Draft Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Update Expands Powers and Penalties

Despite calls to limit the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, it looks like Congress is planning to drastically expand the law and penalties. walterbyrd writes with a few of the major changes listed in the draft bill (22 pages): "Adds computer crimes as a form of racketeering. Expands the ways in which you could be guilty of the CFAA — including making you just as guilty if you plan to 'violate' the CFAA than if you actually did so. Ratchets up many of the punishments. Makes a very, very minor adjustment to limit 'exceeding authorized access.' Expands the definition of 'exceeding authorized access' in a very dangerous way. Makes it easier for the federal government to seize and forfeit anything." TechCrunch also reports rumors that the plan is to push the bill through quickly for approval with a number of other "cybersecurity" bills in mid-April.

Comments

Fascist America

[danbuter]

One step closer to fascism. Big business controls the government, and the government will control every single aspect of your life.

Re:Fascist America

[khallow]

Big business controls the government, and the government will control every single aspect of your life.

Who really thinks big business will hold the leash in this relationship? They simply aren't that powerful, don't have the resources or the guns, and they aren't sufficiently unified compared to a large national government, especial one as vast as the US federal government.

Now, if it were say a half a dozen or less massive businesses (something like the Japanese zaibatsu of old) who controlled virtually all private activity, then you'd be speaking of players who would have power sufficient to deal with the federal government as near equals.

We have to keep in mind that the federal government spends above 20% of GDP and is likely to stay that high for a while. The largest private enterprises, Exxon-Mobile and Walmart are about a tenth the size and have a profit margin to maintain.

OTOH, the US federal government spends somewhere under a dollar to acquire $100 according to the IRS (so I understand, though I getting the data from a secondary source, see page 24).

It also maintains a large military and law enforcement, which in part maintains the societal infrastructure that generates the tax revenue present and future that the US government depends on (either directly through taxes or indirectly through borrowing). I don't think such necessary expenses would be higher than about 10%. That means the rest of it is money waiting to be doled out to constituents, special interests, and building up federal bureaucracies. Now, some fraction of that remainder is going to have to go to entitlements and other gifts to voters in order to preserve the overall revenue stream, but I bet they have a margin that a private company would be willing to kill for.

Re:Fascist America

[Fluffeh]

Actually I think it shows that they are getting more and more scared - which can only be because the people are getting more and more agitated. These folks act in reaction to perceived threats to them and their jobs. If they are cracking down by trying to pass these over-reaching laws it can only mean that they are losing a large amount of control and power on this front. On one hand it is good, I believe in power to the people - though within reason, but on the other hand it brings us one step closer to an Orwellian state which is scary.

Re:Fascist America

[girlintraining]

One step closer to fascism.

Closer? What are the five tenets of fascism:

1. Nationalism (Patriotism)
Exalting the nation (or race) above all else, and promoting cults of unity, strength and purity. "We're number one! We're number one!"
Totalitarianism
2. The State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. In less academic terms, if you're not a patriot, you're the enemy. And a patriot is defined as, well, whatever the state tells you it's defined as.

3. National corporatism (and various other names)
Fascism denounces capitalism not because of its competitive nature nor its support of private property that fascism supports; but due to its materialism, individualism, alleged upper-[class] decadence, and alleged indifference to the nation. Put another way: Collect all the wealth you want, and step on whomever you want, as long as you can demonstrate it's in the best interests of the country. What is the argument that every public corporation? That what it is doing is in the best interests of the consumer. But what are all of a nation's citizens? And what is a nation without citizens? See also: "Too big to fail."

2. Political violence
Essentially, social darwinism. "Survival of the fittest." We have the highest incarceration rate of any country on the face of the Earth, and it's rising faster than any other country as well. If taking away your freedom and stuffing you in a cage isn't violent, I don't know what is. You can recover from being beat up. You can't recover from being stuffed in a 5x3 room for decades.
4. Age and gender roles
This is more difficult to explain than it might first seem, because fascism isn't about reverting to traditional gender and age roles, but rather a radical redefinition of them by placing a premium on the ability to take action. It's like social darwinism, in that your worth is measured by how much punch you can give on behalf of the state, but it is unlike social darwinism in that you, individually, are not what's being judged here but your social class. "A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do."
5. Palingenesis and modernism.
Don't let the academic terminology fool you: Behind high-sounding words is a very populist idea. You saw it most recently in the latest Batman movie: Taking from the rich, and giving to the poor by violent means, and while appearing as the liberator. It's easy to see it on a movie screen, because it rises and falls in a matter of hours. It's not so easy to see in a new bill increasing inheritance tax. But feather by feather, the goose is plucked. Now combine that with the idea of modernizing (and controlling) everything through technology to increase national power. That's what they're talking about with modernism. The idea of building a strong military is part of it, but that's more of a byproduct of this process: The heart of it is economic revitalization. It's about process, efficiency, productivity. Of course, with economic power comes the fear of losing all that money. Hence producing drones, tanks, guns, and bombs; It's secondary, but it's first in most people's minds.

