|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act 1
#22456099 - 10/30/15 11:27 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/28/evil-internet-bill-cispa-is-back-from-the-dead-now-cleverly-titled-cisa.html
sh! No One Will Notice 10.28.155:55 PM ET Evil Internet Bill CISPA Is Back From the Dead, Now Cleverly Titled CISA The bill, which was protested to death under a different name two years ago, would compel websites and tech companies to hand over your info due to almost anything deemed a ‘cyber threat.’ If at first a controversial cybersecurity bill fails, remove one letter from its title and try again. On Tuesday the Senate passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act. CISA would force websites and tech firms to share user information with the government, so long as that information fits an astonishingly vague description of a “cyber threat.” If this sounds like a bill Americans have protested and killed several times over the last half-decade, it’s because it is. The newly successful CISA is recycled from a less-popular model. Its look-alike, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), offered nearly identical immunities for companies that share information with the government. But unlike CISPA, which was abandoned after loud condemnation from activists and an unofficial veto from the president, CISA is gaining momentum. CISPA originated in the House of Representatives, but failed in the Democrat-majority Senate in 2013. CISA, which originated and passed in the Senate, is expected to cruise to approval in the House. A veto, like the one President Barack Obama threatened for CISPA if it came to his desk in 2013, is also unlikely. The White House expressed its support for CISA earlier this year. “Cybersecurity is an important national security issue and the Senate should take up this bill as soon as possible and pass it,” White House spokesperson Eric Schultz told The Hill in August. But opponents say what you’re already thinking: CISA is almost the exact same bill as the one the president threatened to veto. “CISPA is nearly identical to CISA. The bill approaches information sharing from the same framework,” Mark Jaycox, an analyst with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said. “The Senate bill [CISA] is just smarter with workarounds.” Both bills would offer immunity to companies if they turned over information to the government in order to expose broadly defined “cyber threats.” CISA contains only minor updates, which activists say make the bill more potent than its predecessor. “CISPA was pretty overt in saying ‘the National Security Agency is going to be the lead in this, it’s going to collect the information,’” Jaycox said. “CISA says the Department Homeland Security will be the lead in this, but the DHS has to automatically share it with the NSA … There are small, sly changes like that within CISA.” In 2011 and 2012, the Internet rallied against SOPA and PIPA, two controversial bills that would have given the government new powers to block websites that violated copyright. CISPA sank in the Senate in 2013, after coming under similar fire from privacy activists. Hacktivist organization Anonymous spearheaded an anti-CISPA day in April 2013, joined by over 900 websites that blacked out their homepages in protest. Some opponents worry that this force is waning, however. “A lot of the same advocates and organizations that mobilized during the fight against SOPA and PIPA are also very engaged in the fight against CISA,” Tim Karr, senior director of strategy at Free Press, said. “There’s an ongoing coalition, but the scale in terms of public opposition isn’t quite the same caliber as before. With PIPA and SOPA you had literally tens of millions of people engaged, writing and calling Congress, posting blackouts on their sites… I don’t think it’s quite the same scale.”
|
burgerbrain
Freedom Lover



Registered: 09/18/15
Posts: 962
|
Re: Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act [Re: laughingdog]
#22456286 - 10/31/15 12:55 AM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/28/evil-internet-bill-cispa-is-back-from-the-dead-now-cleverly-titled-cisa.html
sh! No One Will Notice 10.28.155:55 PM ET Evil Internet Bill CISPA Is Back From the Dead, Now Cleverly Titled CISA The bill, which was protested to death under a different name two years ago, would compel websites and tech companies to hand over your info due to almost anything deemed a ‘cyber threat.’ If at first a controversial cybersecurity bill fails, remove one letter from its title and try again. On Tuesday the Senate passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act. CISA would force websites and tech firms to share user information with the government, so long as that information fits an astonishingly vague description of a “cyber threat.” If this sounds like a bill Americans have protested and killed several times over the last half-decade, it’s because it is. The newly successful CISA is recycled from a less-popular model. Its look-alike, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), offered nearly identical immunities for companies that share information with the government. But unlike CISPA, which was abandoned after loud condemnation from activists and an unofficial veto from the president, CISA is gaining momentum. CISPA originated in the House of Representatives, but failed in the Democrat-majority Senate in 2013. CISA, which originated and passed in the Senate, is expected to cruise to approval in the House. A veto, like the one President Barack Obama threatened for CISPA if it came to his desk in 2013, is also unlikely. The White House expressed its support for CISA earlier this year. “Cybersecurity is an important national security issue and the Senate should take up this bill as soon as possible and pass it,” White House spokesperson Eric Schultz told The Hill in August. But opponents say what you’re already thinking: CISA is almost the exact same bill as the one the president threatened to veto. “CISPA is nearly identical to CISA. The bill approaches information sharing from the same framework,” Mark Jaycox, an analyst with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said. “The Senate bill [CISA] is just smarter with workarounds.” Both bills would offer immunity to companies if they turned over information to the government in order to expose broadly defined “cyber threats.” CISA contains only minor updates, which activists say make the bill more potent than its predecessor. “CISPA was pretty overt in saying ‘the National Security Agency is going to be the lead in this, it’s going to collect the information,’” Jaycox said. “CISA says the Department Homeland Security will be the lead in this, but the DHS has to automatically share it with the NSA … There are small, sly changes like that within CISA.” In 2011 and 2012, the Internet rallied against SOPA and PIPA, two controversial bills that would have given the government new powers to block websites that violated copyright. CISPA sank in the Senate in 2013, after coming under similar fire from privacy activists. Hacktivist organization Anonymous spearheaded an anti-CISPA day in April 2013, joined by over 900 websites that blacked out their homepages in protest. Some opponents worry that this force is waning, however. “A lot of the same advocates and organizations that mobilized during the fight against SOPA and PIPA are also very engaged in the fight against CISA,” Tim Karr, senior director of strategy at Free Press, said. “There’s an ongoing coalition, but the scale in terms of public opposition isn’t quite the same caliber as before. With PIPA and SOPA you had literally tens of millions of people engaged, writing and calling Congress, posting blackouts on their sites… I don’t think it’s quite the same scale.”
Don't worry- The same morons that were brainwashed to accept Net Neutrality will accept CISA as well.
Fucking government worshippers are worse than Satan worshippers
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Net Neutrality is the greatest thing that has ever happened to this country.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act [Re: burgerbrain]
#22458035 - 10/31/15 02:52 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Tell us what's wrong with net neutrality...
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
burgerbrain
Freedom Lover



