Slashdot Mirror


Congress Seeks To Outlaw Cyber Intel Sharing With Russia (onthewire.io)

Trailrunner7 shares a report from On the Wire: A group of House Democrats has introduced a bill that would formalize a policy of the United States not sharing cyber intelligence with Russia. The proposed law is a direct response to comments President Donald Trump made earlier this week after he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin. After the meeting, Trump said on Twitter that he and Putin had discussed forming an "impenetrable Cyber Security unit" to prevent future attacks, including election hacking. The idea was roundly criticized by security and foreign policy experts and within a few hours Trump walked it back, saying it was just an idea and couldn't actually happen. But some legislators are not taking the idea of information sharing with Russia as a hypothetical. On Wednesday, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), and Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) introduced the No Cyber Cooperation With Russia Act to ensure that the U.S. doesn't hand over any cybersecurity intelligence on attacks or vulnerabilities to Moscow. Recent attacks such as the NotPetya malware outbreak have been linked to Russia, as have the various attacks surrounding the 2016 presidential election. "When the Russians get their hands on cyber intelligence, they exploit it -- as they did last month with the NotPetya malware attack targeting Ukraine and the West. It is a sad state of affairs when Congress needs to prohibit this type of information sharing with an adversary, but since we apparently do, I am proud to introduce the No Cyber Cooperation with Russia Act with my friends Brendan Boyle and Ruben Gallego. I urge my colleagues across the aisle to join us in sending a clear message that Congress will not stand for this proposal to undermine U.S. national security," Lieu said in a statement.

26 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Oh please! Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Are people actually falling for this shit? And you thought Trump was the bottom of the barrel? You poor souls!

    1. Re: Oh please! Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Russians spying on the US? Preposterous.
        Next you'll be telling me there are Russians pretending to be Americans on Slashdot!

    2. Re: Oh please! Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      tfw you can't tell if someone is making fun of Russia paranoia or if he really thinks people he meets online who disagree with him are secretly paid Russian shills.

      When you've reached the "My opinion is so indisputably correct that anyone who disagrees with me must be a foreign agent trying to sabotage the country." stage, it's long past time to step out of your bubble for a while. (And while you're at it, you might also consider seeing a psychiatrist...)

    3. Re: Oh please! Really? by davester666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody else besides Trump (and Putin I guess) is suggesting that their government should make a joint "cybersecurity" unit between their gov't and Russia to help prevent future cyber-attacks on their elections.

      It was, as usual, something that popped into Trumps head (or perhaps was suggested by Putin), and Trump was mentally unable to figure out, by himself, that it was a bad idea.

      We've elected a stupid, ignorant man simply because he is "different" and was on tv.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re: Oh please! Really? by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 4, Informative

      On the one hand: France (oldest ally), the UK (special relationship), and Canada (friend with benefits), all democracies and members of NATO.

      On the other hand: Russia, a major geopolitical adversary for most of the last century, a kleptocratic dictatorship run by an ex-KGB lieutenant who fiercely and violently crushes any non-token political opposition.

      Can't see why we'd favor one over the other.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    5. Re: Oh please! Really? by sound+vision · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The teams of Russian shills that get dispersed across the internet are no less real than the 50 Cent Party of China. Might I suggest researching it, as well as Russia's. since you appear not to know these types of projects are in deployment. The only good thing is, it doesn't matter if its shills or not. A bad idea from a shill is no more difficult to discredit than a bad idea from someone who listened to a shill. The real challenge getting people to think critically. I know the cognitive dissonance between "my favorite reality TV star is president" and "the president treasonously colludes with foreign powers" hurts, and the propaganda machine gives you easy out to assuage that pain. But that sort of running from bad or difficult things stunts your intellectual growth. If you insist on doing it, please also refrain from voting or ever being in a position of authority.

