creators to products and firms, request platform removals, issue public warnings and escalate selected cases into criminal proceedings.
The scale of the FCA’s supporting operation is just as relevant. During 2025, it issued 2,329 warnings about unauthorized or potentially fraudulent firms, compared with 2,240 in 2024. It secured 17 criminal convictions involving fraud, insider dealing, money laundering and data protection offences. Twelve people paid a combined £1.77 million in market abuse fines for market abuse.
Technology is improving that capacity. FCA automation reduced the handling time for simpler supervisory cases from as much as 4 hours to about 6 minutes on average. That doesn’t automate consequential decisions. It clears routine work so investigators can spend more time on repeat promoters, hidden compensation, unauthorized firms and cross border distribution.
The 650 takedown requests are the most commercially relevant number. Arrests attract attention, but removing hundreds of accounts and posts targets distribution. Illegal promotions lose value when creators can’t reach an audience, acquire leads or direct followers to a trading platform.
The FCA can examine multiple parties within one campaign. A creator may publish the content, a financial firm may pay for it, an affiliate network may track referrals and a platform may distribute it. The underlying product can then lead investigators to an unauthorized operator or regulated firm with weak approval controls.
Criminal proceedings provide the upper end of that response. The FCA accused 3 people charged after the 2025 operation of promoting high risk contracts for difference without authorization. Each faces an allegation of communicating an invitation to engage in investment activity contrary to section 21 of the UK Financial Services and Markets Act.
The April 2026 second global week of action showed how quickly the system had expanded. Seventeen regulators participated. The FCA requested the removal of 120 accounts and identified 1,267 illegal financial advertisements that reached at least 2,338,372 accounts. People or firms already listed on its Warning List accounted for 66% of those advertisements.
That 66% figure exposes a persistent enforcement problem. Many promoters aren’t unknown actors. They continue publishing after regulators have already identified the related firm, person or offer. Effective supervision therefore depends on account removal, repeat offender monitoring and platform cooperation, not warnings alone.
The FCA also secured a guilty plea, began criminal proceedings against 2 more people, issued 34 new warning alerts and updated 14 existing warnings during the April operation. Coordination now combines prosecution, surveillance, education and content removal rather than treating each promotion as an isolated post.
Canada’s legal foundation is already in place. In December 2025, the CSA and CIRO published Staff Notice 31-369, which explains how securities law applies to finfluencers, issuers and registered firms. The practical requirements appear in Canada’s finfluencer guidance.
The guidance doesn’t create a separate licence for creators. It examines the activity itself. A creator may need registration when they provide investment advice as a business, facilitates trades, arranges referrals or connects paid subscribers to copy trading. General market commentary may qualify for an exemption, but creators must still disclose financial interests and other conflicts clearly and on time.
Compensation also changes the compliance analysis. Cash payments, securities, affiliate income, referral fees and free products can establish a commercial relationship. A disclaimer such as “not financial advice” doesn’t cancel the substance of a recommendation, the creator’s compensation or the transaction being encouraged.
Responsibility extends beyond the creator. Registered firms must supervise people acting on their behalf, address referral arrangements, retain records and review relevant communications. Issuers remain responsible for paid investor relations activity and promotional claims made for their benefit. The joint staff notice applies the same principles to AI generated content and digital personas.
The investor evidence explains why regulators are paying attention. An OSC study of 655 Canadian retail investors found that 35% had made a financial decision based on finfluencer content. Those who acted on it were 12.2 times more likely to report being scammed on social media and 2.3 times more likely to have experienced a significant investment loss.
The OSC also ran a simulated investment experiment involving 1,465 Canadians. After viewing a promotional social media post, 38% bought the featured asset. Only 8% of the control group did the same. The full findings and behavioural differences appear in the finfluencer effect on Canadian investors.
Canada has also produced direct enforcement results. In September 2025, the Alberta Securities Commission imposed sanctions on James Domenic Floreani and Jayconomics Inc. for promoting 4 issuers through YouTube, X and Patreon without clearly disclosing that they published the content on behalf of those issuers.
The respondents received a $30,000 administrative penalty, $10,185.10 in costs and 2 year restrictions covering investor relations activity, public securities promotion and securities or derivatives advice.
British Columbia added a preventive layer during the April 2026 operation. The BCSC issued 14 compliance letters to YouTubers and other promoters who had discussed publicly traded B.C. companies. It also referred to an active proceeding alleging that sponsored issuer promotions weren’t disclosed clearly.
