In recent years, the US Congress has proposed several laws to address privacy concerns online raises a threat. A Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) has proposed law passed in 2013 and the House of Representatives in 2015. This goal is “indeed cyber intelligence information on threats and threats between computer intelligence communities and Computer security organizations and used for other purposes. ” A similar law, the Law on Information Exchange Information Exchange (CISA), the Senate approved in 2015. CISA has stated the goal of “improving US computer security to increase the threat of sharing information security information and for other purposes “Commented the base. Both houses passed the bill, but both received significant support in the Congress, which led to a considerable discussion among the Internet community. But when the resemblance between the two drafts, and the Congress is considering a switch in each building, will soon accept the version many people think.
Both projects include government agencies, companies, and other entities, the exchange of information threats for computer security and providers of Homeland Security wants to develop cyber threat information sharing procedures with the director of the National Intelligence, Justice and Defense ministers. As private companies as well as non-governmental public institutions. Also, both private sector accounts, the federal government and, in some cases, unauthorized cyberspace government agencies and other private information exchange organizations allow threats and incentives. Both reports, the government, or other organizations that voluntarily share information threats and security measures, and these areas will provide privacy protection for private companies.
One of the most influential advocates of CISA was Senator Dayan Feinstein, the transition to this law “an important step for the development of our cyber security” and “security, privacy and the balance of protection responsibility,” he said. Feinstein and other CISA defenders, government and private companies exchange information between computer threats, these various groups of themselves on the Internet to find hackers trying to steal information from the system and be prepared to defend all because of this kind of information exchange is voluntary, proposed measures, specialized companies, and governments to remove the information before sharing irrelevant personal information requires consideration of everyone; This law does not violate the privacy rights of these businesses or users.
Critique on the Bill
Opponents of the bill, language societies, and government agencies, leaving room for abuse, and said, CISA, which has made the state control authority of individuals. CISA in opposition to democracy and technology center, the bill of law “breach and other crimes together. Biglin of the United Nations of espionage and commercial secrets as part of the law, including harassment. Computer security is entirely used multiple extraneous purposes “Which they allow and as well as” death is an inevitable response to the threats to give or give severe physical damage or to cause serious economic damage “is being discussed. Therefore, CISA, argue that the right to consumer privacy of both companies and governments, and to ensure the broad and weak ethical way.
In the United States, the United States Government and manufacturing between a bill allowing the exchange of information on joint use cyber-espionage Internet traffic and the protection of the law (CISPA HR 3523, HR 624, HR 234 (Convention 114)) of technology and manufacturing enterprises. The stated purpose bill is to help the US government. Investigate computer threats and ensure network security against cyber-attacks.
The legislation, on November 30, 2011, Representative Michael Rogers (R-MI) and were presented by 111 exhibitors. Convention, the House of Representatives on April 26, 2012, was considered but was not accepted by the US Senate. President Baraka Obama advisers said there is no guarantee of privacy and personal freedom and said the White House would veto this bill.
In February 2013, the House introduced the bill again and took place at the home of 18 representatives of April 2013 but arrested and voting by the Senate. 10 July 2014 Senate Computer Security (CISA), a similar law entered into force regarding the exchange of information.
In January 2015, the House was taking over the invoice. The bill, the Electoral Commission and Intelligence 2 February, the crime here to 2015, terrorism, subcommittee on national security and investigations and was sent to the Constitutional Sub-Commission, and civil justice examined, and It comes to a vote in December to 2015. The CISPA version was hidden in the general federal budget.
Social Media Issues
CISPR, Microsoft, Facebook, AT & T, IBM, and companies such as the House of Representatives and lobbying, share relevant information about government threats to leverage simply and effectively. However, the “E-Frontier” American Foundation for Civil Liberties Union, “Free Press,” “The Future of Sava” and “Avaaz.org” As it has been criticized by defenders of privacy and civil liberties. Institute for competitive enterprises, tech freedom I, Freedom Works, Americans for the limited internal government, freedom of association and the American Conservative Union and the diversity of these conservative libertarian groups. These groups CISPA access to information on the private Internet part of the government argued that contains some restrictions on how and when can control. Moreover, rather than the malicious hackers are afraid of this new power could be used to spy the general public.
