iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

CISPA: Facebook Explains Support For Controversial Cybersecurity Bill

The Huffington Post  |  By Posted: 04/13/2012 5:37 pm Updated: 04/13/2012 7:11 pm

Facebook Cispa

Facebook on Friday sought to explain its support for cybersecurity legislation that has come under fire from civil liberties groups who say the bill does not protect consumers from having their private data shared with the government.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, seeks to give businesses and the federal government legal protection to share cyber threats with each other in an effort to thwart hackers. Currently, they do not share that data because the information is classified and companies fear violating anti-trust law.

Facebook supports the bill because the social networking site needs timely information about cyber threats from the U.S. government to keep the site secure and protect the data of its 845 million users, Joel Kaplan, vice president of public Policy for Facebook, said in a statement Friday.

"One challenge we and other companies have had is in our ability to share information with each other about cyber attacks," Kaplan wrote. "When one company detects an attack, sharing information about that attack promptly with other companies can help protect those other companies and their users from being victimized by the same attack. Similarly, if the government learns of an intrusion or other attack, the more it can share about that attack with private companies (and the faster it can share the information), the better the protection for users and our systems."

Privacy and civil liberties groups, led by the ACLU, have criticized the bill, saying its definition of the consumer data that can be shared with the government is overly broad. And once the data is shared, the government could use that information for other purposes -- such as investigating or prosecuting crimes -- without needing to obtain a warrant, they say. They also criticize the legislation for not requiring companies to make customer information anonymous before sharing it with the government.

Michelle Richardson, a legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, told the Huffington Post the bill was "a privacy disaster" and "a new backdoor around the Fourth Amendment."

Kaplan said Facebook was taking those concerns seriously. He said CISPA would "impose no new obligations on us to share data with anyone –- and ensures that if we do share data about specific cyber threats, we are able to continue to safeguard our users’ private information, just as we do today."

Facebook's statement caps a week in which the bill's authors and supporters have defended the legislation from a growing Internet backlash. Last weekend, the hacker group Anonymous claimed credit for cyberattacks that briefly crashed the websites of the USTelecom and TechAmerica in retaliation for the trade groups' support of Rogers' cybersecurity legislation.

On Tuesday, CISPA's authors, Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), held a conference call with reporters seeking to rebut criticisms that the bill does not protect consumer privacy and refute what they said were misconceptions that the bill is similar to SOPA, a controversial anti-piracy bill that was scuttled earlier this year after widespread Internet protests.

On Wednesday, the House Intelligence Committee also created a Twitter account that outlines what CISPA would and would not do.

Rogers and Ruppersberger told reporters they were working with privacy and civil liberties groups to address concerns about the bill and said they were open to amending the legislation, which the House is expected to vote on during the week of April 23.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW TECH

From our partners


Facebook on Friday sought to explain its support for cybersecurity legislation that has come under fire from civil liberties groups who say the bill does not protect consumers from having their privat...
Facebook on Friday sought to explain its support for cybersecurity legislation that has come under fire from civil liberties groups who say the bill does not protect consumers from having their privat...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 148
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
04:18 PM on 04/22/2013
Anonymous is the only reason this information is going around they were the only ones pressing it - all the news sources were quite

the only people you should worry about is congress they are evil and are trying to control the internet - they do not want you to have freedom of speech

what is this communist china now?
04:15 PM on 04/22/2013
They are doing this to make it so we can not speak our free voice online..

they dont want us to connect online they want to control the internet.. look what else is going on:

a bill to place sales tax online
they are trying to control the internet..by fear tacticts it is so wrong

why would our employeer have any right to our private passwords?
08:11 AM on 04/15/2013
When it comes to the online world, the best way to determine how it should work is to look at the offline world.

The 4th amendment has been working out pretty well over the past 200+ years. With liberty comes responsibility - and some don't think that applies to them - and those people usually go to jail. Internet criminals can't be tried by a jury because they are in another country - but there are other ways to handle Internet criminals than taking away privacy in the name of security. One idea - find a way to shut off the hacker's individual IP address from the Internet (offline example - find someone's home, get a warrant and put the person under arrest).

Or we could choose to look at this thru new eyes - corporations could get BETTER security by using these "cyber threats" as a way to grow and expand. Some of the corporations could - dare I say it - HIRE these criminals to find holes in their own system. That used to be how IT security departments were setup (security guys can be the best hackers). Police investigations have become more effective with better criminals...why couldn't that happen with online protections? Just sayin'....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
woody7
Always a Dem, but..............
12:03 PM on 04/16/2012
bULL $ HIT
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Post31
Good grief!!!
07:03 PM on 04/15/2012
So basically if my neighbor turns to be a thief the government has the right to check my house. Um no thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
candcje
Progressive, Liberal Democrat and Proud of it!
08:45 PM on 04/15/2012
I read that this bill would allow for expedient sharing of information regarding a specific cyber threat - such as the Anonymous hacks that have been going on. I don't claim to know every detail of this bill, only what I read in this particular article about it. But could you please share with me WHERE it suggests that "if your neighbor turns out to be a thief, the government will have the right to check your house" cuz I didn't see anything even remotely like that in what I read.

