(This post is by way of a PSA. I know very little about this issue, but it seems to be Very Bad for Us, but Very Useful for the Bad Guys. The front page hasn’t covered this news yet, nor has Emptywheel from what I can tell. My emphasis throughout. Or:
Help yourselves, please, because: you know more than I do.) ;o)
From Open Congress, ‘All Your Data Are Belong to Us’:
Barely a year after the defeat of SOPA, Congress is back to testing the waters for legislation that many internet users believe to be in violation of their fundamental rights to privacy and free expression.
CISPA [The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act], a bill that would make it easier for corporations and the government to share internet users’ personal data, was officially re-introduced in the House on Wednesday. It’s already being rushed forward in the legislative process. The House Intelligence Committee is holding a full hearing on the bill today at 10 am (which was yesterday, Feb. 14). They will hear from four witnesses — all from the business sector and all known supporters of CISPA. No experts with concerns about privacy issues in the bill were invited to address the committee.
According to its sponsors, the goal of CISPA is to update how “cyber threat intelligence” information is shared between private entities and the federal government. In order to accomplish this, many long-standing laws that were designed to protect the privacy of individuals would be explicitly voided. With those laws out of the way, companies would be encouraged (but not required) to share information about their users with the government without a warrant and without disclosure, and they would be rewarded with legal impunity for doing so. The government would then be able to use the information that is shared with them for preventing cyber attacks or for any other law enforcement action.
Unlike SOPA, which divided the business community, CISPA enjoys overwhelming support from corporations.
This is the Rattiest portion:
The re-introduction of CISPA comes less than 24 hours after President Obama announced his executive order on cybersecurity. The executive order compels the government to share cyber threat information with web companies, but it does nothing to increase sharing from companies to the government. From a privacy standpoint, the executive order is neutral.
But during the State of the Union address, Obama called on Congress to pass legislation to “give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks.” That’s an implicit request to pass CISPA, and a sign to Congress that the Administration needs the laws changed in order to get the rest of the information sharing program — from web companies to the government — flowing.
From Electronic Freedom Foundation:
CISPA is the contentious bill civil liberties advocates fought last year, which would provide a poorly-defined “cybersecurity” exception to existing privacy law. CISPA offers broad immunities to companies who choose to share data with government agencies (including the private communications of users) in the name of cybersecurity. It also creates avenues for companies to share data with any federal agencies, including military intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA).
Last year, CISPA passed the House with a few handful of amendments that tried to fix some of its vague language. But the amendments didn’t address many of the significant civil liberties concerns. Those remaining problems were reintroduced in today’s version of CISPA. Here’s a brief overview of the issues (explanations of the bolded issues at the eff website):
Companies have new rights to monitor user actions and share data—including potentially sensitive user data—with the government without a warrant.
CISPA overrides existing privacy law, and grants broad immunities to participating companies.
CISPA also raises major transparency and accountability issues.
Users probably won’t know if their private data is compromised under CISPA, and will have little recourse.
CISPA is a dangerous bill.
The main page for HR 624 is here; the money trail is here, provided by OpenSecrets.org. Telecoms to Congress-critters. A whole lotta D’s, by the by.
EFF is asking (clicking the question takes you to a contact email page):




28 Comments

Ignore your rights and they go away. Ours done gone.
Succinct, arcadesproject.
“without a warrant” . . . all this chipping away at due process has such a domino effect. It doesn’t feel like the laws or “our freedoms” amount to a hill of beans anymore, does it?
Rec’d, thanks for keeping us abreast of how that FISA thing that gave us a peek into Obama’s soul was just an anomaly.
Heh.
“Ilsa, I’m no good at being noble, but it doesn’t take much to see that the
problems of threethe little people don’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world.”~ Humphrey Bogart
Casablanca
Thanks for this, Wendy. I got permission to use this on the MyFDL FP later tonight.
How great, Kit. I dunno if I can host it very righteously since I know so little about it. Is it possible you could help if you have time? I was hoping folks might jump on the thread that actually know the issue, lol.
To be honest (and to my chagrin) I haven’t been able to dive into this beyond the surface level stories like you’ve linked too. Hopefully someone else more knowledgeable will join us!
Good-o, then sweetie. We’ll do our best. Thank you, with chuckles.
I’m assuming the scrambled acronym in the diary’s title is to hide the diary from nefarious googlers. Am I right?
Thanks for the read Wendy, all very interesting, and rcc’d.
I was a bit bemused to find THIS READ AT HUFFPO which is quite a part of YOUR posting.
It never stops, Big Bro is all over us.
Ah well, on we trudge.
Au contraire, AitchD. wendydavis lisps. (Corrected, and thank you, Perfessor.) ;D
Lord luv a duck, LaRue. When will we coin terms far past ‘Orwellian’? ‘Obombian’, maybe?
From your link, and all ya can do is laugh (as crying does no good, and then get righteously pissed off):
and then comes the math, which is seriously hilarious, except that…they’re gonna *codify* all this shit, not that we have much recourse in the law now, in any event. Still, we have to kick back when we can.
I did so many searches on flickr commons for art for this, and ‘Big Bro’ was one. Thank you; please do come back so I can go fetch Russ Baker and friend’s take on Petraeus’s Fallen Star. Reckon you’ll like it, even if you don’t agree. ;o)
my bolds.
well, well, well. all they want is carte blanche.
Here it is; enjoy. ;D
Impunity, immunity…carte blanche for them, imprisonment for us.
Convenient, eh wot, greenwarrior?
“Yeth, and I’m only thickthteen”.
Seems the House wants to pre-empt the unitary executive and dare him to veto if it passes both chambers. I suppose some members also have to own up to their indebtedness.
Before the House rushed ahead, the Guardian had quoted an unnamed spokesperson or spokespersoness vouching for “Anonymous” and by and large approving of Obama’s EO. Also, the ACLU’s Michelle Richardson by and large approved of the EO.
It’s a very hairy issue, not to be trusted to a rabid House of Representatives, not to the unitary executive, and not to the private corporate sector. Hmm.
Mostly, the Good Guys need better lawyers than the Bad Guys, and the Good Guys need to argue in front of honest and ethical judges. But the Bad Guys have the best lawyers, and arguing in front of an honest and ethical judge is a crap shoot.
Point taken that O’s EO had been deemed *fairly* neutral, as I’d read it, but this gives the impression that Congress is aiding him (and follow the telecoms money trail to D’s):
I think that the Bad Guys’ lawyers aren’t necessarily better, but their clients have so much money that they can tie them up in court and with motions, arguments, discovery, etc. that the Good Guys can’t compete. And as you say, the judges are a crap shoot in terms of ethics.
I’d have been interested in seeing the Guardian’s *source* for Anon’s approval, though. Pastebin? ;D Anyone can…be Anonymous, really.
Oopsie. This seems to indicate otherwise, and allegedly from Anon.
And the Guardian says they really hate this iteration and the TPP.
1. Shit (the zombie bill is back)
2. Not unexpected – say “Hello to to Chris Dodd”
3. April 5 seems like a very nice day to get together and protest this and other things.
4. If you think TPP is bad, wait until TPA starts shoving GMOs into Europe.
Don’t just watch the telecoms, also watch RIAA and MPAA. And I wouldn’t be sanguine about what Google, Microsoft, and other big web players are up to. If those three can come to a commercial compromise, say bye-bye to freedom on the internet and a likely a whole lot of open-source development projects.
Please do tell me what RIAA and MPAA are; if you don’t want to take the time or get back, I’ll look them up in the morning.
SCOTUS is going to hear Bowman v. Monsanto soon; a bit of a case that could open up more challenges to seed patenting, though holding one’s breath would be silly with this court. Human genes are being patented as I type. Greed, control, and lust for power combined with lack of conscience and empathy are ascendant; we must fight with all the humanity we have.
Yes; April 5 sounds like a good date. Might even be able to demonstrate in downtown Mancos. ;D
Thanks, THD.
Scary Scary Scary times we live in. The banks own these people, from the President on down. And the banks are busy laundering the Big Cartels billions of dollars, while meanwhile, our rights are going the way of the carrier pigeon. And Obama doesn’t even refer to them as our “rights’ – merely “our traditions.”
Record Industry Association of America
Motion Picture Association of America (Chris Dodd, Exec. Dir.)
The creeping Orwellian-ism of each iteration never fails to amuse:
1) SOPA – Stop Online Piracy Act: DEFEATED
2) CISPA – Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act: NARROWLY DEFEATED?
3) CHiPraARO (?) – Child Protection and Safety Anti-Rape Act: DEFEATED?
4) AFLbCITA (?) – the Assassination of Liberty Freedom by the Coward Islamo-Terrorist Act:
PASSED!
It seems to be the rule; the more just and libertarian the title of the law, the its intended to curtail our constitutionally mandated freedoms or the ability to control our own lives.
Whom does this actually deceive?
Libertarians are economically naive, but they are right about one thing: big government is your enemy. Osama bin Laden was a better man than Barack Obama. He was the lesser murderer.
Yes, what a clever distortion, elisemattu. Made for Prime Time consumption. Akin to ‘The Constitution is such a quaint document…’
Thank you, amigo. Got busy and never did google (well, bing) them. ;o)
Most every US citizen, I fear, baron. Remember when Republicans used to be the ones who named bills the opposite of what they actually were?
Interesting comparison, nonpartisanliberal. And the Pauls have been aces on a few of these deals; Rand wants to hold Brennan’s feet to the fire on torture and drone assassinations before a confirmation vote, for instance.