Some criticism after the Congress after its discussions with the opposition after the Congress of the formulations included in the CISPA agreed that the idea of a second attempt to protect its intellectual property rights. Theft of intellectual property, even if it is withdrawn in the next draft, government and the exchange of information on web traffic is sold as a bill in a possible cause.
CISPA is an amendment to the National Security Act of 1947 does not contain provisions on crime currently. The law defines the intellectual threat of computer threats, “held by the community vulnerability intelligence element. A private organization or network directly to the public system, or has been added to the law associated with the threat, Information about the protection that they are included in the system or network, “the deterioration of a system or network has not or will be eliminated from efforts” against “. Also, CISPA, information on threats of cyber threat from elements of the intelligence community, the director of national intelligence to share with the private sector and provides for the creation procedures to encourage such information on the shopping.
Initiatives for Progression
On 16 April 2012 a press release, the House of Representatives Intelligence Standing Committee, accepted changes from CISPA and “Government Against Federal Litigation” in some CISPA changes, including a new location, adding announced its entry into force. The bill on privacy and outstanding guarantees the use of government information shared on a voluntary basis, including personal rights. Apparently, the government’s share of the provisions related to the prohibition of “Information about computer-based information exchange threats by the private sector with government. To prevent the use of government information, “as well as” legal purposes, if the government’s computer security does not have important purpose or the safety of National Knowledge in use. “Is also” relevant provisions “of the bill, to protect against unauthorized access to networks or systems, including unauthorized access to be able to focus on what is designed” to steal private information or government is designed. Also, data previously collected in the computer threat of “individuals threatened with physical harm” or “immediate threat to the exploitation of the small” can also be used to examine these accounts. It is calculated by current legislation, and Coding for the Patriot Act protects the rights of our children; the US government already protects both provisions, the police and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which allows them to share information voluntarily.
Bill Mike Rogers sponsor and vice president and a member of the House of Representatives of the Dutch Rupersburg, the opposition announced on April 25, 2012, the Obama administration is based on lack of critical infrastructure regulation. Something outside the jurisdiction of the Intelligence Commission; also, “especially those related to the privacy and civil liberties of Americans, touches almost all criticisms on critical management” have prepared a set of changes in the form of legislation.
The bill they intend to amend the bill to solve the problems of sponsor competitors and the terms of allegations of research and development of “theft of malware” which he spoke to Theft and shrinking scope of the definition of rogue software scheduled only because of the leadership of the opposition. Also, private companies or CISPA now the government is “non-cyber threats” to sanction the use of data in the case.
However, the Draft Constitution of Sharan Bradford Franklin states that “Intellectual Property Committee of the bill. Although, I understand the willingness to engage in dialogue with efforts to improve and advocates for privacy, Recent history of new changes in the project, the threat of the bill as close as possible to the views of civilians and some CISPA suggestions is aggravated that is why Congress should not exceed CISPA”.
Electronic Frontier told Rainey Reitman Foundation said. Today, the authors of the bill, this criticism does not respond, it changes the way in which recommendations recommend qualified, serious negative concerns about the possibility of weakening the rights of the bill. Internet user’s privacy every day Mayz Rodzhers representatives on the basis, CISPA ‘versus’ turbulence’ without increasing protests, which he described as radical changes announced ashore and gave a vote insists on a promise.
Said Kendall Burman of the Center for Democracy and Technology said: “In recent years, the author makes some positive changes: Unfortunately, none of these changes will affect the privacy concerns of Internet users Expressing their interest and defense. In April 2012, the US Bureau of Management and Budget Office of the Executive Bureau, which is strongly opposed to this bill and issued a statement that suggested the right of veto.