The FCA operates a national financial promotions regime and can report one consolidated set of arrests, warnings, takedowns and prosecutions. Provincial and territorial authorities administer Canadian securities regulation, while CIRO supervises investment dealers, mutual fund dealers and regulated marketplaces.
Canadian action may therefore appear as several provincial cases, coordinated review periods, issuer investigations, warning letters and firm supervision rather than one national enforcement tally. That can make the activity look smaller even when regulators review the same creators, platforms and promotional networks.
The operating implications are already clear.
Platforms are also becoming part of the enforcement process. When regulators can connect warnings to hundreds of removal requests, account access becomes a compliance dependency. Firms using social media for distribution can’t treat the creator’s channel as an independent marketing asset beyond their control.
Canada doesn’t need to duplicate the FCA’s structure to produce comparable enforcement. Its regulators are already participating in the same international operations, applying national guidance and using provincial proceedings. The open question is whether those actions will become visible as a coordinated Canadian program or remain distributed across separate regulators and cases.
Will Canada’s finfluencer guidance support coordinated enforcement across provinces, platforms and firms, or will separate cases continue defining the compliance boundary?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA engages with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
July 13, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Cybersecurity And Fraud, Artificial Intelligence And Data, Banking And Credit

On June 25, 2026, Jack Henry expanded its Google Cloud collaboration to develop agentic AI security for banks and credit unions. The U.S. banking technology provider serves about 7,400 community financial institutions and plans to combine Google Security Operations, Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, and Mandiant Consulting across Google Cloud, other cloud services, and on-premises systems.
The deal is less about access to an advanced model than the work required to deploy one inside a bank. Security evidence is spread across user accounts, devices, applications, networks, and cloud services. Analysts must connect those records quickly enough to determine whether an alert is harmless or part of an attack. Smaller institutions often lack the security teams and integration capacity to do that across several enterprise products.
The divide and conquer commercial logic of the deal is Google brings the models, security software, and threat expertise. While Jack Henry brings the bank relationships and operating knowledge required to put them to work.
Google Security Operations collects security data from across an institution’s systems and connects related alerts into an investigation. Its Triage and Investigation Agent can retrieve evidence, apply threat intelligence, assess likely causes, and explain its findings.
Google says the agent has processed more than five million alerts and reduced a typical 30-minute manual investigation to about 60 seconds. Those are Google product results, not outcomes reported by Jack Henry customers.
The operating gain comes from completing the early investigation before an analyst steps in. Instead of opening several products, finding related records, and rebuilding the sequence of events, the analyst receives an assembled case with supporting evidence and a proposed response.
Sensitive actions still require clear limits and human oversight. Google can pair AI investigations with fixed playbooks and require approval before isolating a device, disabling an account, or blocking traffic. Jack Henry hasn’t said where it will draw those boundaries, how customers will audit agent decisions, or what happens when an automated recommendation is wrong.
Release timing, pricing, implementation requirements, and the first participating institutions also remain undisclosed, so the announcement is good on tech direction but light on adoption or performance figures inside an operating bank.
Mandiant Consulting adds threat modelling, security assessments, and red team testing. That work tests the design before attackers do. Gemini handles reasoning, while Google Security Operations provides the data and investigation tools.
Jack Henry must make the combined service fit each institution’s systems, controls, and support model. That integration is the difficult part.
A bank could buy Google’s security products directly. It would still need to connect the right data, define agent permissions, build response procedures, satisfy audit requirements, and decide who remains accountable for each action.
Jack Henry already operates inside that environment. Its core processing, digital banking, payments, lending, and operational products support institutions that rarely replace critical systems. It also manages hosted and on-premises deployments that a cloud provider may not control.
The companies began working together in 2022 on cloud data, reporting, and integration services. Security extends that relationship into a product Jack Henry can configure around each customer and deliver through an existing technology and support contract.
That could make AI security another banking software service rather than a separate enterprise purchase. Core providers already control the connections, implementation work, and customer access needed to distribute agents at scale.
Security specialists still compete on detection quality, threat intelligence, and response tools. CrowdStrike and Palo Alto Networks are adding agents to their products, while Fiserv offers managed cybersecurity services and is developing AI capabilities. Jack Henry competes from a different position. Its advantage is knowing how community institutions run and where security tools must connect.
