Slashdot Mirror


Internet Kill Switch Back On the US Legislative Agenda

suraj.sun points out a story at Wired that US lawmakers have revived the idea of a government-controlled "Internet Kill Switch," which reads, in part: "The bill, which has bipartisan support, is being floated by Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican ranking member on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The proposed legislation, which Collins said would not give the president the same power Egypt's Hosni Mubarak is exercising to quell dissent, sailed through the Homeland Security Committee in December but expired with the new Congress weeks later. 'My legislation would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,' Collins said in an e-mail Friday. 'It would give our nation the best tools available to swiftly respond to a significant threat.'"

7 of 376 comments (clear)

  1. A significant threat... Um, like the government. by webdog314 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems to me, the biggest threat would be doing EXACTLY what Mubarak is doing now in Egypt.

  2. Citizen this is completely different than Egypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because we'll only use it for your own good.

    They're the bad guys. You can trust us.

    We're looking out for you.

  3. Another Egypt scenario? by rs1n · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In light of the recent incident in Egypt, it seems that the real purpose of such a kill switch is more useful as a means of censorship (a la big scandals that could make the US look bad, like Wikileaks). On a local scale, if I know my network is about to be attacked, I would cut off the main entrance into my network, while leaving the inside up and running. If they insist on a kill switch, why not just implement a similar scheme for all the "gateways" into government networks? As for each citizen's own access, I don't need the government to unplug my computer for me -- I can do that by myself, and am capable of making the decision to do so myself.

  4. Why is "Critical Infrastructure" available online? by beanbrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "An example, the aide said, would require infrastructure connected to “the system that controls the floodgates to the Hoover dam” to cut its connection to the net if the government detected an imminent cyber attack."

    Am I the only one who wonders what that kind of system is doing connected to the internet in the first place? Seems to me that if you want to protect infrastructure, the easiest and most sensible thing to do would be to unplug the ethernet cable.

  5. Biparitsan by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Amazing how the really bad shit always has bi-partisan support. More and more it becomes obvious that we really need a viable third party.

  6. Re:It is just data! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, you can hurt people with data. Mainly, people in power. And that's what they're afraid of.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  7. Re:It is just data! by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No offence, but I think that for the most part, you Americans have lost the freedoms that you all tout - you just aren't aware of it properly yet.

    You get fondled to get onto a plane, you can't protest the President anywhere near where anyone can see it and so many other things. Sure, you might still have the right to carry guns for the most part, but you have lost the freedoms that really matter.

    For the most part, actually, so has the rest of the world. Such are the times we live in heh.

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!