PDA

View Full Version : ALERT: CISPA Passes House, moves to Senate - Contact ur Senators and Reid to STOP CISPA




tsai3904
04-12-2013, 03:17 PM
Mod: Senate Contacts: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Congressional Twitter Accounts: http://t.co/TaF48XhFfx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Muf23Rc7HV8

34 Civil Liberties organizations that oppose CISPA:https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/04/33-civil-liberties-organizations-oppose-cispa-after-amendments

Vote on H.R. 624, CISPA, scheduled for Thursday, April 18 (calendar here (http://majorityleader.gov/floor/weekly.html))

FAQs about the bill:

https://www.eff.org/cybersecurity-bill-faq

One of the FAQs:


Under CISPA, what can a private company do?

Under CISPA, any company can “use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information to protect the rights and property” of the company, and then share that information with third parties, including the government, so long as it is for “cybersecurity purposes.” Whenever these prerequisites are met, CISPA is written broadly enough to permit your communications service providers to share your emails and text messages with the government, or your cloud storage company could share your stored files.

Right now, well-established laws like the Cable Communications Policy Act, the Wiretap Act, the Video Privacy Protection Act, and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act provide judicial oversight and other privacy protections that prevent companies from unnecessarily sharing your private information, including the content of your emails.

And these laws expressly allow lawsuits against companies that go too far in divulging your private information. CISPA threatens these protections by declaring that key provisions in CISPA are effective “notwithstanding any other law,” a phrase that essentially means CISPA would override the relevant provisions in all other laws—including privacy laws. CISPA also creates a broad immunity for companies against both civil and criminal liability. CISPA provides more legal cover for companies to share large swaths of potentially personal and private information with the government.

Objectionable provisions within CISPA:


- Eviscerating existing privacy laws by giving overly broad legal immunity to companies who share users' private information, including the content of communications, with the government.

- Authorizing companies to disclose users’ data directly to the NSA, a military agency that operates secretly and without public accountability.

- Broad definitions that allow users’ sensitive personal information to be used for a range of purposes as long as it pertains to "cybersecurity".

The bill was marked up by the Intelligence Committee a couple days ago behind closed doors. Some slightly good amendments were passed but it did not change the overall bill.


CALL AND EMAIL YOUR CONGRESSMAN!

If you call your Congressman and they don't take your name/address, send them an email too since they won't know you already contacted them.

Find your Congressman's contact info here:

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

Roll call on House vote passing CISPA: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

luctor-et-emergo
04-12-2013, 03:28 PM
It's important that as many people read this and take action as possible.
Maybe it's a good idea to also post this topic in 'General politics' as it may be viewed by more people there.

sailingaway
04-12-2013, 04:10 PM
retweet this, it has the Congressional twitter directory in it: https://twitter.com/usernamenuse/status/322834015470096384

sailingaway
04-12-2013, 04:14 PM
I put it on the front page, but I have to play with it.

CaseyJones
04-12-2013, 04:19 PM
I moved the rally live feed above it and will move the cispa thing back above it after the rally

sailingaway
04-12-2013, 04:21 PM
K. I want it to be tweeted out to the forum list and it may need to be on top for that. I didn't realize there was an event coming right up that it was blocking when I first promoted it, though.

compromise
04-12-2013, 04:58 PM
Good targets would be Radel, Salmon, Bridenstine, Meadows, Stockman and Mullin.
They're freshmen and it would be useful to know where they stand on this.

tsai3904
04-12-2013, 07:17 PM
Under CISPA, what can I do if a company improperly hands over private information to the government?

Almost nothing. Even if the company violates your privacy beyond what CISPA would permit, the government does not have to notify the user whose information was improperly handed over—the government only notifies the company.

CISPA provides legal immunity to a company for many actions done to or with your private information, as long as the company acted in "good faith." This is an extremely powerful immunity, because it is quite hard to show that a company did not act in good faith. These liability protections can cover actions the company uses to identify and obtain threat information and the subsequent sharing of that information with others—including the government. The immunity also covers "decisions made based on cyber threat information," a dangerously vague provision that has never been defined.

