Suppose Edward works for a division of DSL Data Security. He has noticed that some of the security practices at another division of the company are not sufficient to meet industry standards and European legal requirements. Edward has gathered good evidence of these failures, he has fully informed his supervisor of his concerns, and he has followed other internal procedures at DSL for making his concerns known. However, a week has passed and he has gotten no reaction from the management.

Which of the following conditions is also required in this situation, in order for Edward to have strong moral reason to blow the whistle and inform the public of his concerns?

Edward must have the approval of data security regulators.

Edward's evidence must be sufficient to make a legal case against DSL$.$

Without whistle$-$blowing, there would be a substantial harm or risk to the public.

Whistle$-$blowing must benefit both the public at large, as well as DSL$.$