After a year-long conflict, frustration, and surveillance, the Senate brought the most relevant law on cyber security to 74-21. The Cyber Security Information Exchange Act (CISA) is a controversial measure to encourage companies and government agencies to share information about hackers and their methods. The state and the industry talk about this exchange of information, ten years more. In 2013, the House of Representatives, predecessor CISA, Cyber Intelligence Use and Protection (CISPA) adopted commonly but stopped the progress of the decision prepared by Pres. Barack Obama has threatened to veto due to lack of privacy. Primary Senator (D-Calif.) Presented the first version of the CAAS July 2014, but he and Senator Richard Burr (RN.C), the laws of the bill did not receive the Approval in March this year. In the past, Sony Pictures, Home Depot, the Office of Personnel Management and other agencies have helped to break the computer security violations database of the ICAT’s Senate.
The problem with CISA is that accountability and confidentiality are imposed when businesses begin to transmit data on clients’ data, particularly the government. The limits of the invoice of corporate responsibility in the case, but the Senate, enterprises and public institutions, at least given people the information that can be used to identify registrations in favor of measures that require work for a Clean vote.
Critics pointed out that sharing information would not do much to prevent successful cyber-attacks. In fact, the federal government already has an organization exchange information on threats to cyber security. 2003 Department of Homeland Security, government agencies, gather information on computer security, distributed between the private sector and researchers, analyze, disseminate and respond to these Readiness Team US (US-CERT) created the team Prepared for. At that time, CISA will help collect data on malware, but it is not clear how to use this information. Also, most designs are developed to explain how the federal government will share information across agencies, not how all private organizations can access these data.
Some privacy advocates and other CIS companies, new types of malicious software, suspicious network activity and other threats have stressed that information indicators about change have Little done to fight. This information should be combined with other ways to improve purchasing, cryptography, correction and security of obsolete software. The Electronic Frontier Foundation summarizes this argument in the latest criticism of ICAR. Scientific American has created a makeup chart to help you understand the bill because it is contradictory and what it means to you.
Failures of the Act
Internet Security Standards (SOPA) after overcoming the setbacks, cyber 112 to repeat for the second session of the online discussion forum Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is preparing a bill called. The bill was approved only through the House of Representatives, and the Senate’s draft will soon be discussed and voted. Contrary to the piracy and intellectual property that focuses on CISPA, which could damage the network through the improvement of information security information, sharing of “threats” was intended to provide protection. The bill, since “national security” and for other purposes has been expanded to include the government and military and intelligence agencies have given broad powers and immunities to use data from the use of collateral for individual companies. And like SOPA, the Internet privacy law and objected civil liberties advocates provide broad definitions and applications.
The Obama administration threatened to veto the bill and expressed strong opposition to a recent memorandum, but is not sure or not. The White House has shown that it is open to some cyber security law so that a compromise version can reach Obama’s desk. We see some of the most relevant provisions of CISPA.
“CIRCUITS:” HOW DOES CISPA WORK?
The purpose of the bill, the government, and private companies like Google and Facebook (“protected property”) is to provide more information for exchanges between the two. CISPA allows customers to share their information or personal government, including the United States’ US intelligence bill and therefore have priority over all other federal and state laws. This allows almost any type of content to share if companies are associated with a “computer threat.” What exactly is under the umbrella “computer threats”?
What is the purpose of CISA?
The bill calls on government agencies, businesses and other organizations to share information on security threats. The idea is that this general information, identifying and protecting these different groups of hackers who are trying to steal information from computers helps to prepare better. However, in its current form, CISA how to share this information does not provide a clear definition of who manages this information as it will be or how it is delivered.
Who is in favor of CISA?
Among the sponsors are: Diane Feinstein, Richard Burr (R-NC), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) And Angus King (I-Maine) (D-Calif.). The Financial Services Roundtable, a defense group of the US Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the US financial services sector, also supports the design.
Who is opposed to that?
Organizations, such as the “E-Front” Foundation, the Center for Democracy and Technology and the Struggle for the Future. Its members include the information and communications industry (ICC), which includes Facebook, Google, and Yahoo; Rivets Ronald and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (RSA Ringing Protocol) Garkvardskogo Human and Sanders (Ben-Vt.).
