The administrator of this blog comes with the following message:
Do not give up, even if this amendment was adopted, not discouraged, we can still protest against, stand up for your right!
Do not give up, even if this amendment was adopted, not discouraged, we can still protest against, stand up for your right!
A voice can make the difference
A milions can change the world
---------------------------------------------
Join Us -- Fight With Us!! --- Stop CISPA!
In this summary I will collect as many official announcements who announced the news.
According to wired.com:
House Passes Controversial Cybersecurity Measure CISPA:
The House on Thursday approved cybersecurity legislation that privacy groups have decried as a threat to civil liberties.
The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, sponsored by Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Maryland), passed on a vote of 248 to 168.
Its goal is a more secure internet, but privacy groups fear the measure breaches Americans’ privacy along the way. The White House had weighed in on Wednesday, threatening a veto unless there were significant changes to increase consumer privacy. The bill was amended to provide more privacy protections, but it was not immediately clear whether the Senate or the White House would give the amended bill its blessing.
The measure, which some are calling the Son of SOPA, allows internet service providers to share information with the government, including the Department of Homeland Security and the National Security Agency, about cybersecurity threats it detects on the internet. An ISP is not required to shield any personally identifying data of its customers when it believes it has detected threats, which include attack signatures, malicious code, phishing sites or botnets. In short, the measure seeks to undo privacy laws that generally forbid ISPs from disclosing customer communications with anybody else unless with a court order.
The bill immunizes ISPs from privacy lawsuits for voluntarily disclosing customer information thought to be a security threat. Internet companies are also granted anti-trust protection to immunize them against allegations of colluding on cybersecurity issues. The measure is not solely limited to cybersecurity, and includes the catchall phrase “national security” as a valid reason for turning over the data.
CISPA also allows ISPs to bypass privacy laws and share data with fellow ISPs in a bid to promptly extinguish a cyberattack.
Moments before the vote was taken during a daylong hearing, Rogers urged his colleagues to “stand up for America. Support this bill.” He said those who were opposing the measure — groups that include the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation — were practicing “obfuscation.”
The bill’s supporters include Microsoft, Facebook, AT&T, Verizon, Oracle and many others.
The ACLU quickly blasted the measure’s passage. They and other groups said Americans’ private data should not be shared with the military, and that data sent to the government should be anonymized as much as possible to protect privacy.
“Cybersecurity does not have to mean abdication of Americans’ online privacy. As we’ve seen repeatedly, once the government gets expansive national security authorities, there’s no going back. We encourage the Senate to let this horrible bill fade into obscurity,” said Michelle Richardson, ACLU legislative counsel.
Some last-minute amendments included making non-national-security data subject to the Freedom of Information Act, sunsetting the measure after five years and barring the government (.pdf) from reviewing library, firearms, tax and medical records.
Rep. Edward Markey (D-Massachusetts) during the debate seemingly agreed with the ACLU. “Could the government use that personal information to spy on Americans? Yes,” he said. Rep. Dan Boren (D-Oklahoma) wasn’t convinced: “The government is not the enemy,” he said.
Amendments to remove language allowing the information-sharing in the name of “national security,” and to remove the NSA from the agencies receiving the data, never made it to the House floor.
The measure is now headed for the Senate. If it passes there, it will go to the White House for approval or veto.
A few Hours ago Anonymous has released this video with the following message:
Your creators, supporters, and counterparts have become sworn enemies of Anonymous. Expect us.
Emergency Action Authorized.
TRANSCRIPT
__________
Greetings citizens of the United States.
We are Anonymous.
Thursday, April 26th, the United States House, in a rushed vote, passed the HR 3523, also known as CISPA.
Dubbed the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, it allows the United States to collect information about users of the internet. It allows the United States to monitor all activity on the net and can be used to monitor any individual's internet usage. This monitoring is called deep packet inspection, it looks through everything that is going in and out of your computer, which is a blatant violation of our rights to privacy.
Looking through your mail is a crime for a postman, these rules should apply to the internet too.