Now, when you think of fascism along those five axis, is there any aspect of societal change that hasn't been moving in this direction since 9/11? Every dictator comes with the same words to the working class: "We are your friends." And for a time, they are. They deliver exactly what they promise: Material prosperity and a sense of pride. But it's temporary and transitive, because it isn't a process that can be stopped once you reach a happy middle-ground... once you start down the path of violence, it becomes cyclical. It builds, visciously eating, biting, and snapping at everything around it, and when there is nothing left to consume... it begins eating itself. The people who built the monsterous machine, cheering it on all the way, become the fuel for its last, gasping breaths.

That is the lesson history t

Re:Fascist America

[Required Snark]

The original post has it right, you have it wrong: mega-business has co-opted the government. Every real world example shows this pattern.

The bank bailout of 2008. Even though the banks failed the most basic rules of capitalism, there was no meaningful penalty for institutions or individuals. All the whining about Dodd-Frank regulation is crocodile tears. The big Wall Street firms have not changed in any way. They still engage in appallingly bad behavior because of unbridled greed. JPMorgan just got caught effectively breaking the new regulations and lost $6 billion as a result. There were still casino gambling, but they called it something else. The fallout: nothing. No legal or regulatory action. Dead silence after one day of hearings. Jamie Dimon just got a big vote of confidence from his board, and retains the titles of both CEO and Chairman. He was personally aware of what went on. Yes, at some point an underling will be thrown under the bus and go to jail, but the big crooks are untouched.

DCMA in general and this legislation in particular. It criminalizes the most innocuous actions so that business can crush anyone at any time. This is the government doing the bidding of mega corps.

Fracking. Ever increasing areas of the country are having their water supplies poisoned forever so that Big Oil can make more money. It's worse then Chernobyl or Fukushima, because radioactivity has a half life. Fracking is a irreversible change to geologic structure. It will take geologic time to recover. These are the same companies that were the most profitable businesses in the history of the world in the 2000 decade. They still get obscene tax brakes that go back to 1926.

Monsanto and GM crops. First they said the the manipulated genes would not get into non-GM crops. Then when it happened the courts ruled that the non-GM planing farmers could be sued for stealing their IP. So if GM crops are used in an area, either you plant a different crop, or are forced to use the GM seeds to avoid being sued. The Mafia is envious.

In addition: Big Pharma and Oxycontin. HDMI cables. EULA. "Clean Coal". Mandatory ethanol from corn. Increasing the number of 1-HB visas.

The constant feature is that big business can buy damn near any legislation they want. The government is the enforcement arm of corporations. In the real world the law goes to the highest bidder, and all the money and power resides in corporations. When you blame the government your corporate owners are delighted. They can keep right on going because their disinformation campaign is working perfectly. Any fix requires understanding who is in charge, and you have it completely wrong.

Re:Fascist America

[Runaway1956]

It's for globalization and the one world government. What else? Hell, we're being conditioned to accept and respect titles like "czar" already.

When the ruling class is ready for us to know who holds the puppet strings, they'll let us know.

Re:Fascist America

[khallow]

That is the textbook definition of fascism - where big business is run solely for the purpose of advancing government

Fixed it for you. Perhaps you should look at textbook cases of fascism in Europe and elsewhere. Was business or government in charge in Nazi Germany under Hitler? Fascist Italy under Mussolini? Argentina under Peron? Chile under Pinochet? Or modern cases such as Singapore or possibly mainland China? Government has always been in charge.

I think this distinction is important because it matters how we try to solve things. If we assume business was the power here, then stripping them of power (say via regulation) would fix the problem.

