iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Gerry Smith
GET UPDATES FROM Gerry:

Cybersecurity Bill's Authors Will Add Amendments To Address Privacy Concerns

Posted: 04/24/2012 7:09 pm Updated: 04/24/2012 9:20 pm

Rogers

Authors of a cybersecurity bill said Tuesday they will amend their legislation in response to privacy concerns before the House votes on the controversial measure this Friday.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, sponsored by Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), seeks to give businesses and the federal government legal protection to share cyber threats with each other in an effort to thwart hackers. The government does not currently share that data because the information is classified and companies fear violating anti-trust law. The bill would remove legal barriers so they can do so.

But the legislation has been criticized by privacy and civil liberties groups that have said the bill's definition of the consumer data that can be shared with the government is overly broad.

They have expressed concerns that the bill could allow law enforcement to obtain citizens' personal information without needing a warrant. They also worry about consumers' data ending up in the hands of the National Security Agency (NSA), which gathers intelligence on foreign entities but is legally barred from collecting data on Americans.

The bill’s authors said one of the amendments would limit the federal government’s use of private information to five purposes: cybersecurity, investigating and prosecuting cyber crime, protecting “individuals from death or serious bodily harm,” protecting minors from child pornography, and ensuring national security. Another amendment would restrict the cyber threat data that can be shared.

“I am very pleased with where the bill stands today,” Rogers said in a statement. “Our bill is designed to help protect American companies from advanced foreign cyber threats, like those posed by the Chinese government. It has always been my desire to do that in a manner that doesn’t sacrifice the privacy and civil liberties of Americans, and I am confident that we have achieved that goal.”

In a conference call Tuesday, Rogers told reporters “we feel very confident we have the votes” to pass the bill in the House, which is scheduled to begin debate on the bill Thursday and vote on Friday.

In a statement released Tuesday, the Center for Democracy and Technology, which had opposed the legislation due to privacy and civil liberties concerns, said the bill’s authors have “made important privacy improvements."

But the group said the legislation still “falls short” because it does not prevent the flow of Internet data to the NSA and the use of information for purposes unrelated to cybersecurity. It said it would support amendments to address those concerns, but that it “will not oppose the process moving forward in the House.”

On Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said he will offer his own amendment to the bill in order to limit the collection of personally identifiable information and "narrowly define" the purposes for which the government can use information obtained from companies.

The White House has declined to comment on the bill specifically. But in a conference call with reporters Monday, a senior administration official said that cybersecurity legislation also needed to regulate critical infrastructure, such as the power grid, and include oversight to protect citizens' privacy.

"We need legislation that is carefully crafted and narrowly tailored to find the types of information that can be shared so it is focused on cybersecurity risks and not on every conceivable use of private information," one senior administration official said.

In recent weeks, the bill's authors and supporters have defended the legislation in the face of a growing Internet backlash. In particular, Rogers and Ruppersberger sought to refute what they said were misconceptions that the bill is similar to SOPA and PIPA -- controversial anti-piracy bills that were scuttled earlier this year after widespread Internet protests.

Despite such concerns, Rogers' bill has widespread bipartisan support, with more than 100 co-sponsors in the House and letters of support from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several major technology companies, including Facebook and Microsoft.

Rogers said there is a reason “every corner of the private sector loves this bill.”

“They need the help,” he told reporters. “They need it now. And they are absolutely under siege.”

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW TECH

From our partners


Authors of a cybersecurity bill said Tuesday they will amend their legislation in response to privacy concerns before the House votes on the controversial measure this Friday. The Cyber Intelligenc...
Authors of a cybersecurity bill said Tuesday they will amend their legislation in response to privacy concerns before the House votes on the controversial measure this Friday. The Cyber Intelligenc...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 19
  • 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
11:11 AM on 04/27/2012
Why all the finger pointing? Quote from the article

"Despite such concerns, Rogers' bill has widespread bipartisan support, with more than 100 co-sponsors in the House"

Not just the right backed this bill.

Theft of intellectual property by foreign nations must be addressed. If you think this is not a major issue then you are very misinformed.

Industries having to compete with counterfeits made in China not only drives costs up for all, not just the rich.

Like most of the bills it is not perfect, but it is a step in the right direction to protect American intellectual property. Should we just continue to allow it to be stolen?
10:09 AM on 04/25/2012
There was SOPA. There were protests. And, there was protest fatigue.

