Importing cannabis materials — either the plants themselves or oils derived from them — circumvents those strict controls and exposes consumers to products that may have been cultivated under more lax regulatory regimes. Some states, for instance, do not limit pesticide use on cannabis plants the way Massachusetts does, which may be important to some consumers.

The Cannabis Control Commission recently recognized the potential for problems, adding a definition of inversion to state regulations. At a public meeting in December, commission chair Shannon O’Brien said, “We’ve heard rumors that this could be a little bit more widespread than we think in Massachusetts.” O’Brien told the editorial board in a statement that she met with stakeholders this month to discuss “how we can further update state testing protocols to detect inverted products and prevent them from entering Massachusetts’ regulated market in the first place.”

That’s a start. But inversion has been illegal for years, and it’s high time state regulators got serious about using the data the state already collects to identify whether out-of-state material is coming into the Massachusetts marijuana market, and if so, penalizing anyone who breaks the law.

“Inversion creates a potential public health threat, and not only that, it undermines the entire regulated cannabis industry in Massachusetts by allowing cheap, potentially untested cannabis products to be dumped on the Massachusetts market,” said Peter Gallagher, CEO of Easthampton-based cannabis company INSA.

Inversion has been caught in other states. Sometimes it is blatant, like the Minnesota employees of Vireo Health charged in 2017 with transporting marijuana oil from company facilities in Minnesota to company facilities in New York.

But often, it’s more subtle. In New York, regulators alleged that cannabis company Omnium Health let out-of-state brands sell their products under Omnium’s license, although regulators sought to drop the charges last month. New York regulators recalled products from IndoGro after it sourced products from out-of-state that contained unallowable levels of pesticides.

A lawsuit filed in the New York Supreme Court by the New York Medical Cannabis Industry Association alleges that regulators “allowed a prolific supply of illicit and unregulated cannabis to enter the licensed New York cannabis market” and some licensees “have ascertained how to import this product across state lines, how to bypass or to manipulate their onsite inventory tracking, and how to insinuate this contraband into the licensed cannabis supply chain undetected.” (New York, unlike Massachusetts, hasn’t fully implemented a seed-to-sale tracking system.)

Reports have also emerged from Colorado of cannabis flower allegedly being diverted from the legal market to the black market, then replaced in legal products with cheap, unregulated hemp-derived THC oil.

Hemp is a form of the cannabis plant with much lower levels of THC than marijuana. But even those small amounts can still be extracted and sold, and the federal legalization of hemp in 2018 opened new opportunities for the sale of cannabis-derived products (although Congress recently sought to limit their sale, with new rules set to become effective in November). Higher-potency marijuana remains illegal under federal law.

If no inversion has been identified in Massachusetts yet, it’s not because the opportunity isn’t there. Gallagher said he gets emails frequently from hemp producers selling products from out of state. One email shared with the editorial board, from a North Carolina-based company, advertised hemp-derived Delta 9 distillate, good for use in vapes and edibles, and Delta 9 water soluble, a powder with 15 percent active THC that could be mixed in drinks and gummies. (The email includes a disclaimer instructing the purchaser to ensure compliance with applicable local regulations.)

All of these are federally legal (for now) intoxicating products. But under Massachusetts law, it would be illegal for a Massachusetts cannabis manufacturer to use them in items sold in the state’s legal cannabis market. State law only lets manufacturers buy hemp from a state-licensed grower, with restrictions on how it can be labeled and used.

If any Massachusetts manufacturers are buying and using out-of-state cannabis products, it shouldn’t really come as a surprise. These products are produced more cheaply elsewhere than in Massachusetts, because of weather conditions and fewer regulations, so a business could save money by using them. “The economic incentive is there,” said Carl Giannone, who previously owned a Massachusetts dispensary and now works in cannabis business services.

State regulators could identify potential inversion by using the state’s tracking system to determine if a manufacturer extracting THC from a cannabis plant is reporting THC yields that are unusually high. That information could be used to begin an investigation.

There is perhaps an irony in businesses that are themselves illegal under federal law demanding the rigorous enforcement of state laws. That is an unavoidable tension in all marijuana regulation, though. Laws are on the books to protect consumers and businesses. The Cannabis Control Commission — and if necessary, the attorney general’s office — should prioritize enforcing them.

Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us @GlobeOpinion.