    6. Re: Oh please! Really? by cavreader · · Score: 2

      The weird thing is the lawyer Trump Jr. met entered the country without a Visa. She needed special dispensation to enter the US because she was legally barred from entering the US due to sanctions. Her dispensation was approved by Loretta Lynch and signed off on by the Obama administration. The lawyer also has a documented history of working on Democratic party campaigns as a registered foreign agent. She was not registered as a foreign agent when she talked with Trump Jr.

  2. No Cyber Cooperation by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So the world is now safe for spam, malware and
    Equation Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    Stuxnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    Want some more Magic Lantern with vendor cooperation?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    Thats why a global understanding of what is trying to enter, stay on and communicate from systems and networks is so vital.
    Malware is often very different to normal OS functions and the more nations and skilled people looking for such changes the better.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  3. I see a problem with this? by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does this mean they can prosecute Open Source programmers and security experts for publishing Security vulnerabilities to Bugzilla, or LinuxSecurity.com?

    1. Re:I see a problem with this? by guises · · Score: 3, Informative

      Probably not. This is a law with three goals: preventing Trump from doing something specific, calling attention to the fact that Trump wanted to do this, and perhaps creating a law for Trump to break (and thus be more easily removed from office). In other words, this is all about Trump and will likely be written so as to effect the rest of us not at all.

    2. Re:I see a problem with this? by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 2

      I'm a Junior maintainer for Mageia. I know we have people who happen to be from Russia registered in the Bugzilla system. Americans too. I'm worried this might affect Linux Distributions with an International scope resulting in US Contributors being charged with a Crime because sudo CVE-2017-1000367 gets published in Debian, Mageia Picks it up as MGASA-2017-0207, the US DOJ then says: US Maintainers of Mageia are in violation of this law because by posting the bug to be patched in sudo means the Russians know about it, and can exploit CVE-2017-1000367 in unpatched syetems.

    3. Re:I see a problem with this? by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Re "prosecute Open Source programmers and security experts for publishing" A Russian company publishes a good quality security report.
      Could a company in the US use that data directly to secure their networks more quickly?
      Have to wait for another nation to republish that information and then act on that much later?
      Or would a US company have to detect the same security issue on their own and then rediscover what was in public?
      No direct use of any Russian security information or quoting the direct results of a first hop of Russian information?
      How many hops from Russia until information is just information again?
      Comments on any Russian related product, network, service, research, finding or science is still directly "supporting" Russia in some way?
      Security research around the world would slow as lawyers get invited in to help. Spam and malware would be able to spread in the legal confusion.
      Experts have to stay in the US or Russia or avoid the USA and Russia so they can keep working around the world on security matters?

      How many friends of friends to avoid the US cyber sanctions?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:I see a problem with this? by guises · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, I got the gist of what you were saying in your comment above. I'm expecting this to be a law about what government agencies are allowed to do, and nothing to do with the population at large. If you're really worried about this then you can look up the text of the bill, it shouldn't be too hard to find.

      That's even assuming that this ever gets passed though, and I can't imagine that happening.

    5. Re:I see a problem with this? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably not for a different reason. This is clever political posturing designed to generate headlines (hey, mission accomplished!) in the wake of Trump's faux pas. There's not a snowflake's chance in hell this bill is going anywhere except to news aggregators. It won't affect us at all because it will never get passed into law. That's just political reality talking. Republicans control Congress right now, and Trump is the one who would have to sign this into law.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    6. Re:I see a problem with this? by strikethree · · Score: 2

      In other words, this is all about Trump and will likely be written so as to effect the rest of us not at all.

      Hm. Pretty much all laws start out targeting one thing and one thing only but then get expanded to be used in ways not originally declared.

      Be careful of your dismissals when it comes to Laws.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  4. Summary is incorrect, by bongey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The bill is trying to cut funding to a russia/us cyber security group in the future, that doesn't even exist. It would be unconstitutional from the legislative branch to prevent executive from sharing information for national defense. Better summary directly from politicians http://dearcolleague.us/2017/0... and the text https://www.congress.gov/bill/...

    1. Re:Summary is incorrect, by butzwonker · · Score: 2

      The bill is still a very bad idea, though. There are many areas of Internet security in which Russia and the US could and should peacefully cooperate.