Now, there is another law - CISPA or something. And yes, there are no protests.

How many such laws are passed like this?

On this particular topic, its entirely relevant that we educate ourselves. Online courses on Security related topics [like this one here ->http://www.wiziq.com/course/3706-computer-security-and-ethical-hacking-training-by-ankit-fadia] are taken. These would enable everyone to understand and support the right policies - whether it is corporate, politics or companies.

And, government's everywhere (and largely all companies too) are always looking for control of our lives, our choices and our actions. No matter which party comes to power - its always the same story. All decision making is shrouded in so much secrecy and causes so much loss. Why don't they become more open instead of us asking to be so?

This is not only relevant for government and politics but also in companies.
08:49 AM on 04/25/2012
The supposed freest country in the world has the most invasive internet laws.. so to speak, there is no freedom on the American internet. Privacy rights are of no concern to the American government unless of course its their privacy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sfmarkh
02:22 AM on 04/25/2012
What's one more invasion into personal information by Big Bro? I got nothin to hide! (That's what you think!
This continual invasion into personal information is sickening. The laws that keep allowing even more avenues are accelerating and the level of mistrust by this individual keep rising. No wonder people are so paranoid these days? Is there anyone accountable or in charge of every available methodical, legal way to get all of our info? Does it boggle anyone else's mind about all of these legal "rights" and what they are exactly and the number of them? Is nothing personal anymore? (No, I think not)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TiredOfNo
So far left of the Republicans I'm almost moderate
01:31 AM on 04/25/2012
How does it go..........."give them an inch................."
10:59 PM on 04/24/2012
What does "ensuring national security" mean, exactly?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sarkazmo
Not liberal, not conservative, I am an individual.
04:51 PM on 04/25/2012
Anything they want it to mean, that's the problem.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Patricia013
American made - what have you done with my badges?
10:22 PM on 04/24/2012
Yet another ploy to get their foot in the door to government and big business regulation of the internet....don't be fooled!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RobertFromMN
Fiercely secular Luxemburgist
01:21 AM on 04/25/2012
This is the U$A. Protecting Big Business IS protecting national security. So all you whiners carrying on about "civil liberties" and "privacy" need to grow up. You can either be safe or you can be free, but you can't be both.
Remember 9/11, and Beware the Chinese Boogieman!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Patricia013
American made - what have you done with my badges?
01:33 AM on 04/25/2012
I'll take freedom every GD day of the week! You live under big brother's thumb!!! You sound like the whiner here...most of us don't need a nanny!
09:52 PM on 04/24/2012
Having witnessed actions by my government over the past two or three decades, behavior by politicians in general, the corruption and greed on Wall Street and in the financial industry and the total disregard for consumers by corporations I can honestly say that I don't trust any of them.
kman22
live more
09:09 PM on 04/24/2012
Cyber-security threats should be made public but why would you share user data as part of the process? Knowing the whys and hows of a successfull attack will not be compromised by not sharing personal information. Geo targeted information, hardware state, o.s. state, this is valid information for compromise resolution. Personal information, web activities, buying habits, should not be included in shared information. Can anyone think why you would want personal info for anything to reconcile an attack or compromise?
08:28 PM on 04/24/2012
Listen Up Everyone.

There is a strong chance that CISPA will pass in to law if you do not show support to oppose this bill by contacting your district Congressman (listed below). If 'CISPA' does pass into law, your personal and financial information will be at risk under the broad misinterpretation of the unrelated amendments excuses and context of the bill, which gives websites the free power to send your private online activities, such as bank transactions, e*trade, online debt or credit transactions to the local police without a court order or subpoena and also makes those websites NOT accountable for the fraud and misuse as a result of sending it.

The fact is, police agencies have made database's that collect and contain personal & private data about you, created around laws like 'CISPA', for instances, the N-DEx databases network created under the 'Patriot Act' of 2001, making everyone’s family personal matters and communication with local police PUBLIC and accessible to every justice computer system around the U.S. at the push of their keyboards to potentially blackmail you with. Just take a look at @ http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/n-dex . If this law ‘CISPA’ is passed, a database like N-DEx will have all your online bank activities automatically captured and at risk for misuse & fraud the same way, unless you don’t mind gambling your life saving away, I suggest you CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN very quickly, before it’s too late!