The bill's intent is to help stop cyber attacks... However; the vague wording of the bill could allow the government to use this new power to go behind privacy protection and monitor, censor, and cut off online communication.
President Obama has already stated that he will veto the bill, but this is also what was said about NDAA.
Together, we can stop this act. The time to take action is now. We have defeated previous attempts to censor our only platform of true honest communication, the internet. SOPA was only the beginning.
Sign petitions, call your congressmen, and kill this act in the senate.
We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
CISPA, Expect us.
According to techdirt.com:
CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed VoteUp until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that's not even the worst part.
The vote followed the debate on amendments, several of which were passed. Among them was an absolutely terrible change (pdf and embedded below—scroll to amendment #6) to the definition of what the government can do with shared information, put forth by Rep. Quayle. Astonishingly, it was described as limiting the government's power, even though it in fact expands it by adding more items to the list of acceptable purposes for which shared information can be used. Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous vote. The CISPA that was just approved by the House is much worse than the CISPA being discussed as recently as this morning.
Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for "cybersecurity" or "national security" purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.
Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government's power.
Somehow, incredibly, this was described as limiting CISPA, but it accomplishes the exact opposite. This is very, very bad.
HRPT-112-HR3523HR4628
There were some good amendments adopted too—clarifying some definitions, including the fact that merely violating a TOS does not constitute unauthorized network access—but frankly none of them matter in the light of this change. CISPA is now a completely unsupportable bill that rewrites (and effectively eliminates) all privacy laws for any situation that involves a computer. Far from the defense against malevolent foreign entities that the bill was described as by its authors, it is now an explicit attack on the freedoms of every American.
Accoording to rt.com:
White House 'strongly opposes' CISPA, threateans to veto
Congress is slated to vote this week on America's most controversial bill in waiting — the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. But now the president’s advisers say they will recommend Obama vetoes CISPA if it makes it to the White House.Following comments this week from within the Obama administration that suggested that the White House was opposed to H.R. 3523, or CISPA, the executive office of the president has officially released a statement of administrative policy on the polarizing proposal that, if approved, would allow the federal government to snoop into the Internet correspondence of every American through the guise of being a necessary implement in ensuring cybersecurity.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, the White House officially condemns CISPA over some of the same issues that have caused other opponents to rally against the legislation across the nation. Specifically, the Obama administration denounces the proposed law for potentially giving the government cyber-sleuthing powers that would allow both federal authorities and private businesses to sneak into inboxes and online activities in the name of combating Internet terrorism tactics.
“The sharing of information must be conducted in a manner that preserves Americans' privacy, data confidentiality and civil liberties and recognizes the civilian nature of cyberspace,” the memo begins. “Cybersecurity and privacy are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, information sharing, while an essential component of comprehensive legislation, is not alone enough to protect the nation's core critical infrastructure from cyber threats. Accordingly, the administration strongly opposes H.R. 3523, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, in its current form.”
“H.R. 3523 fails to provide authorities to ensure that the nation's core critical infrastructure is protected while repealing important provisions of electronic surveillance law without instituting corresponding privacy, confidentiality and civil liberties safeguards,” adds the policy statement,
Additionally, adds the White House, CISPA “would inappropriately shield companies from any suits where a company's actions are based on cyber threat information identified, obtained or shared under this bill, regardless of whether that action otherwise violated federal criminal law or results in damage or loss of life. This broad liability protection not only removes a strong incentive to improving cybersecurity, it also potentially undermines our nation's economic, national security, and public safety interests.”
Wednesday’s press release comes only two full days after presidential hopeful and congressman, Ron Paul (R-TX), came after CISPA citing similar faults. In an address made Monday morning, the potential GOP nominee says that “CISPA represents an alarming form of corporatism as it further intertwines governments with companies like Google and Facebook,” and permits the private sector to steal personal communications and hand them to federal authorities “without a warrant, circumventing the well-known established federal laws like the Wiretap Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.”