Google gains a route into thousands of regulated institutions without implementing its products one bank at a time. Jack Henry can add a service whose value depends on its knowledge of each customer’s systems and operating requirements.
This is where enterprise AI economics become clearer. Foundation models can be sourced from a small group of large providers. The commercial asset is access to the workflow where the model can complete useful work under controlled permissions.
That favours software companies with deep customer integration. Fintech founders don’t need to build a foundation model, but a general AI interface won’t be enough. TD’s AI loan decisioning deployment shows why the value comes from placing verification and decision tools inside an active lending workflow. A specialized process, regulated decision, proprietary dataset, or difficult integration gives an agent work that an incumbent can’t easily reproduce.
Jack Henry hasn’t announced a Canadian release, but the deployment problem is familiar. Canadian regulated AI workshops have identified vendor dependence, data quality, model validation, and accountability as barriers to production use.
Access to a capable model isn’t the constraint. Banks need to connect it to existing systems without losing control of data, permissions, decisions, or operational risk. National Bank’s Sardine deployment follows that reality by embedding external device intelligence and risk scoring into retail, commercial, and wealth operations.
The Canada AI Consortium is working on common controls for models, agents, users, and enterprise systems. Its use cases differ from Jack Henry’s security project, but the operating requirement is the same: agents need restricted access, visible decisions, and accountable people.
For Canadian banks and fintechs, the commercial challenge is solving those controls inside regulated workflows. Products that leave the integration and governance work to the bank may struggle to progress beyond a pilot.
As foundation models become easier to replace, will banking software competition depend less on who owns the AI and more on who controls the workflows where agents can act?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
July 3, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Cybersecurity And Fraud, Digital Identity And Trust, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Payments And Money Movement, Digital Assets Blockchain And Tokenization, Artificial Intelligence And Data

Governments are no longer treating post-quantum cryptography as a research topic. They're now publishing migration plans.
On June 22, 2026, the White House issued an order on advanced cryptographic attacks, including the risk that adversaries collect encrypted data today so they can decrypt it later. The same day, a separate White House order advanced U.S. quantum innovation across computing, sensing, networking, applications, and industry partnerships.
That combination is the useful development marker for fintech. Governments are funding quantum capability while also pushing organizations to prepare for the security risk that follows.
The financial sector doesn't need to know the exact year a cryptographically relevant quantum computer arrives before it starts planning. Long time customer data, payment credentials, digital identity systems, API certificates, custody systems, vendor software, archived records, and cryptographic keys may remain sensitive for years.
Quantum readiness is therefore becoming an operating requirement. Not someday. Now.
The policy picture is getting clearer.
NIST finalized its first three post quantum cryptography standards in August 2024. The standards are FIPS 203 for ML-KEM, FIPS 204 for ML-DSA, and FIPS 205 for SLH-DSA. NIST says organizations should begin migrating systems to quantum resistant cryptography.
NCFA has already tracked how post quantum cryptography is entering implementation, with payments, digital identity, secure messaging, APIs, and financial data all exposed to the migration challenge.
Canada has started, too. The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security published a roadmap for migrating Government of Canada non classified IT systems to post quantum cryptography, covering stakeholders, phases, milestones, governance, and departmental planning.
Financial authorities are paying attention too. The Bank for International Settlements published a quantum readiness roadmap for the financial system, and the G7 Cyber Expert Group issued a roadmap for the financial sector's transition to post quantum cryptography.
The practical message is this. Start with awareness, find where cryptography is used, assess risk, plan migration, and work with vendors before deadlines become urgent.
The hardest quantum risk is not only future system compromise. It is long term data.
Financial institutions protect account records, payments data, identity documents, loan files, custody records, private market documents, insurance records, tax files, transaction histories, and compliance archives. Some of that data must stay confidential for years or decades.
That creates the harvest now, decrypt later problem. An attacker can collect encrypted data now and wait for stronger decryption capability later.
For fintechs, this impacts the planning window. A company doesn't need to be systemically important to hold sensitive data. A payments provider, open banking intermediary, wallet provider, identity service, lending platform, wealthtech app, regtech vendor, or crypto custodian may all depend on cryptography that was never designed for a quantum era.
Post quantum migration starts with discovery.