What are the arguments against CISA?
Senator Wyden and other compliance policies of the CIS, “the National Security Agency and other government officials of information sharing companies have argued that they can use to spy on customers” Critics. Customers had found new opportunities for the theft of government data agencies or other third-party information transfer processes, they said, and the bill to answer the real reasons that hackers can Steal old data and software, argues that give information about malicious software and unencrypted file. Information is a voluntary exchange program that does not affect any participant.
The Senate is identifying the threats needed to define computing or at least trying to erase the data before sharing client information that could identify the person declined three changes. However, another amendment provides legal safeguards for private antitrust and privacy complaints to legal entities. The government stated that the information it was receiving would not be used to commit offenses other than computers.
What happens next?
Most likely, CISA will soon be coordinated with two bills on the exchange of information passed by the House of Representatives in April. The combined bill will go to the White House, where the press. Obama will probably sign it into law. As soon as this happens, the Attorney General of the United States has 180 days to complete the development of a plan to collect and disseminate cyber threat data.
Amendments the Senate Should Adopt
The Senate is considering the Law on Information Exchange Information Exchange (CISA), and the sponsors of the bill proposed to change direction, in addition to the many changes proposed by individual senators. Although some of these changes do not significantly affect the technique or invoice, some of them may harm the value and the likelihood of information exchange.
Fundamentals of information exchange
The exchange of information focuses on the sharing of information on threats and weaknesses in network security between the private sector and state actors. Just like the Waze application or traffic-based reports geared to the transport of unpleasant incidents, information exchange helps public and private organizations to prevent cyber-attacks or use the defective program. For this reason, the exchange of information has not focused on personal data, such as email content, and sharing threat lists and correctly encoding IT products. Such general information should be made available to law enforcement officers to arrest and investigate cybercrime and investigate other cybercrime issues.
To ensure this separation, we need immunity from private sector liability and law enforcement, as well as the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Without these security measures, companies will not hesitate to share information with the court, regulators or competitors and cyber-enemies, as they can be used against them. Although the exchange of information is not a silver bullet, it will improve existing information for all parties and thus improve the security situation in America. Conservatives must win the battle for ideas in this and any case; That is, a change of conscience between the Congress and the Americans. You can do it. Find more.
Since the Director had no provision in the amendment that could harm the exchange of information, CISA has been extended to exclude information sharing arrangements. The new CISA Title II is aimed at strengthening its US capabilities detection networks and corresponding management strategies, plans and estimates for developing these skills in the light of the failure to detect attacks against the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Section III requires that federal cyber criminals determine the needs of the workforce and that each agency develops a plan to address the shortcomings of the IT workforce. Closing the name suggests a series of initiatives and strategies, including mobile security, computer diplomacy, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the capture of computer criminals, emergency, cyber security, health security and vulnerable infrastructures.
Other changes are damaging. Senator Patrik Lihi (D-VT) changes information to harm the exchange and sharing of information to competitors and enemies to voluntarily remove the protection in the bill providing the FOIA request rest. Personal identification, in addition to the other bill provisions, changes must be replicated, will further slow down and reduce the sharing utility BILGIN Un.
Senator (R-AZ) sunset modification point in six years, using (which can compromise the long-term protection of those who prefer the company due to the exchange of information), saving material to protect the exchange of Information also includes the accident occurred during the entry into force.
Another change is taken into account, but it is worth noting the home was immediately condemned to the suspension of legal rights of the rectifier. This favor allies’ readers as well as EU citizens and their US government institutions “regional economic integration organization” that does not fully comply with requests made under the privacy law to sue. European countries, transatlantic negotiations on the transfer of data to the required provisions. The measure, CISA, of course, does not refer to the discussion and intelligence and law enforcement agencies of the United States all over the world that can open a series of legal actions by individuals and governments. US citizens, if they can also be found in such a request and such legal action against European countries, to understand whether it is a practice, will be worth investigating.
