Slashdot Mirror
New Cyber Security Bills Open Door To Gov't, Corporate Abuse
Gunkerty Jeb writes with a selection from Threatpost about upcoming legislation to watch out for: "EFF looked at two bills making their way through Congress: The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 (S. 2105), sponsored by Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) of Connecticut and the Secure IT Act (S. 2151), sponsored by Senator John McCain (R-AZ). The digital rights group claims that the quality of both bills ranges from 'downright terrible' to 'appropriately intentioned.' Each, however, is conceptually similar and flawed, EFF said."
Something's wrong here... we're getting far to many new copyright powers laws being proposed in Congress, and this sort of nonsense is supposed to be dead in committee and not brought to the floors. Is Hollywood sending too much money to Congress and we're not sending enough?
Well, at least the lobbyists bought the sharpest tools in the tool chest.
Everything must be owned. It is the mantra of capitalism. The first peoples of the internet; the hackers, the academics, the non-profits, are now being rounded up, jailed, or forcibly deported from their homes and off their property to make way for The Man. All of this has happened before. All of this will happen again. Your days of "free" code and believing nobody can own [the internet] are coming to an end. They have guns, they have the support of the government, and this time they won't bother with that non-sense about signing treaties. And future generations will never know a world where ideas couldn't be owned, where knowledge was free, and where anonymity from corporations and governments provided fertile ground for social change.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Every thing the feds do can be used nefariously, and in time regardless of its original intentions, will be.
its the nature of a federal government who ignores its rules. ( ie, the Constitution here in the US ), or has none in the first place ( like in several other countries )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Well, that's just abused.
I saw that McCain and Lieberman were the sponsors, and immediately concluded that the EFF is doubtlessly right. Have either of those warmongering sellouts ever proposed a single thing that would actually benefit their constituents (as opposed to their paymasters)?
quoting:
Of particular concern: a section in both the Lieberman bill and the McCain bills that authorizes monitoring by private firms of any traffic that transits their networks. Ostensibly intended to facilitate private-public information sharing, the passage would grant complete private sector immunity for data monitoring and sharing practices. Private entities would be unbound from the Wiretap Act and other legal limits and immunized against a swath of questionable monitoring practices, EFF claims.
emph mine.
THIS is what's going on. and end-run around US laws. since the US has been repeatedly caught with its hands in the cookie jar, it now tries to get some other kid to take the cookies and shift the blame to them.
sleazy and, yes, fully expected in today's 'government ethics'. ;(
the government learned it can employ corporations to do its black work.
nice, huh?
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
New Cyber Security Bills Open Door To Gov't, Corporate Abuse
Sorry, but that door you speak of has been broken down, smashed, and burned for a long time.
Nobody in power gives a shit anymore, or they're completely ignorant (and, quite possibly, mentally handicapped).
vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
More IT bills introduced by an old fart that has flat-out admitted his computer illiteracy. Heaven help us.
When your economy depends on people only attempting to gain only what they actually need (and no more), being generous with one another, accepting a lack of control over resources, etc., expect it to flop.
An important selective pressure that has been acting on human evolution since the dawn of the cell is this: competition over scarce resources.
You can't realistically expect something as brand-spanking-new as the Internet to undermine millions upon millions of years of selective refinement.
The desire to acquire and control is a basic tenet of human nature. And yes, the "Indians" did it too. And so do you, whether you think of it as such or not.
That stuff like this is obsolete now that nsa and the cia outsourced themselves to facebook?
New Government Bill Aimed At Vague Threat Turns Out To Benefit Government, Corporations More Than It Actually Protects You Or Me From Vague Threat
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I was told during the last election that McCain is rather ill and would probably not survive the term, so I shouldn't vote for him or the dud bombshell gets to be prez. I guess that's another election promise going unfulfilled.
(just in case you wondered how on earth this could be blamed on Obama)
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
American is the most retarded, stupid, ignorant, mind controlled, selfish country on this planet earth..
How you retarded fucking Americans keep electing the SAME jackoffs over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over ..
But Mccain was war hero!!! And lieberman... hes just.. uhh.. well he's the best zionist we got!
With public awareness about cyber legislation high after the dramatic failure of Stop Online PRIVACY Act (SOPA), interest in- and skepticism of new cybersecurity legislation is on the rise.
Mistaken or on purpose, it is apt.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
However, things can and will get even worse if that Mormon liar Romney is elected.
Try these excerpts from the article:
"In an e-mail conversation with Threatpost, Auerbach of EFF characterized the bills as âoealarming.â Of particular concern: a section in both the Lieberman bill and the McCain bills that authorizes monitoring by private firms of any traffic that transits their networks. Ostensibly intended to facilitate private-public information sharing, the passage would grant complete private sector immunity for data monitoring and sharing practices. Private entities would be unbound from the Wiretap Act and other legal limits and immunized against a swath of questionable monitoring practices, EFF claims.
Furthermore, Auerbach and Tien worry that the bills' definition of a "cyber security threat" is too broad, and could cover everything from stealing passwords from a secure government server to scanning a network for software vulnerabilities. Similarly, the bills calls for more ISP traffic analysis and monitoring could bring about more civil liberties violations. For example, ISPs could simply block Tor, cryptographic protocols, or traffic on certain ports under the guise of defensive countermeasures, the EFF speculated."
So given our new over-reaching governments, it's not hard to see how those kinds of measures then later get warped out of control even more than they already are.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
For example, ISPs could simply block ... cryptographic protocols... under the guise of defensive countermeasures ...
In simpler words, they want to block our use of encrypted login names, account numbers and passwords.
It might be interesting to know how the major banks are lobbying in this case. If the public comes to understand that their account information can be harvested by their ISP and other companies that provide the "wires", smart people will simply stop using electronic banking.
The companies pushing for such clauses certainly understand what clauses like the above mean, and they've included it so that they can block encryption of our login info. It would take a real dummy to fail to understand why they want this.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
the government is a corporation... the citizens are its employees that's why you are not consulted before wars bailouts or any of the thousands of "illegal" goings on behind the scenes
Sure, that would hurt all sorts of online commerce. And since, in their view, the entire purpose of the Internet is commerce, it's going to be a big problem.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I get it. Once you take away the ability to encrypt, you take away the ability to be anonymous, too. That would certainly kill a lot of speech.
It would also kill a lot of commerce though. Once again, it sounds like legislation that has not been well thought out.
You are welcome on my lawn.
That's one reason I keep calling this stuff "Social Division by Zero". They can just keep carving out slices of the pie to "allow encryption for commercial details but outlaw encryption for free speech". Once you get swindled by the "Fridge Logic" (see TV Tropes) then free speech law will start to be like the US Tax Code. (Which, while nasty, makes its own scary brand of internally consistent sense.)
And better bet that the big corps will just buy "Speech Licenses" to be exempt anyway.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine