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.


The Cybersecurity Act (S. 2105) Threatens Online Rights - a Handout for Your Senator

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:06 PM
The Cybersecurity Act (S. 2105) Threatens Online Rights

"The Cybersecurity Act (S. 2105), sponsored by Sen. Lieberman and Sen. Collins, compromises core American civil liberties in the name of detecting and thwarting network attacks. While Internet security is of the utmost importance, safeguarding our networks need not come at the expense of our online freedoms. That’s why civil liberties groups, security experts, and Internet users oppose this bill."

The bill uses dangerously vague language to define "cybersecurity threat indicators" (information that companies can share with the government), leaving the door open to abuse (intentional or accidental) in which companies share protected user information with the government without a judge ever getting involved.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Lieberman-Collins Cyber Security Act

Will Internet companies be able to intercept and read my email?
Under this bill, how are “cybersecurity threats” defined?
How are “cybersecurity threat indicators” defined?
In addition to monitoring, what else can companies do?
What are countermeasures and how would they work?
How are “countermeasures” different from ordinary behavior already in widespread use by ISPs and companies to protect their networks?
Does this bill create new exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act?
Under the Cybersecurity Act, if a company improperly hands over my information to the government, do I have an effective remedy?
What is a “cybersecurity exchange” and how would it work?
Will the new “cybersecurity exchange” create new bureaucracies?
What safeguards are in place to ensure that this legislation won’t be used as a method of sharing data with the National Security Agency?
Can cyber security threat indicators collected under this legislation be used for other, unrelated purposes?
Whoa! Sharing what “appears to relate to a crime” is crazily broad, and surely will impinge on civil liberties. Does the Cyber Security Act throw me a bone, with some sort of vague promise to maybe think about civil liberties in the future?
If the Cyber Security Act passes the Senate, will we have a chance to fight it in the House?
There are amendments pending on this bill. Will it get better or worse for civil liberties?
How can I speak out against this bill?

Answers to the above questions can be found here.

posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:53 PM
It is perhaps an unfortunate side effect of the amount of power that access to the internet gives an individual, or a group, that in order to maintain the right to that power, internet users and liberty loving persons everywhere will have to continue to fight for that freedom and power. However, the very fact that the US government is attempting to circumvent its own ideals in order to grab back control over it, proves that the internet has been, and will continue to be the biggest threat to tyranny, and the greatest freedom from it, for people all over the world.

As reassuring as that certainly is, we do now have to expect that every vested interest will attempt to embugger, infect, violate, and penetrate this realm of freedom of thought and expression, and crush all the free, spirited, and unbiased sources of information. Everyone from national governments, to cartels of lawyers, money men, and schemers are undoubtedly going to attempt to take this beautiful thing, and warp it, shape it into something terrible. It is already half way there, and those who doubt that the intelligence agencies have already converted large portions of the internet into part of thier web of shadows is fooling himself.

All is not lost though. There is a way to defeat this outrage. If every single person, in every country whose government attempts such a thing stands up, and DEMANDS the government step back from its aims in this regard, then the governments involved will have no choice (in a democratic nation) but to do as thier electorate order them to do. If they fail to comply with the will of the people, then thier positions will become instantly unstable, and then you may crush THEM as you see fit.

Do not just contact your local representative, contact your local community as well. Get every person that you know, who uses the internet and wishes it to remain free from this hellish scenario, and get them to contact thier representative as well. FORCE your local representative to fight your corner, set up lobby groups, send petitions, march on the White House if you have to, to ensure your messege gets across.

It is important that everyone understands this simple truth. You cannot expect to retain, that which you are not prepared to fight for.

posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by Daedal

this same guy is responsible for many bad bills and would properly be the best paid for shill for bad ideas i have seen,

"The Cybersecurity Act (S. 2105), sponsored by Sen. Lieberman

the same name pops up on all sorts of bad bills
wounder who ownes and pays for this behaviour
what lobbying firm has bough this guy?


posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:08 PM
The reality of the situation is that internet privacy is fading. While some skilled operators can preserve some anonomity, given enough resources a lot of this can be cracked. For the average facebook and google user, everything they post and access has a log and backup somewhere. The justice system is having a hard time keeping up with all of this so I can respect a call for more resources. Considering the dependance that has grown on the network and how assults against it are considered an act of war, there are some very serious implication to be considered with the issue of cybersecurity.

The highly technical languages of computers and diverse nature of man does lead to some very clouded concepts and lines in distinguishing between right and wrong with localised cultural traditions very much a guide in the adjudication process. It does need to be acknowledge that there are many risks associated to the power information can represent and without the proper moral guidliness abuse of this power is innevitable. The 9/11 case does show that more open and proffesional peer review rather than less review with secret and controlled access is able to get to the facts when corruption is present.

Issues of trust and responsibility are very much at the core of these issues with tough questioning of alternative motives and twisting in the application of law very important. I have not been through the contents of the bill and so unable to provide my personal support or disaproval for it, but just wanted to mention a few of the very complex issues surrounding this topic.

new topics

top topics

log in