Featured Stories World News Commentary Money Watch Multimedia Prison Planet U.S. News Science And Technology

Security Experts: CISPA Not Needed, Would Do More Harm than Good

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Washington’s Blog
April 25, 2012

Torture doesn’t provide any actionable intelligence - it actually reduces the chance that the witness will tell you anything – and yet the government insisted on using it.

Security experts (conservative hawks and liberal doves alike) agree that waging war in the Middle Eastweakens national security and increases terrorism – see thisthisthisthisthisthis and this – but the government insisted on doing it.

For years, many high-level economists and financial experts have said that bailing out the giant banks will make a true economic recovery impossible … but the government keeps bailing them out.

The government tried to pass SOPA – even though security experts said it would harm Internet security.

Now – after the defeat of SOPA – boneheads in Congress are doing it again … trying to ram through the CISPA bill which would do nothing useful, and would more or less destroy all privacy in the U.S.*

As Internet security expert Kaspersky Lab reports today:

A long list of security, networking and computer science experts have signed a letter sent to lawmakers on Monday, asking them to drop support for CISPA and other proposed cybersecurity bills because they consider the measures overly broad and say they would infringe on users’ privacy and civil liberties. The group, which includes Bruce Schneier, Peter Neumann and others, said the bills’ focus on allowing the sharing of users’ traffic with government agencies would ”unnecessarily trade our civil liberties for the promise of improved network security.”

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) has become a focus of criticism and ire from a number of groups who oppose the bill’s provision that could allow ISPs to turn over traffic from their networks to government agencies as part of a program to share information on security threats and attacks. Critics have said that this could amount to wiretapping without the knowledge of the users whose data is captured and shared.

The technologists, researchers and academics who signed the letter sent to congressmen this week said that the promise of better network security in return for this kind of data sharing is not a valid one.

“As experts in the field, we reject this false trade-off and urge you to oppose any cybersecurity initiative that does not explicitly include appropriate methods to ensure the protection of users’ civil liberties,” the write in the letter.

CISPA, introduced last fall by Rep. Michael Rogers (R-MI), is designed, in part, to allow intelligence agencies to share information about ongoing threats and attacks, not just among themselves but also with appropriate private-sector companies. Critics worry that the bill would eliminate some of the existing protections against warrantless wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping and would not give users any knowledge of or recourse against the sharing of their private communications.

The bill is scheduled to go to the House floor for a vote this week and final amendments to the measure are due today. Some people have compared CISPA to SOPA, the highly controversial online copyright legislation that was the focus of so much criticism and anger. The bills are not that much alike and have different scopes and goals, and CISPA does not seem to be drawing quite as much public reaction as SOPA did.

However, some groups warn that CISPA may, in fact, be worse for consumers’ rights than SOPA would have been. Officials at the Center for Democracy and Technology said that “CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies and it supersedes all other privacy laws” and “is likely to lead to expansion of the government’s role in the monitoring of private communications.”

In their letter to lawmakers, the group of Internet engineers, security experts and academics said that passing CISPA would be a major mistake.

“We appreciate your interest in making our networks more secure, but passing legislation that suffers from the problems above would be a grave mistake for privacy and civil liberties, and will not be a step forward in making us safer,” they wrote.

CNET notes:

Last-minute opposition to the CISPA, which has been criticized as a “Big Brother” cybersecurity bill, is growing as the U.S. House of Representatives prepares for a vote this week.

Rep. Ron Paul, the Texas Republican and presidential candidate, warned in a statementand YouTube video today that CISPA (PDF) represents the “latest assault on Internet freedom.” Paul warned that “CISPA is Big Brother writ large,” and said that he hopes that “the public responds to CISPA as it did to SOPA back in January.”

In addition, 18 Democratic House members signed a letter (PDF) this afternoon warning that CISPA “does not include necessary safeguards” and that critics have raised “real and serious privacy concerns.” The number of people signing an anti-CISPA petition is now at more than 718,000, up about 100,000 from a week ago.

But most of the web giants like Google and Facebook which opposed SOPA are now supporting CISPA.

Why? Probably because SOPA would have held them responsible for their users’ actions, while CISPA won’t make the web giants responsible.   In other words, they don’t have skin in the game this time around.

Here’s an action list for stopping CISPA.

* The government is destroying our privacy anyway. But CISPA would codify it in law.

This article was posted: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 at 2:59 am





Infowars.com Videos:

Comment on this article

Comments are closed.

Watch the News

FEATURED VIDEOS
10 Conspiracy Theories That Came True See the rest on the Alex Jones YouTube channel.

Secretive Forced Labor Camp Revealed See the rest on the Alex Jones YouTube channel.

© 2013 PrisonPlanet.com is a Free Speech Systems, LLC company. All rights reserved. Digital Millennium Copyright Act Notice.