Registered: 09/18/15
Posts: 962
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Tell us what's wrong with net neutrality...
Since liberals don't know how to use google:
In truth, however, market failures like these have never happened, and nothing is broken that needs fixing. If consumers were being harmed by ISPs, ample antitrust, competition and consumer protection laws already exist to fix the problem. And major broadband providers have pledged, in their terms of service, to keep the Net open and freedom-enhancing. Why? Because it is good business to do so.
In refreshingly honest congressional testimony, Wu has crystalized the net neutrality movement’s goal: “FCC oversight of the Internet.” His simple statement acts as a dog whistle to regulators, telling them to sweep everything about the Internet under the government-controlled net neutrality umbrella— technical operations, business decisions, content and speech. State manipulation of the Net would shape “not merely economic policy, not merely competition policy, but also media policy, social policy” and “oversight of the political process,” according to Wu’s testimony. Current regulations simply do not “capture” the Net the way more government powers would through powerful new rules, he argued. https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/07/14/this-is-why-the-government-should-never-control-the-internet/
Every time the government takes over another facet of human life, we all lose freedom. Good job, socialist libtards.
|
hostileuniverse
Stranger



Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
Re: Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act [Re: burgerbrain]
#22474552 - 11/04/15 05:36 AM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Every time the government takes over another facet of human life, we all lose freedom. Good job, socialist libtards
Nope. Haven't you learned yet govt controlling every facet of our lives gives us MORE freedom?
|
burgerbrain
Freedom Lover



Registered: 09/18/15
Posts: 962
|
|
Quote:
hostileuniverse said:
Quote:
Every time the government takes over another facet of human life, we all lose freedom. Good job, socialist libtards
Nope. Haven't you learned yet govt controlling every facet of our lives gives us MORE freedom?
Haha, Falcon tried to convince me- but he was distracted by his Obowmaphone
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
|
Quote:
hostileuniverse said:
Quote:
Every time the government takes over another facet of human life, we all lose freedom. Good job, socialist libtards
Nope. Haven't you learned yet govt controlling every facet of our lives gives us MORE freedom?
Can you make a single post without a straw man, please?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
hostileuniverse
Stranger



Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
hostileuniverse said:
Quote:
Every time the government takes over another facet of human life, we all lose freedom. Good job, socialist libtards
Nope. Haven't you learned yet govt controlling every facet of our lives gives us MORE freedom?
Can you make a single post without a straw man, please?
Ugh, no strawman here buddy,
Can you please explain to me how govt implementing more rules and regulations give us MORE FREEDOM?
I'll wait...
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
|
Quote:
hostileuniverse said: Ugh, no strawman here buddy,
Can you please explain to me how govt implementing more rules and regulations give us MORE FREEDOM?
I'll wait...
The discussion was about Net Neutrality. The response was that every time the Government steps in it takes away from our freedom. How exactly does not allowing internet service providers to slow down my internet connection take away from my freedom???
I'll wait...
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
burgerbrain
Freedom Lover



Registered: 09/18/15
Posts: 962
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
hostileuniverse said: Ugh, no strawman here buddy,
Can you please explain to me how govt implementing more rules and regulations give us MORE FREEDOM?
I'll wait...
The discussion was about Net Neutrality. The response was that every time the Government steps in it takes away from our freedom. How exactly does not allowing internet service providers to slow down my internet connection take away from my freedom???
I'll wait...
Hehe Libtards can't read: 1) This thread is about CISA 2) Net Neutrality equates to FCC oversight of the internet. 3) Why morons think that the FCC is going to "make the internet faster" is beyond me, if anything they're going to degrade service with extra controls, and red tape. Moron socialist retards are really fucking stupid people, it seems.
In truth, however, market failures like these have never happened, and nothing is broken that needs fixing. If consumers were being harmed by ISPs, ample antitrust, competition and consumer protection laws already exist to fix the problem. And major broadband providers have pledged, in their terms of service, to keep the Net open and freedom-enhancing. Why? Because it is good business to do so.
In refreshingly honest congressional testimony, Wu has crystalized the net neutrality movement’s goal: “FCC oversight of the Internet.” His simple statement acts as a dog whistle to regulators, telling them to sweep everything about the Internet under the government-controlled net neutrality umbrella— technical operations, business decisions, content and speech. State manipulation of the Net would shape “not merely economic policy, not merely competition policy, but also media policy, social policy” and “oversight of the political process,” according to Wu’s testimony. Current regulations simply do not “capture” the Net the way more government powers would through powerful new rules, he argued. https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/07/14/this-is-why-the-government-should-never-control-the-internet/
|
|