Thanks. And I'm being totally serious. I wouldn't want to support or stand idly by doing nothing regarding a bill that would allow that level of personal intrusion. But I didn't see/read anything of the sort, so please point me toward your source so that I, too, can be fully informed on this issue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Post31
Good grief!!!
11:10 AM on 04/16/2012
The whole bill suggests it. It's not a hard concept. We all share the Internet like neighbors. One of our neighbors (you know someone that shares the Internet with us cause we are all connected to the same Internet) turns out to be a hacker. Because of that now the government has a right to look at my private stuff? This is fair or does it sound like it falls under illegal search and seizer. But don't get me wrong as Americans we traded our freedoms for the illusion of safety a long time ago.
04:35 PM on 04/15/2012
A thumbs-up gesture has different meanings in different cultures. Facebook's Liking of this bill suggests another digit pointed at its users.
photo
Spock
You are completely, absolutely, illogical
03:55 PM on 04/15/2012
What a terrible bill. Although I'm not really surprised FB supports it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ResearchtheFacts
Alert, awake & paying attention to the details.
03:28 PM on 04/15/2012
FB site secure and protect the data of its 845 million users...many who are copycat alias name creators and is the same person with various identities.  Let's get real FB. How many have canceled their accounts too? Are you still including those people in your bogus numbers? Also, I'm sure many have after hearing you are for CISPA.
03:07 PM on 04/15/2012
You think a guy like ZuckerB who jitled all his friends to make his billions is going to be honest with you or anyone? He has already sold you out. This would be as you continue to live in an America that is long gone. You and all your information now belongs to the State. The new USSA is going to make the old USSR look like Disneyland. The laws that have already been passed have rendered the America we knew and loved null and void. My question is, wasn't there any real patriots on top, in government who cherished what we once were and were willing to fight to preserve it? They all sold out at once? How can that be?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
theobserver4
progress is a process not an end result
11:10 AM on 04/16/2012
9/11 changed everything......the fright wing turned into a quivering mass of Jello and gave it all up to feel safe. They handed over the US to the people carrying the fascist torch from the 30's. FDR fought them off, W. Bush did not.
photo
bcainw
Editor New Age Citizen
01:18 PM on 04/15/2012
Leave it to the liberal Huttington Post to apologize for this Orwellian exercize in population control. They might have mentioned the data center being built in Utah that is 10 times larger than the Capitol and will be used to parse through our links, our phone conversations and our emails. Next thing "Big Brother" will be watching you and possibly contacting you through your television. Better we change the archetecture of browsers and ISP's so that these problems are solved through better fire walls. The bottom line is the government is scared shitless of the people as the great Ponzi Scheme continues to unravel. They are trying to stop a necessary revolution. It won't work. LOL.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
George Cummings
Warning: Moderate. Future posts unpredictable
01:15 PM on 04/15/2012
'CyberSecurity' bills won't solve the security problem. As a former IT professional, let me make it completely clear to you how systems are breached through a little role playing:

CEO: We need a network that can handle the load and be secure.
IT Head: No problem. We can do that for 12 million.
CEO: Here's 5.4 million. Make It Happen.

And that, children is 99% of the story.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rob Huggins
12:26 PM on 04/15/2012
The knee jerk reaction to the bill is obviously that your information is being shared in ways you didn't intend and that's bad. If you are upset about your information being shared on Facebook though, you are delusional. Nothing on Facebook has ever been intended to be private besides your email and password.

I think the bill does need to be more specific though on the scope of use for information. The user needs to be left with a clear right to sue companies and the government for wrongfully sharing personal data in ways not directly related to criminal activity without a warrant.

Otherwise, if a person is stupid enough to do something on Facebook that is either criminal or points to their criminal activity, we call that survival of the fittest, and they are obviously not the fittest.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
writerjohnny
11:43 AM on 04/15/2012
No surprise here. Facebook acts like any other greedy corporate multi-national, profit-based entity. Surrender your fourth amendment rights at your own risk.
11:04 AM on 04/15/2012
Would be too much fun to see Facebook taken down for a day or two. Anonymous Rocks.
10:50 AM on 04/15/2012
This stance is such BS. None of the companies mentioned, nor any of the Fortune 5000 (that's right, 5000) reveal ANY information on security breaches until the absolutely have to.

Over 95% of all corporate security breaches in the US go completely unreported, and that includes the Federal Government.

Miles "....Pants On Fire" Long