“It also grants them broad immunity from lawsuits for doing so, leaving you for without recourse for invasion of privacy,” Congressman Paul adds.
On his part, President Obama says now through the White House that “Without clear legal protections and independent oversight, information sharing legislation will undermine the public's trust in the government as well as in the Internet by undermining fundamental privacy, confidentiality, civil liberties and consumer protections.”
In an effort to propose a remedy, the Obama administration says that the “the Administration believes that a civilian agency – the Department of Homeland Security – must have a central role in domestic cybersecurity, including for conducting and overseeing the exchange of cybersecurity information with the private sector and with sector-specific Federal agencies.” Those sentiments mirror what Richard A. Clarke, the former special adviser for cybersecurity under US President George W. Bush, told America earlier this month.
In an op-ed published in The New York Times three weeks ago, Clarke proposes that “Under Customs authority, the Department of Homeland Security could inspect what enters and exits the United States in cyberspace.”
“Customs already looks online for child pornography crossing our virtual borders. And under the Intelligence Act, the president could issue a finding that would authorize agencies to scan Internet traffic outside the United States and seize sensitive files stolen from within our borders.”
The Obama administration has not implemented plans to put the authority of monitoring the Internet into the DHS, but suggest on Wednesday that it might be the best idea in the meantime for creating a plan that would alleviate cyberterrorism threats while avoiding the privacy concerns brought up by opponents of CISPA.
“Legislation should address core critical infrastructure vulnerabilities without sacrificing the fundamental values of privacy and civil liberties for our citizens, especially at a time our Nation is facing challenges to our economic well-being and national security,” writes the White House. “The Administration looks forward to continuing to engage with the Congress in a bipartisan, bicameral fashion to enact cybersecurity legislation to address these critical issues. However, for the reasons stated herein, if H.R. 3523 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.”
Earlier this week, the UK’s Guardian cited Alex Ross, a senior adviser for innovation to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as saying that “the Obama administration opposes CISPA.”
"The president has called for comprehensive cybersecurity legislation. There is absolutely a need for comprehensive cybersecurity legislation,” said Ross.
Last year the White House announced that they would recommend that President Obama veto the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA). He authorized it on December 31, signing into law the power for the US military to indefinitely detain American citizens.
CISPA passes House in unexpected last-minute vote
The House of Representatives has approved Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act with a vote count of 248-168. The bill is now headed for the Senate. President Barack Obama will be able to sign or cancel it pending Senate approval.Initially slated to vote on the bill Friday, the House of Representatives decided to pass Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) Thursday after approving a number of amendments.
Apart from cyber and national security purposes, the bill would now allow the government to use private information obtained through CISPA for the investigation and prosecution of “cybersecurity crime,” protection of individuals and the protection of children. The new clauses define “cybersecurity crime” as any crime involving network disruption or hacking.
“Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cyber security bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a 'cybersecurity crime.' Basically it says the Fourth Amendment does not apply online, at all,” Techdirt's Leigh Beadon said.
Declan McCullagh, correspondent from CNET News, says CISPA will cause more trouble than is immediately apparent.
“The most controversial section of CISPA is the language – that notwithstanding any other portion the of law, companies can share what they want as long as it’s for what they call a ‘cyber security purpose,'" he told RT.
The CISPA battleground in numbers
CISPA was introduced in the House last November. Critics chided the bill, saying its broad wording could allow the government to spy on individual Internet users and block websites that publish vaguely defined ‘sensitive’ data.
"[CISPA] doesn’t really have any protections against cyber threats, all it does is make people share their information. But that’s not going to solve the problem. What’s going to solve the problem is actual security measures, protecting the service in the first place, not spying on people after the fact," Internet activist Aaron Swartz told RT.
The White House issued a statement Wednesday saying President Barack Obama would be advised to veto the bill if he receives it. The Obama administration denounces the proposed law for potentially giving the government cyber-sleuthing powers that would allow both federal authorities and private businesses to sneak into inboxes and online activities in the name of combating Internet terrorism tactics.
0 comments:
Post a Comment