More FAQs here:
https://www.eff.org/cybersecurity-bill-faq

sailingaway
04-13-2013, 11:25 AM
weekend bump

sailingaway
04-13-2013, 11:38 AM
this is the list of reps who voted for and against it in 2012 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/h192

CaseyJones
04-13-2013, 05:52 PM
bump

CaseyJones
04-14-2013, 05:10 PM
bump

[edit - ok those of you who have looked at this thread and are wanting to do stuff come to chat please]

sailingaway
04-14-2013, 05:52 PM
bump

sailingaway
04-14-2013, 08:24 PM
bump

MelissaWV
04-14-2013, 08:29 PM
I've emailed my Representative, and will be making some phonecalls at lunch over the next couple of days.

tsai3904
04-14-2013, 11:11 PM
IBM launching CISPA advocacy tour

Nearly 200 senior IBM executives are flying into Washington to press for the passage of a controversial cybersecurity bill that will come up for a vote in the House this week.

The IBM executives will pound the pavement on Capitol Hill Monday and Tuesday, holding nearly 300 meetings with lawmakers and staff. Over the course of those two days, their mission is to convince lawmakers to back a bill that’s intended to make it easier for industry and government to share information about cyber threats with each other in real time.

“We’re going to put our shoe leather where our mouth is,” Chris Padilla, vice president of governmental affairs at IBM, told The Hill.

“The message we're going to give [lawmakers] is going to be a very simple, clear message: support the passage of CISPA,” he later added.

...

The company believes the best way to thwart a cyberattack is to encourage companies to share more data about malicious source code and other online threats with the government and their private-sector peers so they can take steps to address it, according to Padilla.

“It’s our experience that the most effective thing you can do when a cyberattack occurs is to share information quickly between government and industry and between industry actors in real time in order to find where the attack is coming from and to shut it down,” he said.

More:
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/293715-ibm-launching-cispa-advocacy-tour

sailingaway
04-14-2013, 11:16 PM
More:
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/293715-ibm-launching-cispa-advocacy-tour

So who cares that it is OUR mail and information they want to 'share quickly' without warrant? We care.

CaseyJones
04-15-2013, 09:24 AM
bump

sailingaway
04-15-2013, 09:36 AM
IBM admits it will send your records directly to NSA under CISPA http://t.co/1oGhEOo2aW

sailingaway
04-15-2013, 09:44 AM
Anyone who has a few seconds and a twitter account could retweet the tweets they like best from this list: https://twitter.com/search?q=cispa&src=typd

tsai3904
04-15-2013, 05:16 PM
34 Civil Liberties Organizations Oppose CISPA After Amendments


Dear Representative:

Earlier this year, many of our organizations wrote to state our opposition to H.R. 624, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2013 (CISPA). We write today to express our continued opposition to this bill following its markup by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI). Although some amendments were adopted in markup to improve the bill’s privacy safeguards, these amendments were woefully inadequate to cure the civil liberties threats posed by this bill. In particular, we remain gravely concerned that despite the amendments, this bill will allow companies that hold very sensitive and personal information to liberally share it with the government, including with military agencies.

CISPA creates an exception to all privacy laws to permit companies to share our information with each other and with the government in the name of cybersecurity. Although a carefully-crafted information sharing program that strictly limits the information to be shared and includes robust privacy safeguards could be an effective approach to cybersecurity, CISPA lacks such protections for individual rights. CISPA’s information sharing regime allows the transfer of vast amounts of data, including sensitive information like Internet records or the content of emails to any agency in the government including military and intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency or the Department of Defense Cyber Command.

Developments over the last year make CISPA’s approach even more questionable than before. First, the President recently signed Executive Order 13636, which will increase information sharing from the government to the private sector. Information sharing in this direction is often cited as a substantial justification for CISPA and will proceed without legislation. Second, the cybersecurity legislation the Senate considered last year, S. 3414, included privacy protections for information sharing that are entirely absent from CISPA, and the Obama administration, including the intelligence community, has confirmed that those protections would not inhibit cybersecurity programs. These included provisions to ensure that private companies send cyber threat information only to civilian agencies, and a requirement that companies make “reasonable efforts” to remove personal information that is unrelated to the cyber threat when sharing data with the government. Finally, witnesses at a hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence confirmed earlier this year that companies can strip out personally identifiably information that is not necessary to address cyber threats, and CISPA omits any requirement that reasonable efforts be undertaken to do so.

We continue to oppose CISPA and encourage you to vote ‘no.’