But if it's just a case of government selling its monopoly services at an exorbitant premium, then you just handled even more power to the real problem. I think that is what is happening here. There's nothing keeping government from continuing to sell its services. They'll just be able to charge even higher prices than they currently do.

For example, someone cited the bank bailouts as evidence of big business power. So how did the banks, desperate for capital, manage to force governments all over the world to release vast amounts of public funds? They didn't. It was another opportunity for government officials to profitably play winners and losers, while simultaneously appearing to "do something" about a huge financial crisis. Well, we're still suffering from the fallout of that banking crisis and the subsequent "solutions", but at least the politicians are doing fine.

OTOH, if big businesses really were too powerful, then cutting government spending means that they lose a vast gravy train which helps fund their power.

So needless to say, I'm in favor of cutting government spending whether or not government is the more overly strong party or not.

Re:Fascist America

[some old guy]

Our multinational capitalist oligarchs do not have to hold the reigns of power. They own the horse.

The government is bought and paid for via graft and 1st Amendment-protected campaign contributions.

Not to accept the obvious is hopelessly naive.

this just in

[girlintraining]

Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Laws too dense for average citizens to understand, too vague to prevent massive abuse! Please. You're all felons. You haven't been prosecuted because you haven't pissed anyone off enough to become one, but all I need to do is record you going about your daily business for a week, and I'll find enough dirt to keep you locked up for a long time. Every. Last. One of you. Except perhaps the person who can't read this, because they're in a coma, in a hospital bed. And that poor, poor bastard is only avoiding his fate for as long as his bank account continues to pay off his mortgages and student loans. Once the money runs out, yeah... he's gonna be a felon too.

The law has ceased to have any relevance of any kind whatsoever for principled and ethical people. You cannot follow all the laws, you don't even know all of them, and you're not supposed to, and even if you did manage this collossal feat that even our own government can't accomplish with all of its resources... interpreting the law is also a crime. Ha ha. And telling someone else what you've learned? Practicing law without a license... another crime.

We're all criminals. We just haven't been caught.

Re:this just in

[Man On Pink Corner]

Exactly. It's not about being able to arrest everybody. They can't arrest everybody, and they don't want to arrest everybody.

It's about being able to arrest anybody.

Needs a new title

[russotto]

Maybe they could change the title to this bill to the "Piss on Aaron Swartz's Grave Act of 2013"?

Seriously, what did you expect. The noose always gets tighter.

Re:Conservative reaction to shooting foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it is:

Liberal reaction: shoot the other foot.
Conservative reaction: shoot a poor person in the foot.
Libertarian reaction: allow someone else to shoot themselves in the foot.
Socialist reaction: cut off all feet so that no one can shoot themselves in the foot.

Massive Overreach, Then Seeming To Relent

[Anonymous Coward]

They propose something completely over the top, so that when they appear to reconsider and listen to the public, we are all mollified to let them get precisely what they wanted in the first place.

Join the ACLU and EFF, your NRA for the 21st century.

nt

[shentino]

Dear americans:

Fuck you

Sincerely, the feds.

Re:Conservative reaction to shooting foot

[Lawrence_Bird]

Well it is most certainly not a congress critter as they are way to stupid to think and write anything 'legal' themselves. So the bigger question is, who has lobbied for the terms in the proposed law?

you should not get less time for robbing 7-11

[Joe_Dragon]

you should not get less time for robbing 7-11 or some other store.

Let make a car analogy

Let say that you find a gas pump that does not force you to pre pay and is wide open for any one to just start pumping gas is about the same thing as longing into a system with no security.

But you can get less time for the Gasoline theft and you did steal something vs even just logging in / copying or looking at data that is still there. Unlike gas that is now missing from the station tank.

Mike Masnik

[the eric conspiracy]

This story originates from a TechDirt posting by Mike Masnik.

Mike is generally a pretty perceptive reporter, however he occasionally jumps the gun when posting commentary about preliminary documentation such as draft bills or revisions to such bills. I lost a lot of credibility with my Congressman in reacting to a story of his related to a revision being made to the ECPA.

From that experience I learned to not pay attention to his reports on draft bills and similar preliminary documents because it's too early in the legislative process to determine if they have any weight or chance of becoming embedded in actual legislation.

SO this may be worth following, but I don't think it's worth writing to a Congressman about yet.