It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

CISPA's Privacy-Killing Successor Just Cleared Its First Hurdle

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:04 PM
CISPA's Privacy-Killing Successor Just Cleared Its First Hurdle

CISPA's successor, which civil liberties groups say is still awful for privacy and could threaten net neutrality, is moving forward despite those concerns—the Senate Intelligence Committee passed it yesterday, meaning it'll likely be voted on by the full chamber. Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill was approved by a 12-3 vote yesterday. The bill has been changed since its original form—Feinstein says the amendments should assuage the concerns of privacy advocates that say the bill could funnel information about consumers directly to law enforcement, regardless of their involvement in any hacking schemes.

Feinstein and the bill's cosponsor, Saxby Chambliss, brushed aside privacy concerns following the markup, which was closed to reporters and the public, as most important legislative sessions seem to be these days.

"It's not perfect for anybody," Chambliss told reporters after the markup. "But if we take no action, then cyberattacks are going to continue to occur, and there is the potential for the American economy to be severely disrupted."

Feinstein was even more brash: "I don't know what information you would be concerned about that NSA would have in an information-sharing bill," she said.

Well, the way the bill is written—and we haven't seen the final language, because the session was closed—a "cyber threat" can be defined as loosely as a spam email or a high-bandwidth activity. And anyone who poses a "cyber threat" is subject to having their information funneled to the NSA or to local law enforcement.

They [Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union] said there are loopholes that the government can and will exploit, a view that was seconded by Sens. Ron Wyden and Mark Udall, two of the lawmakers who voted against the bill."We agree there is a need for information-sharing between the federal government and private companies about cybersecurity threats and how to defend against them," the two said in a statement. "However, we have seen how the federal government has exploited loopholes to collect Americans' private information in the name of security."

"We are concerned that the bill the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence reported today lacks adequate protections for the privacy rights of law-abiding Americans, and that it will not materially improve cybersecurity," they added. The bill will march on, anyway.

"...which was closed to reporters and the public, as most important legislative sessions seem to be these days." That sentence alone bothers me on a profound level. Throw in the fact this is a Feinstein authored bill they've been trying to pass for years now, in one form or another, and, quite frankly... It doesn't bode well.

Further reportage on the subject:
The Senate Is Officially Considering a CISPA Clone
The New CISPA Bill Might Let Law Enforcement Create Backdoor Wiretaps

The bill looks to [...] allow the federal government to trade classified "cyber threat" information with private companies in exchange for companies' "voluntarily" doing the same with its users' data. Feinstein has been one of the NSA's biggest supporters in Congress.

The way CIPA is worded, local police agencies could use companies "voluntary" information sharing to create backdoor, warrantless wiretaps, according to civil liberties experts I spoke with.

The bill allows companies to share user data with local, state, and federal law enforcement that pertains to any sort of criminal activity, a move that would allow the police to forgo the court system to set up a wiretap.
CIPA would, in general, require companies to strip users' identifying information. But if someone is even tangentially related to a "cyber threat," that provision is waved, a loophole that Amie Stepanovich, an attorney with the civil liberties group ACCESS, told me is a "loophole large enough to drive a semi-truck through."

What say you, ATS?

edit on 792014 by CloudsTasteMetallic because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:58 PM
Feinstein needs to retire; along with the majority in government. She needs to be bared from any Intelligence work until she cultivates some of her own. They have been trying to ram this down our throats many years now? CIPA YOU SHALL NOT PASS!!!!!!!!

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 01:28 PM
What happens with business intelligence?

With the privatization of many security functions how will the boarder between the national interest and the corporate interest be preserved?

Just how valuable would it be having all the communications and files of your competitors? Is the industry, culture and people disciplined enough for it?

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 04:18 PM
a reply to: kwakakev

No one, government or corporation can be trusted with that volume of data.

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 04:53 PM
a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic

I say Feinstein and others are not for the little guy's best interests. This is clear. They are out for their own interests and for the interests of their cohorts.

I swear to G that if our country does not start voting out the incumbents in toto regardless of who the challenger is we are doomed.

We MUST send a message. "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore."

"I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore."

"I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore."

"I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore."

posted on Jul, 10 2014 @ 07:10 AM
a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic

The prevention of an open hearing is based on the committee in question, which is appropriate since its national security related. With that said just because the committee votes on it and passes it does not make it law. It still must be voted on by the full Senate at which point the House can either accept it and vote, or make changes.

If changes are made (items removed / added) then it must pass the house and sent back to the senate for them to consider.

A joint committee is usually involved to iron out the differences both houses have to reach a bill both will accept. Obama must then sign the bill. At that point who ever is affected has standing to challenge the law.

What people should be doing is contacting their Senate / House reps and tell them how you feel and what you would like to see happen with the bill.

People must get out of the mindset of doing nothing but bitching. Contact your reps people.

posted on Jul, 10 2014 @ 07:22 AM
Don't worry, it won't pass the House. One of the good things about this severely partisaned congress we have is that the awful bills don't get passed just like the good ones.

posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 07:57 AM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Don't worry, it won't pass the House. One of the good things about this severely partisaned congress we have is that the awful bills don't get passed just like the good ones.

Like this lovely bill the House passed back in May?

NSA reform bill passes House, despite loss of support from privacy advocates

The bill, known as the USA Freedom Act, would shift responsibility for retaining telephonic metadata from the government to telephone companies. Providers like AT&T and Verizon would be required to maintain the records and let the NSA search them in terrorism investigations when the agency obtains a judicial order or in certain emergency situations. The bill passed on an 303 to 121 vote.

Funny how most bills seem to have the exact opposite effect of their name nowadays.

I bring this topic up mainly because they've been trying for this for a few years now. This time, it seems to be sneaking through pretty quietly due to all the other distractions over the IRS and immigration, to name but a few.

A year or two ago, there was mass outrage over SOPA/PIPA, including a voluntary one-day blackout of Wikipedia and others in protest.

And yes, I realize it has a long way to go before being signed into law. Merely trying to raise awareness before its too late.
edit on 7112014 by CloudsTasteMetallic because: fixed bold tag


log in