Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

CNET ^ | August 28, 2009 12:34 AM PDT | Declan McCullagh

[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."

[Steve Van Doorn]

" This may be the "Reichstag Fire Enabling Act" of 2009"

No I don't think so, but you are on the right track.
During any declaration of war communication like the net would need to be shut down as much as possible. This is the act that will attempt to do that.

This in my opinion sets up for "the night of the long knives."

[RepublitarianRoger2]

Who cares about this? I mean, Ted Kennedy died!
It's All Ted, All Dead, All F%$#ing Day Long.
Nothing else matters right now, least of all some stupid little piddly thing like the President taking over control of the Intertubes.

[CottonBall]

Freakin' unbelievable...

Not really, given the history of socialism. First, the clunker bill has people sign a paper saying something about some information on them would always be available to the gov - I don't remember exactly what. The health care bill as a provision for giving the gov access to people's bank accounts. This isn't that much of a stretch....

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

And she has company!

Hagel is gone but there is still Collins and Lindsay!

[jongaltsr]

I drew my line in the sand a long time back. (About 5 months ago).

Not only did I draw a line in the sand I have been freely giving my name so that anybody can clearly tell that I am not hiding behind any type of ananimity and boldly stand on my principals at my own peril.

Again I state. I will do what ever is necessary to preserve my freedom and the freedom of others at risk of my own life and freedom.

When I say “Whatever is Necessary”, I mean I will go the extreme should it require such measures. That involves armed insurrection.

I am armed. I am serious. Fear Me and others like me.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

That is an excellent Graphic.

[Taggart_D]

What they really mean here is ignoring reality and principles of law and blocking/allowing access to the network

Or...in addition to the auto industry and healthcare, the US gov't will be taking over internet service providers

[raybbr]

Here we go. Going for a ride and that “Homeland Security” slippery slope.

[Clintonfatigued]

This is damned scary.

[Darnright]

Myrddin, does Gopher figure into an alternative in any meaningful way, should the internet as we know it be shut down?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks, I just posted that for folks in Florida....

Fl. Sen. Bill Nelson--cosponsor to S773--White House to control internet

[TaraP]

LOL..Well I guess I just see Nicolae coming out in you know who so often!

:)

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

And Sen Nelson of Florida...is also a sponsor.

[SunkenCiv]

aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors

Thanks Ernest.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks for checking....over there.

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

My God - everyday seems like we get closer to the events in the “Left Behind” series. I am beyond scared of this president and his administration...

[PennsylvaniaMom]

Ernest, I find going to DU and Kos to be like changing the wax rings under your commode...a dirty job that just has to be done every once in a while.

Heaven help us all if Senate Bill 773 passes.

What would Teddy do? (other than drink heavily???)

[Myrddin]

Myrddin, does Gopher figure into an alternative in any meaningful way, should the internet as we know it be shut down?

Gopher lives on top of TCP/IP. It depends on the internet, name servers and routers. The protocol will work fine in a neighborhood on a mesh network, but you'll have to set up your own replacement name servers if the internet gets cut off. It's not a terrible difficult task. A Linux box and a little practice setting up zone files will get basic capability running fairly quickly.

[Americaneedsyoou]

thanks to CFR When Olympia Snowe Maine 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. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,In June, Mr. Rivera took his friend Mayor Michael Bloomberg to meet with Senator Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine, to urge her to support health reform. Mr. Rivera has urged her to back a public plan, hoping she might be the 60th Senate vote needed to overcome a filibuster. To win her over, he is considering her proposal for a trigger mechanism that would create a public plan, perhaps when one health insurer dominates a state or when premiums are unusually high, as is the case in Maine.

[Soothesayer9]

I am hoping it doesn’t. Last thing I want is for my government to order me to open fire on family members in the opposing side. I see a lot of freepers advocating for CW2 without realizing just what kind of hell they are getting themselves into (i.e. bud/s candidates before they reach the infamous Hell Week).