Posted on 08/28/2009 8:13:33 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."
Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.
When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.
The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government's role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.
Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.
The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. "As soon as you're saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it's going to be a really big issue," he says.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."
Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
The Internet Security Alliance's Clinton adds that his group is "supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective."
Thank ‘to whom it may concern’ that it is Obama doing this, we can trust him. If it were that horrid dictator W Bush, I would be protesting that it was another move in his creating a dictatorship and denying the people of this country their rights and freedoms. (scarcasm off)
I have my torches lit, pitchforks ready and a stock of ammo.
“Define: emergency & threat”
Practically anything, and once declared and implemented, we would have no way to check it out.
THe only thing I want to know is what is in place still that prevents them from doing this? In what way are they not ready yet? What further obstacles to the takeover of the country have they yet to consider and plan for?
This would not be difficult. Declare any old emergency - either exploit an accidental, natural or hostile event, or facilitate or even manufacture one.
Shut down the phones, cell phones, internet. Use force or threats or installed management to control the media. Monitor for “illegal” use of the airwaves.
Send the “authorities” door to door rapidly to collect all arms. Katrina showed that people did not exercise their Second Amendment rights, but allowed themselves to be disarmed (dry run, yes?).
Further controls will include intimidation like the draconian fines and incarcerations found in the new Massachusetts law.
So. What’s preventing them from acting now?
Internment camps - check, in place.
Civilian Security Force - check, currently getting organized.
Military and National Guards ready to operate on US soil - check.
Congress neutralized and by-passed by Executive Orders, Czars, complicity, general disregard for the Constitution - check.
Money and troops from foreign concerns to support the effort - check, already lined up, willing and able.
What keeps them from moving right now? Anything?
Would the US military follow orders, especially if kept in the dark about the truth, and with the current crop of leaders? Would the Guards? Would the Police?
Anything we can do to prevent this?
I copied this**On the night of Feb. 27, 1933 the Reichstag building was set on fire. At the urging of Hitler, Hindenburg responded the next day by issuing an emergency decree “for the Protection of the people and the State,” which stated: “Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.”
Obama is a FACIST!
Bloody revolution, here we come!
Poke around here:
http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/
http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/project_details.cfm?id=476&index=27&domain=Internet
and here:
http://xavier.informatics.indiana.edu/lanet-vi/
Sean Hannity is now interviewing Jay Sackolow.
A second civil war or revolution is coming, MARK MY WORDS.
Agreed. Here is what I posted few days ago:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2325684/posts?page=27#27
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2317044/posts?page=62#62
Glenn Beck just talked about the Internet. He’ll talk about it on Monday.
Ultimately, that is (IMO also) what this ‘is.’ This Bill, which has been in the works seemingly since Spring, is flag@whitehouse.gov on steriods. ‘Juiced’ protection for the Ruling Party to wipe out any and all ‘misinformation’ with one fell swoop.
Goebbles would be proud.
That idiot Snowe is behind this too?
You had to post Nicolae didn’t you? LOL I just rewatched those movies (I think we’ve seen every movie in our video store at this point — well, at least the ones I care to! LOL).
Probably helping write the bill, and lining up co-sponsors.
Well, they are on the definitely on the way out also. This state is terrible & Durbin leads the pack of idiots who run it.
Ernest, being a mom and all, I am brave...
so I went over to DU (need to shower now...) but...the postings (about 40 or so) are all quite ‘soft’ for DU. No (nothing else followed on that post...but I fear the hopey/changey poster is now sobbing looking up at an Obama poster, asking ‘why?’; Imagine logging onto DU and getting gov’t issued statements instead (THAT one made me laugh out loud for reals!!!); Imagine if Bush had this power (maybe worried the pendulum of power might shift right?); a few references to China and Iraq (those surprised me). But again, still early (the ‘news’ I guess had to be dealt with over there as Drudge has it bannered) yet the ‘tone’ of the DUmmies is pensive at best.
When DU finally accepts that their Messiah wants to control their speech a few will over there will lead the charge. And I do believe that...free speech is as important to them as it us.
Will check back over there again later...on this I find their posts fascinating.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.