PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security Cybersecurtiy bill gets Senate go ahead.


talastan
06-26-2010, 11:01 AM
http://news.techworld.com/security/3228198/obama-internet-kill-switch-plan-approved-by-us-senate/?olo=rss

Obama Internet kill switch plan approved by US Senate
President could get power to turn off Internet
By Grant Gross
Published: 11:02 GMT, 25 June 10

A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.

Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an Internet "kill switch." Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause "the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication" in a time of war, as described in the Communications Act of 1934, they said in a breakdown of the bill published on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee website.

The committee unanimously approved an amended version of the legislation by voice vote Thursday, a committee spokeswoman said. The bill next moves to the Senate floor for a vote, which has not yet been scheduled.


The bill, introduced earlier this month, would establish a White House Office for Cyberspace Policy and a National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications, which would work with private US companies to create cybersecurity requirements for the electrical grid, telecommunications networks and other critical infrastructure.

The bill also would allow the US president to take emergency actions to protect critical parts of the Internet, including ordering owners of critical infrastructure to implement emergency response plans, during a cyber-emergency. The president would need congressional approval to extend a national cyber-emergency beyond 120 days under an amendment to the legislation approved by the committee.

The legislation would give the US Department of Homeland Security authority that it does not now have to respond to cyber-attacks, Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, said earlier this month.

"Our responsibility for cyber defence goes well beyond the public sector because so much of cyberspace is owned and operated by the private sector," he said. "The Department of Homeland Security has actually shown that vulnerabilities in key private sector networks like utilities and communications could bring our economy down for a period of time if attacked or commandeered by a foreign power or cyber terrorists."

Other sponsors of the bill are Senators Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, and Tom Carper, a Delaware Democrat.

One critic said Thursday that the bill will hurt the nation's security, not help it. Security products operate in a competitive market that works best without heavy government intervention, said Wayne Crews, vice president for policy and director of technology studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an anti-regulation think tank.

"Policymakers should reject such proposals to centralize cyber security risk management," Crews said in an e-mail. "The Internet that will evolve if government can resort to a 'kill switch' will be vastly different from, and inferior to, the safer one that will emerge otherwise."

Cybersecurity technologies and services thrive on competition, he added. "The unmistakable tenor of the cybersecurity discussion today is that of government steering while the market rows," he said. "To be sure, law enforcement has a crucial role in punishing intrusions on private networks and infrastructure. But government must coexist with, rather than crowd out, private sector security technologies."


On Wednesday, 24 privacy and civil liberties groups sent a letter raising concerns about the legislation to the sponsors. The bill gives the new National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications "significant authority" over critical infrastructure, but doesn't define what critical infrastructure is covered, the letter said.

Without a definition of critical infrastructure there are concerns that "it includes elements of the Internet that Americans rely on every day to engage in free speech and to access information," said the letter, signed by the Center for Democracy and Technology, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and other groups.

"Changes are needed to ensure that cybersecurity measures do not unnecessarily infringe on free speech, privacy, and other civil liberties interests," the letter added.

Bwana
06-26-2010, 11:08 AM
Al Gore takes the time to invent it, now Barry kills it......bad libs.....BAD!

BucEyedPea
06-26-2010, 11:24 AM
Where on our way to dictatorship. So much for proclaiming civil liberties by the left. If Obama signs it and there's a war with Iran we'll know he is truly no different than Bush and the NeoCons, who always were lefties.

This bill requires a massive call-in by the folks—not that they'll heed us.

petegz28
06-26-2010, 11:27 AM
First the banks, then the auto makers, then the health insurance companies, now the interweb.

talastan
06-26-2010, 11:54 AM
Okay so this will give the government the ability to control the internet. Probably hurt the business of tech companies who work on Cybersecurity such as anti-virus software, firewalls, etc. And basically then give the government the ability to come up with a new internet tax to finance the whole system. Yeh this has fail written all over it.

Chiefspants
06-26-2010, 04:44 PM
Where on our way to dictatorship. So much for proclaiming civil liberties by the left. If Obama signs it and there's a war with Iran we'll know he is truly no different than Bush and the NeoCons, who always were lefties.

This bill requires a massive call-in by the folks—not that they'll heed us.

What side do you consider Reagan on then? I ask because if you're branding all neoconservatives as lefties, wouldn't this naturally mean that you consider Reagan to be a "lefty" as well?

Garcia Bronco
06-26-2010, 04:45 PM
This isn't something they can actually accomplish to meet their goal of stopping the flow of information. The only thing they truly control is DNS.

Baby Lee
06-26-2010, 05:25 PM
What side do you consider Reagan was on then? I ask because if you're branding all neoconservatives as lefties, wouldn't this naturally mean that you consider Reagan to be a "lefty" as well?

I believe there is a certain misquote by a Mr. Ronald Paul would establish that you're flat WRONG!!!

teedubya
06-27-2010, 02:06 AM
First the banks, then the auto makers, then the health insurance companies, now the interweb.

next the Oilcane and mass evacuations with potentially several lower states becoming uninhabitable... tons of methane gases...

instantly 100s of thousands of mortgages become worthless...

look at how much shit Barry has gotten done... banks, auto, health and internet... jesus. And now a potential cataclysmic event

headsnap
06-27-2010, 07:27 AM
next the Oilcane and mass evacuations with potentially several lower states becoming uninhabitable... tons of methane gases...

instantly 100s of thousands of mortgages become worthless...

look at how much shit Barry has gotten done... banks, auto, health and internet... jesus. And now a potential cataclysmic event
the perfect storm...

Dave Lane
06-27-2010, 08:15 AM
So this bill was unanimously approved . By republicans and democrats. And still you think it's some horrible thing. If you seriously think the president couldn't get this done before you are not thinking rationally.

BucEyedPea
06-27-2010, 08:39 AM
What side do you consider Reagan on then? I ask because if you're branding all neoconservatives as lefties, wouldn't this naturally mean that you consider Reagan to be a "lefty" as well?

I don't consider RR a NeoCon. I consider him a FP realist. Go check some things I out up right out of his autobiography....despite patteu's spin on some of them.

It can be tough to spot a real NC because sometimes conservatives and NCs agree. Sometimes conservatives are buying the rhetoric of true NCs ( lies actually) because NCs push the right emotional buttons....like national security.

Chiefspants
06-27-2010, 12:11 PM
I don't consider RR a NeoCon. I consider him a FP realist. Go check some things I out up right out of his autobiography....despite patteu's spin on some of them.

It can be tough to spot a real NC because sometimes conservatives and NCs agree. Sometimes conservatives are buying the rhetoric of true NCs ( lies actually) because NCs push the right emotional buttons....like national security.

So you were in full support of his interventions in Grenada and Afghanistan?

Chocolate Hog
06-27-2010, 12:14 PM
So this bill was unanimously approved . By republicans and democrats. And still you think it's some horrible thing. If you seriously think the president couldn't get this done before you are not thinking rationally.

Patriot Act.

memyselfI
06-27-2010, 01:22 PM
Al Gore takes the time to invent it, now Barry kills it......bad libs.....BAD!

This.

stevieray
06-27-2010, 01:39 PM
First the banks, then the auto makers, then the health insurance companies, now the interweb.

don't forget student loans and 96% of mortgages.


...they were negative liberties for a reason, President Dumbass.

BucEyedPea
06-27-2010, 02:10 PM
So you were in full support of his interventions in Grenada and Afghanistan?

I always said I supported the Cold War especially when it comes to the Monroe Doctrine which I also said I support. I think communists like the Soviets need to be killed and rolled back. Afghanistan, well that was more by proxy. Plus there's new information Gates has written about that was not known then. You need to read my posts or check my archive. I said many times, that I do not support most of our post Cold War FP.

BucEyedPea
06-27-2010, 02:12 PM
don't forget student loans and 96% of mortgages.


...they were negative liberties for a reason, President Dumbass.

But he's not a socialist. ROFL