backtop


Print 7 comment(s) - last by thisisaname.. on Dec 2 at 1:48 AM


  (Source: kaltoons.com)
The White House is concerned about the government's "ability to protect citizens" if this bill were to be signed into law

Members of the U.S. House intelligence committee have proposed a bill that would allow private firms to receive cyber threat-related information from government agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA).

The legislation was proposed Wednesday by Representative Mike Rogers, Republican chairman of the U.S. House intelligence committee, and Representative C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger, the committee's senior Democrat.

The bill intends to allow the sharing of classified threat information with defense contractors and internet service providers (ISPs). This would require spy and intelligence agencies to tell ISPs, for example, what types of threats they've identified so that the ISPs can block traffic that contains that particular signature.

In addition, the bill would protect firms who relay cyber threat information to the government from "frivolous" lawsuits.

This bill addresses complaints from ISPs and other private firms regarding the government's lack of information about cyber threats, even though the private sector has informed the government about such threats.

Over the past year alone, many companies and government entities have been hit by cyber attacks such as U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp., Citigroup, the Pentagon, and Google.

"Our intelligence agencies collect important information overseas about advanced foreign cyber threats that could dramatically assist the private sector," said Rogers. "The government needs to be able to share this threat intelligence so that the private sector can protect its own networks.

"We will have a catastrophic attack within the next year, whether it's attacking a banking system, a grid system, this is going to happen and we have to make sure that we protect ourselves."

The White House is currently reviewing the bill. It cited concerns about the government's "ability to protect citizens" if this bill were to be signed into law because sensitive information would be released and could land into the wrong hands. This could potentially hold corporations accountable.

The new bill echoes the ideas of former CIA/NSA head Michael Hayden, who said that cyber security threats are "horribly over-classified" back in October.

Source: MSNBC



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

What about senate bill 1867???
By thisisaname on 12/1/2011 7:35:00 PM , Rating: 5
Why isn't anybody covering the news about this dangerous bill that's up for a vote???
S. 1867 gives the president and all future presidents the legal authority to arrest and detain american citizens in the US and around the world, by the military, and hold them indefinitely without charge or trial, just on the suspicion of terrorist activities.
Hello? Is anybody out there???




RE: What about senate bill 1867???
By spread on 12/1/2011 7:55:17 PM , Rating: 2
It's always good to give someone endless power. It's never been abused before. Ever. Not one time in history.


RE: What about senate bill 1867???
By thisisaname on 12/1/2011 8:38:15 PM , Rating: 2
I'm going to let you guys do your homework, but here's a couple videos to get you started. This is from Senator Rand Paul's official youtube channel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rghhz_t5POo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKaTxjxnYfE

I don't know if I'm allowed to post video links or not, but I'm going to try.
Now, what concerns the National Defense Authorization Act (senate bill 1867), is sections 1031 and 1032. You can find that info yourself, but there's a lot of disinfo that's getting put out about this, so don't be decieved.
The bill was drafted by Carl Levin and John McCain and they have been trying to cram this through congress. They already passed through closed door secret committees. There was a vote to amend the bill to strike the american citizens part from the bill, and it failed by a vast majority.
The rest if you want any info, is up to you to find.


By thisisaname on 12/2/2011 1:48:51 AM , Rating: 2
Well, MSNBC and CBS are reporting tonight the bill has passed the senate by an overwhelming majority. It goes back to the house to be "reconciled", then it's on its way to the president.
One step closer to martial law. :\


Does this bill have a name?
By Iaiken on 12/1/2011 1:42:11 PM , Rating: 2
Funny that you would write so much about the bill and it's sponsors, yet forget to include the name of the bill...




RE: Does this bill have a name?
By soulcarver on 12/1/2011 2:24:04 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, but you could have used some decorum in your response. How about just simply asking for the name? Bad form sir, bad form.


US-CERT
By TeXWiller on 12/1/2011 4:09:19 PM , Rating: 2
It does sound like this bill could strengthen the position of the US-CERT as a hub and a filter between the US government and the private sector, although it might be imaginable that the description of ISP-government interaction could be added to the laws regulating telecommunications as well.
The White House privacy concern (what else could it be?) is slightly amusing in the light of the scale of intelligence gathering by the US government and the private contractors reported and talked about in recent years. The corresponding systems do work in some other countries, where there are also laws regulating privacy and collection of personally identifiable data.




"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki