What you need to know about CISPA
On April 26, 2012, the US House of Representatives passed the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), the latest in a series of legislation affecting the freedom of Internet users.
CISPA is an appendix to the National Security Act of 1947, complementing it with the notion of cyber threats as “vulnerabilities / threats to public / private systems / networks, including information relating to the protection of systems / networks from attempts to mitigate / damage / damage, and Assignment of private / public information, intellectual property or personal information of citizens ”.
The essence of CISPA is that private companies (Google, Facebook, etc.) should share information about vulnerabilities and other threats with each other, as well as with government agencies. This, of course, is a good thing. But why are protesting against the “wonderful” law of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and other public organizations, and advisers to the president of the United States recommend vetoing it?
Critics of the bill point to two postulates that turn CISPA into a potential weapon against Internet freedom.
')
First, it is a postulate about "national security". If cyber threats — or, in simple terms, SQL injection, DDoS attacks, and other Trojans — are seen as a potential threat to national security, then it is unacceptable to expand the powers of state agencies to investigate computer incidents. In fact, the FBI and others will have unhindered access to the internal computer network of any private company, as well as access to the personal information of users that is stored there. At the same time, the House of Representatives blocked the amendments, which proposed to cancel the postulate on "national security" and introduce public control over the exchange of information.
The second postulate criticized by human rights defenders is about “responsibility”, it proclaims the protection of private companies from lawsuits if they provide information on “cyber threats” to state agencies, including protection of lawsuits of citizens whose personal information was declassified during investigations.
Initially, CISPA was supported by some computer companies and computer security experts, and the bill was discussed with them in advance. But recently, Microsoft decided to abandon its support due to "obligations to respect the privacy of users."
On the vote of April 26, 2012, the CISPA bill was adopted by 248 votes to 168, while the Republicans voted 206/28, and the Democrats - 42/140. CISPA has now been sent to the Senate, controlled by Democrats. It is unlikely that CISPA will be adopted in its current form, which has caused such a stormy indignation among the public. In addition, the press service of President Obama has already told the press that he will veto the bill if it does not make the necessary changes.
Branch against CISPA on Reddit (1450 comments)
Collection of signatures against CISPA (778 thousand signatures)
CISPA is an appendix to the National Security Act of 1947, complementing it with the notion of cyber threats as “vulnerabilities / threats to public / private systems / networks, including information relating to the protection of systems / networks from attempts to mitigate / damage / damage, and Assignment of private / public information, intellectual property or personal information of citizens ”.
The essence of CISPA is that private companies (Google, Facebook, etc.) should share information about vulnerabilities and other threats with each other, as well as with government agencies. This, of course, is a good thing. But why are protesting against the “wonderful” law of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and other public organizations, and advisers to the president of the United States recommend vetoing it?
Critics of the bill point to two postulates that turn CISPA into a potential weapon against Internet freedom.
')
First, it is a postulate about "national security". If cyber threats — or, in simple terms, SQL injection, DDoS attacks, and other Trojans — are seen as a potential threat to national security, then it is unacceptable to expand the powers of state agencies to investigate computer incidents. In fact, the FBI and others will have unhindered access to the internal computer network of any private company, as well as access to the personal information of users that is stored there. At the same time, the House of Representatives blocked the amendments, which proposed to cancel the postulate on "national security" and introduce public control over the exchange of information.
The second postulate criticized by human rights defenders is about “responsibility”, it proclaims the protection of private companies from lawsuits if they provide information on “cyber threats” to state agencies, including protection of lawsuits of citizens whose personal information was declassified during investigations.
Initially, CISPA was supported by some computer companies and computer security experts, and the bill was discussed with them in advance. But recently, Microsoft decided to abandon its support due to "obligations to respect the privacy of users."
On the vote of April 26, 2012, the CISPA bill was adopted by 248 votes to 168, while the Republicans voted 206/28, and the Democrats - 42/140. CISPA has now been sent to the Senate, controlled by Democrats. It is unlikely that CISPA will be adopted in its current form, which has caused such a stormy indignation among the public. In addition, the press service of President Obama has already told the press that he will veto the bill if it does not make the necessary changes.
Branch against CISPA on Reddit (1450 comments)
Collection of signatures against CISPA (778 thousand signatures)
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/143036/
All Articles