  5. Deliberately incorrect headline by StevenMaurer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It isn't "Congress" which is trying this, it's a small group of the minority party. In fact, a small group even of the minority party. Basically nothing but gesture politics.

    Why is this being covered as if it's real, again?

    The only plausible answer is that it's BS click-bait.

  6. Smug by geekymachoman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > When the Russians get their hands on cyber intelligence, they exploit it

    As opposed to Americans, who handle information in a way that benefit the greater good ? (/Sarcasm) (Do i really need to provide links ?)

    Get off your moral high horse already. You don't want to cooperate with anyone, you want to do things that are in your own interests, and get whoever you can to support your own interests (read: spineless Europeans vassal states). Cooperating with Russia would undermine common American interests and hence it's not good for America, because the Russians, have their own interests.

    Has nothing to do with the already stupidly boring narrative "Russians are Evil" that is constantly being rammed into minds of commoners through the popular media channels. By the way, if you going to talk evil, talk about your own politicians and foreign policies that turn at least one country to dust and cause 50 years of political instability in the region every ~ 10 years. I see more evil committed by USG than in Stalin's wildest dreams. You just pack it better, hollywood style, a polished turd for ready for people to eat up and feel better about themselves at next election.

    Freakin' hypocrites, the lot of you.

    1. Re: Smug by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 2

      Some investigators suspect

      Sigh, so more innuendo and blaming, and absolutely no fucking evidence.

      What boggles my mind is that America has interfered in other countries, overthrown entire governments by funding and arming malcontents, and then helping them fight for "freedom". Syria is a perfect example. Look what state Libya is in after the "evil" Saddam was overthrown, it's a fucking shit hole now with warring factions, mass killings, raping and child soldiers. Way to go America, but at least now they are "free" to starve to death in their own shit, since the first targets were water treatment plants and other infrastructure. Not sure why a sewerage plant makes a good military target though, maybe because it's big and you can hit it easier?

      Even if the Russians had interfered by sending messages and leaking information regarding Hillary, if they had done it America style they would have funded and armed all the red necks who don't want no guvment, and America would now be in a civil war. I prefer Russia's way.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  7. fundraising by Orgasmatron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can we be honest with ourselves for a moment?

    This is a fundraising bill. It is designed to look good on a letter sent to Democrats in a couple of districts in hopes that they will send money to the reelection campaigns of the bill's sponsors.

    It is functionally identical to the "questions" asked by Democrats during confirmation or committee hearings, or the statements made by Democrats during bill debates. The questions aren't seeking information, the statements aren't swaying votes, and this "bill" isn't intended to ever become a law.

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
  8. Re:Enough Denials, Truth Time! by epine · · Score: 2

    You'd think she could have talked to her husband about connecting with voters, but - nope!

    If I try to behave like the Fonz, it only makes me extra dorkier.

    Hillary never had the televangelism gene. She couldn't channel Bill if she tried. You'd get about as far suggesting the average televangelist channel Richard Dawkins.

    Most of her debate prep was spent mastering that ghastly almost amused-looking smile when Donald went off on one of his many ridiculous riffs. Unfortunately, her best shot at running America was being born long before the invention of television.

    With the same intensity of prep as The King's English she might have managed to sound charismatic over the radio.

    But really, I'd have advised she broadcast a series of fireside radio chats with Bertrand Russell.

  9. Re:Cold War 2 by mOzone · · Score: 2

    Keep calm and blame Russia

    We have always been at war with eur-russia

  10. Re:Why Are Democrats So Fucking Stupid? by Rockoon · · Score: 2

    because they were always fakers. They were never good people. Lip service to liberal values, and then installing fascist dictators in countries were were sworn to protect via treaty.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  11. It's Dead Jim... by cb88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "a group of House Democrats"

  12. Russia derangement syndrome. by jacekm · · Score: 2

    The Russia Democrats obsession is reaching levels of group paranoia obsession. Future psychiatrists will have a new field of study.