The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 Passes Senate Panel 367
An anonymous reader writes "The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 passed a Senate panel, giving the president unprecedented power to issue a nation-wide blackout or restriction on websites without congressional approval. The bill, written by Sen. Jay Rockefeller [D-WV] and revised by Sen. Olympia Snow [R-ME], was drafted in an attempt to thwart internet-based terrorist threats, and gives the president this 'kill switch' without oversight or explanation. The bill is up for Senate vote."
Report to Congress (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't seem, though, to give Congress power to stop the emergency action if it feels that it's not really an emergency.
We'll see what the House does with it.
Wikileaks (Score:3, Interesting)
A page must be created right now to prepare the bets and polls on which page will be blocked first.
How does this work? (Score:3, Interesting)
I know you're joking, but seriously, how would something like this even work?
As far as I know, there's no Great Firewall of China style ISP-level filter here in America. So how would they even enforce a blackout of a website?
Re:How does this work? (Score:4, Interesting)
As far as I know, there's no Great Firewall of China style ISP-level filter here in America. So how would they even enforce a blackout of a website?
Should be easy enough to include such function inside the snooping machines that NSA has at tier 1 providers and ISP's.
Where are the technical people on /. (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok, I'll ask. Exactly how would a kill switch for the intrawebs work? Specifically, how would the president hit one button and "shut down" all telecom infrastructure in the country (including wireless). What about the various mesh networks that sprung up?
I am trying to envision how this would work on any technical level and I just can't get there. Yes, you could pretty easily cripple our telecom system here and there but to shut the whole thing down and make it unusable is quite a different scenario.
Not to mention the hacking opportunity this presents. Yes, I am sure there will be many many layers of security....but still.....if the president can do it, then someone else can also do it.
This actually raises (many) more questions than it answers.
Re:Where are the technical people on /. (Score:2, Interesting)
I was about to post this same thing, the only situation that makes any sense is that he could tell the ISPs what to do, who would promptly challenge the directive in court rather than shutting off traffic.
Not so terrible (Score:5, Interesting)
I've read the bill. It honestly isn't that bad. First off, the "kill switch" doesn't apply to arbitrary web sites or anything like that. It specifically targets 1) government computer networks and 2) computer networks connected to "critical infrastructure". By "critical infrastructure", they mean things like the power grid, water and sewer systems, natural gas systems, stuff like that. Some people who have read this bill have made the assumption that "infrastructure networks" is synonymous with "network infrastructure", i.e. internet backbones, but it's pretty obvious from the context that this is not what the bill is meant to cover. There's nothing in the bill which allows the president to turn off your internet or disconnect you unless you are a utility company.
Now, that said, they really could have more precisely defined "critical infrastructure networks" in order to make that clearer. There is still a little weasel-room in the bill where it is possible that someone could try to justify ridiculous actions using it. They could have eliminated this with a more specific definition of what comprises "critical infrastructure". So I wouldn't say that I support it 100% in its current form, but honestly, I don't think that the bill is all that terrible.
The bigger problem to me is that I don't see any reason to believe that the measures in this bill will do anything significant to address the problem which they are purporting to address. Although I'm not convinced that a "cyber attack" is a real threat, if it is, by the time the president declares a state of "cyber emergency", it will probably already be too late. If there really is a serious on-line threat then the way to fight that is not to give more power to people at the top to respond, it is to give people at the bottom more authority to make decisions and respond quickly to a developing security situation.
Re:It's ok people (Score:3, Interesting)
Once such power is granted, it will not go away. And it invevitably will eventually fall into the wrong hands.
I would argue that in many cases, misuse of power isn't the evil -- power itself is the evil. The fact that power will fall into the "wrong hands" and is a moot point, because there are no right hands.
To paraphrase Lord Acton, no class is fit to govern. This is just a formal way of saying that power itself (the special "right" to employ physical force as one's means) is evil.
Re:Bye, bye freedom... (Score:2, Interesting)
Nice try, but here's what Madison actually wrote:
"Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged against provisions against danger, real or pretended from abroad."
-- Letter to Thomas Jefferson (1798-05-13); published in Letters and Other Writings of James Madison (1865), Vol. II, p. 141 (via Wikiquote)
Re:How does this work? (Score:3, Interesting)
"declare a cybersecurity emergency and then shut down or limit access to parts of the internet without any oversight or explanation"
Don't know about other
Re:It's ok people (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>Slashdotters, I love you, but I hope you never have to endure governments as powerless as you desire them to be.
You mean like the USA circa 1820s. We seemed to do okay. The government was limited to only those powers granted by the Constitution, and men were free to pursue happiness in whatever way they desired. There was the problem of slavery and sexism, but we were still making progress.
Now contrast to the present, where citizens are treated like serfs:
- "Buy healthcare or be fined ~$1000."
- "Give us half your income every year, or else face jail time."
- "Your 18. Time to join the draft in case we need you to give up your Right to Life in some foreign hellhole."
- "You can speak on the net, unless we don't like what you say, then we'll charge you with hatespeech. Or just yank your site. Or search your home without warrant to arrest you for some other made-up charge."
It took about 200 years but the leaders have successfully restored the monarchy/nobility. True it's an elected monarchy/nobility, but still the same old Medieval-style power structure.