Exchange information Make business in the United States safe
Congress to Ensure Exchange of Information to Contribute to Computer Security in the United States:
Protection of FOIA Obligations and Protection. CISA provides reliable protection of the responsibilities of FOIA activities and the exchange of information at the moment. These measures allow companies were voluntarily fearing evil entities or factors of competitiveness resulting from information exchange and protection. Use general information. CISA contains relatively large governments that can use general information. Also, a good policy, the use of state institutions provided that information is an important cyber-security objective and allow users to share.
Optimization of privacy clause. The exchange of information prevents the extreme position of the secret should be re-examined. Instead, you need to delete all information from all your data to avoid sharing of personal information within reasonable limits is a more appropriate way to require removal standards. The adoption of automated methods or other information exchange tool is available to help limit the amount of personal data in general. Also, it is necessary to speed up the position of the privacy multiplier and the reporting requirement.
In response to the deteriorating security situation, it is a stock market and arms race, as a result, probably fueled, President Obama, February 12, 2013, for developing a critical Cyber Infrastructure Security executive order. The order specification that can be considered as essential infrastructure, as well as to improve security and requesting the creation of a framework to reduce the risks to the structure that is appropriate to this description. Also, outlining a series of policy goals, including creating and best leaving private privacy threats of confidential information periodic risk reports will be used in the private sector. This sensitive information will include at least some of the vulnerabilities that are purchased on the open market and are accessible to the highest bidder, will reveal some interesting questions about the effectiveness of the exchange of database information. If the threat of access to information on open bus buses has exceeded the costs associated with buying information, how to choose between the scope of market abuses offered by private state institutions?
Despite Obama’s efforts to protect critical infrastructure, while the potential for being a limited test of how effective information exchange is to combat data threats, restart CISPA now cyberspace issues of legal solutions to discuss Security focus again. Critical Infrastructure Cyber Security with the introduction of the Order to improve at least not the alleged exchange of information through the most accomplished CISP and can be moved on. Also, the state already has illegal or unauthorized access to private networks. To report these crimes, which have suffered a negative for PR companies under the Information Exchange Order is not to confuse the situation will create. If you want to receive information about the investigation, which has continued the government has the right to request an order or request a national security letter. To speed up this process of questionable benefits or eliminate them all together, but also fully open information exchange will help you solve the scope of the current rise in online cyber-attacks and accusations.
US network threats in realistic and federal governments and the private sector that produces weapons used to carry out these attack attacks to regulate sales and the developing industry was made. Conversely, the US government is an information technology innovation, known and widely recognized as an important customer of computer abuses and malicious software. US agencies, the will of market participants in 2013 to promote solutions in the US to deal with issues, the legislation does not appear to be an intermediary such as CISPR, to make more civilian casualties. This first logical step is to create weapons that seek to protect the critical infrastructure of the United States by strengthening laws against the sale; The current Defense, and not the government, will further weaken the legal protection of the population. Also, and probably profitable, allowing the development of commercial operation, CISPA activity increased the capacity of countries like China and removed by the fact that the main reason for the increase.
Morgan Little (April 9, 2012). “CISPA legislation is seen by many as SOPA 2.0”. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 30, 2012.
Rushe, Dominic (April 23, 2012). “Ron Paul says CISPA cyber terrorism bill would create ‘Big Brother’ culture.” London: GuardianUK. Retrieved April 23, 2012.
“HR 3523 as reported to the House Rules Committee” (PDF).
Jump up ^ “H.R. 3523”. Library of Congress. Retrieved April 5, 2012.
Jump up ^ “Current Status of CISPA.” GovTrack. Retrieved April 18, 2012.
“Save The Internet.” Free Press. Archived from the original on June 18, 2012. Retrieved April 16, 2012.
Jump up, (2013). “Internet Advocacy Coalition Announces Twitter Campaign to Fight Privacy-Invasive Bill (CISPA.” Retrieved from En.rsf.org.
Jump up, (2013, April). “Everything Anonymous.” Retrieved from AnonNews.org.