Most organizations know they use TLS, certificates, signing keys, databases, cloud services, APIs, authentication systems, payment connections, and vendor platforms. Fewer have a current inventory of which cryptographic algorithms protect each system, which assets must remain confidential long term, and which vendors control the upgrade path.
That's why cryptographic inventory keeps appearing across official guidance.
A fintech should be able to answer basic questions:
Without that inventory, migration plans become guesswork.
Fintech security is rarely managed by one company anymore.
A single product may rely on cloud hosting, identity verification, payment processors, data aggregators, card issuing platforms, custodians, wallet technology, fraud systems, CRM tools, analytics software, email providers, certificate authorities, and outsourced compliance systems.
That makes post quantum readiness a vendor risk issue.
A fintech can upgrade its own code and still remain exposed through a vendor that cannot explain its cryptographic dependencies. Banks and credit unions face the same issue in reverse. They may need to ask whether fintech partners can support post quantum requirements before onboarding, renewing, or expanding contracts.
The procurement question changes from "is this vendor secure today?" to "can this vendor survive a cryptographic transition without disrupting our product, customers, or regulatory obligations?"
Quantum readiness touches more than cybersecurity teams.
In payments, cryptography protects authentication, transaction integrity, messaging, API connections, certificates, and sensitive account data.
In digital identity, it protects credentials, signatures, documents, device binding, verification records, and trust chains.
In crypto and digital assets, it touches wallets, custody, private keys, signing systems, transaction authorization, smart contract administration, and institutional key management. BTQ's quantum safe Bitcoin and stablecoin roadmap highlights one approach to preparing digital asset infrastructure for post quantum cryptography.
In open banking, it affects API security, consent records, data sharing, third party access, and customer authentication.
In capital markets, it touches trading access, fund administration, investor records, tokenized securities, transfer agency, data rooms, reporting, and long term documents.
In AI and data systems, it affects model access, training data, confidential records, synthetic data pipelines, and secure data exchange.
That breadth is why the topic belongs with executives, product leaders, compliance teams, boards, and investors, not only cryptography specialists.
Canada's Cyber Centre roadmap gives public sector organizations a starting point. It also gives fintech and financial services leaders useful guidance that migration will take planning, governance, technical discovery, budgets, and coordination.
Canada doesn't yet have a full financial sector post quantum mandate comparable to a hard compliance deadline, but that statement should not create comfort.
Canadian fintechs operate in a global market. They sell into banks, credit unions, enterprises, governments, insurers, capital markets, payment networks, and regulated financial institutions. Their buyers may start asking post quantum questions before Canadian rules require formal answers.
A fintech that can show cryptographic inventory, vendor readiness, migration planning, and crypto agility may have an advantage in enterprise sales. A fintech that cannot answer basic questions may face longer diligence, higher security friction, or blocked procurement.
The near term opportunity is not building quantum computers. It's helping financial organizations prepare for the cryptographic transition. Quantum Bridge's USD $8M raise shows Canadian capital already backing deployment ready quantum safe security for finance, telecom, government, and defence.
Product opportunities include:
These opportunities are practical because they map to work financial firms already need to do. They need to know what they use, what they protect, which systems carry the highest risk, which vendors control dependencies, and how migration can happen without breaking production systems.
These are the kinds of tools that belong on NCFA's Financial Innovation Map, such as identity, payments, custody, regtech, data governance, and cyber resilience.
Quantum readiness won't arrive as a single upgrade.
Organizations will need inventories, test environments, migration sequencing, vendor commitments, product changes, audit evidence, customer communications, and fallback plans. Some systems will be easy to update. Others will depend on old software, hardware limits, contracts, third party platforms, or regulatory approvals.
That's why waiting for a precise quantum break date is the wrong approach for operators. Ask yourself, your team, your leadership this simpler question, "If a regulator, bank partner, insurer, enterprise buyer, or board asked tomorrow where vulnerable cryptography sits in the business, could the company answer?"
For many fintechs, the honest answer is probably no. So that's the opening to start.
Takeaway: Post quantum cryptography isn't a distant science fiction story anymore. It's becoming part of how financial organizations prove they can protect data, manage vendors, maintain trust, and keep critical services running through the next security transition.
If post quantum readiness starts with knowing where cryptography lives, should fintech due diligence now include a cryptographic inventory before major bank, payments, custody, or identity partnerships?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer to peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: [www.ncfacanada.org](http://www.ncfacanada.org)
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |