Internet 'Kill Switch' Approved By Senate Homeland Security Committee

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has approved a cybersecurity bill, Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA), that would give the president far-reaching authority over the Internet in the case of emergency.

As The Hill explains, the bill, sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman, Susan Collins, and Tom Carper, would give the president "emergency authority to shut down private sector or government networks in the event of a cyber attack capable of causing massive damage or loss of life." The original bill granted the president the authority to "indefinitely" shut down networks, but an amendment to the PCNAA, approved yesterday, mandates that the president "get Congressional approval after controlling a network for 120 days."

The authority granted to the government in the bill has been likened to an Internet "kill switch."

Collins noted that she takes issue with the "kill switch" term. The Hill writes,

"It's been frustrating to read some of the misrepresentations of our bill in the cybersphere," Collins said, arguing the new bill actually circumscribes the president's existing authority and puts controls on its use. "I believe the substitute amendment we're offering strengthens those protections even more."

As we wrote here, the bill would also see the creation of a new agency within the Department of Homeland Security, the National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC). Any private company reliant on "the Internet, the telephone system, or any other component of the U.S. 'information infrastructure'" would be "subject to command" by the NCCC, and some would be required to engage in "information sharing" with the agency, says CBS4.

The bill will soon head to the Senate for a vote.

Read more about the PCNAA here.

Comments

[fireincarmation]

03:36 AM on 08/12/2010

Can someone please explain how this is even possible? I thought the internet was designed to be impossible to kill through some central authority?

[Jim riippa]

10:21 AM on 08/11/2010

Next step is to find a reason to use it.

[sdiaz]

11:35 PM on 07/08/2010

one word: Wikileaks

[AltonEDrew]

07:17 PM on 07/08/2010

I admit that when I read this article and reviewed portions of S.3480, Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010, I had visions of Keifer Sutherland running through the streets trying to stop a terrorist while Dennis Haysbert sits in the Oval Office with his finger over a big red button.

Okay, I’m also suffering from “24” withdrawal and it sounds like Senator Joe Lieberman,


Independent from Connecticut, is suffering from it, too. At the risk of channeling Representative John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, it sounds like we are using a nuclear bomb to kill an ant.

This bill is just another example of the overreach the Commerce Clause can be used to commit. While aimed at protecting our federal information infrastructure, let’s face it, anything or anyone could be a source of disruption to the infrastructure via the Internet. All this bill does is create the potential of killing the whole body in pursuit of destroying one cancer cell.

Maine’s Republican Senator Susan Collins is correct that “kill the switch” may be the wrong moniker for the bill. Overkill of Internet commerce may be more like it.

[BMcCue7]

07:02 AM on 07/04/2010

How long before we have a continuous Official State of Emergency? That way, the government can act unfettered by pesky restrictions on its power.

We already have a continuous state of war. A continuous state of emergency doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

[SALTYDAWG59]

04:38 PM on 07/02/2010

Is this being read from a hollywood screenplay of George Orwells book 1984?

[Bridget C]

05:12 PM on 07/01/2010

I find it interesting to note that many of the same people pitching a hissy about this were also against Net Neutrality. So you are perfectly happy giving ComCast the power to control what you see, but your against your government having emergency powers?

Personally, I'm for Net Neutrality and mostly against this bill.

[charles roemer]

10:07 AM on 06/30/2010

The President already has the authority to control communications but he has to declare a national emergency, This bill will short circuit that procedure and allow Homeland Security to monitor the net and obtain information without judicial review of a formal request.

The collateral damage this law will cause will chill the first amendment. If the internet providers fear that certain types of communication will draw the attention of Homeland Security they will be reluctant to allow some web sites to register.

[Brendan Wenzel]

11:30 AM on 06/29/2010

This will set a very dangerous precedent that will lead to China-like control over the internet. Just wait and see. After they get this passed, they will try to gain control over content.

[kfreed]

09:39 AM on 06/29/2010

Internet kill switch, DTV kill switch... was not impressed by the arguments for going to digital television as the possibilities for abuse are endless. Imagine a scenario where all communications systems could be shut down remotely and simultaneously. I'm not much into conspiracy theories, but I don't much like the idea of deliberately setting ourselves up for the next G.W. Bush who manages to get himself nominated to the Presidency by the Supreme Court. Imagine, let's say, a Sarah Palin with a universal kill switch at her disposal. Besides, anything proposed by Joe Lieberman elicits a Pavlovian reflex to duck and cover.

[Dtyra]

09:18 AM on 06/29/2010

Since The President and the Speaker of the House told us we had to wait until the Health Care Bill was passed to know what was in it I have a tendency to be somewhat suspicious of what's going on. An Internet Kill Switch? What's next? A daily hate session? A method to listen to us even if our C-phones are off? Will they be able to track our location? Will they monitor what we write? Will they...Wait, they already do that don't they.

[Bridget C]

05:07 PM on 07/01/2010

"Since The President and the Speaker of the House told us we had to wait until the Health Care Bill was passed to know what was in it"

I am sick and tired of this particular lie. What was said was that there was so much misinformation being pushed by certain segments of the media and certain right wing members of congress that the general public would not understand what was really in the bill until they started seeing it in action. Until then, the lies being told were overwhelming the real information. They did not say we COULDN'T know the correct information, that was widely available all along, I had a copy of the bill downloaded to my home computer well before it was voted on. No, what they said was we WOULDN'T know. If you were ignorant regarding that bill it was your own fault, not theirs.

[hey0there]

06:30 AM on 06/29/2010

suddenly cloud computing loses it appeal

[bkmur]

12:57 AM on 06/29/2010

And you'll still get a monthly bill from your ISP.

[bkmur]

12:54 AM on 06/29/2010

How soon will Obama use it after announcing that we're staying in Afghanisitan past the 7/11 deadline? Lying SOS.

[The Stand]

04:13 PM on 06/28/2010

My suggestion is to buy a shortwave radio. Just in case.

[PizzaGuy1]

09:51 AM on 06/29/2010

Yet another reason I give when friends find out I'm an amateur rado (HAM) operator, and they say "b..bbb.but you're a techie? An Internet inhabitant from way back? You use Skype and Ventrilo all the TIME!!!. Why do you want to talk in CW (morse code) to Japan, or even by voice over radio? It's so ANCIENT?!!!"

This is why.

[The Stand]

04:15 PM on 06/29/2010

Thanks, I was looking at data transmission over shortwave too. Im sure its pretty slow, back to the old days of modem speed for text documents.