Sincerely,

Access
Advocacy for Principled Action in Government
American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
American Association of Law Libraries
American Civil Liberties Union
American Library Association
Amicus
Association of Research Libraries
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Breadpig.com
Center for Democracy & Technology
Center for National Security Studies
Center for Rights
Competitive Enterprise Institute
The Constitution Project
Council on American-Islamic Relations
CREDO Action
Daily Kos
Defending Dissent Foundation
Demand Progress
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Fight for the Future
Free Press Action Fund
Government Accountability Project
Liberty Coalition
Mozilla
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
New American Foundation’s Open Technology Institute
OpenMedia.org
PolitiHacks
Reddit
RootsAction.org
Tech Freedom

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/04/33-civil-liberties-organizations-oppose-cispa-after-amendments

CaseyJones
04-15-2013, 07:12 PM
bump

tsai3904
04-16-2013, 09:27 AM
Please call your Congressman today. All it takes is a two minute phone call to say that you are opposed to HR 624 (CISPA) because it gives the govt access to our online data without a warrant.

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

tsai3904
04-16-2013, 11:14 AM
Former Rep. Bob Barr wrote a good op-ed today against CISPA:

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/294121-qjust-say-noq-to-cybersecurity-bill

sailingaway
04-16-2013, 11:30 AM
bump

tsai3904
04-16-2013, 04:28 PM
FreedomWorks is opposed to CISPA, which is good since they usually stick to economic issues.

http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/mkibbe/key-vote-no-on-cispa

Spoa
04-16-2013, 04:53 PM
House voted to expand government's role in the internet in 2 votes today. See the thread here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?411493-House-Votes-to-Expand-Government-Role-in-Internet-In-2-Votes-(Only-16-and-11-Oppose)

Good prediction of Thursday's vote.

Spoa
04-16-2013, 04:54 PM
Duplicated.

sailingaway
04-17-2013, 09:39 AM
bump! Contact your reps against this!

sailingaway
04-17-2013, 10:47 AM
bump for google search

Brian4Liberty
04-17-2013, 10:58 AM
#EndCISPA seems to be trending on Twitter right now.

tsai3904
04-17-2013, 11:07 AM
House will vote on an amendment sponsored by Amash and cosponsored by Massie today.

the amendment prohibits the federal government from using, inter alia, library records, firearms sales records, and tax returns that it receives from private entities under CISPA.

sailingaway
04-17-2013, 11:08 AM
I guess any improvement is something but the whole thing is outrageous violation of privacy. The feds HAVING the database is unacceptable. They are ALWAYS abused. Even the ACLU even on the gun issue said as much.

Brian4Liberty
04-17-2013, 11:22 AM
FreedomWorks is opposed to CISPA, which is good since they usually stick to economic issues.

http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/mkibbe/key-vote-no-on-cispa

And maybe they changed their minds? Link not working...

Brian4Liberty
04-17-2013, 11:23 AM
House will vote on an amendment sponsored by Amash and cosponsored by Massie today.

the amendment prohibits the federal government from using, inter alia, library records, firearms sales records, and tax returns that it receives from private entities under CISPA.

Any links on that?

Brian4Liberty
04-17-2013, 11:27 AM
And maybe they changed their minds? Link not working...

Found this link that works:

http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/mkibbe/letter-in-opposition-of-cispa

tsai3904
04-17-2013, 11:30 AM
Any links on that?

Not really.

Here's the text of the bill:
http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/AMASH_009_xml416130939143914.pdf

I got the summary from the Rules Committee website where they list the amendments submitted.

The House schedule shows that the amendment will be voted on today.

tsai3904
04-17-2013, 12:24 PM
Vote is tomorrow. Please call your Congressman.

tsai3904
04-17-2013, 12:26 PM
House is debating CISPA right now.

tsai3904
04-17-2013, 12:58 PM
bump

Brian4Liberty
04-17-2013, 01:05 PM
People are saying on Twitter it passed the House. Are they confused because it passed the Committee?

Created4
04-17-2013, 03:15 PM
Reports are it DID pass the House: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

tsai3904
04-17-2013, 04:12 PM
Reports are it DID pass the House: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

That article is from 2012.

The House passed a resolution that set out the rules to debate the bill. Many people confused that as the House passing the final bill.

The final vote on HR 624 is tomorrow.

Spoa
04-17-2013, 04:26 PM
Final Vote is tomorrow.

Four GOP Representatives even voted against the motion to proceed to debate the bill: Jones, McClintock, Rohrabacher, and Stockman. I expect they are sure that they will vote against it tomorrow since they didn't even want to debate it. :)

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll109.xml

Spoa
04-17-2013, 08:08 PM
Dan Bongino (ran for senate last year and running for MD-GOV in 2014) tweeted against CISPA:


Dan Bongino ‏@dbongino 56s
#EndCISPA , but only if you value your liberty & privacy. #tlot

Visit his campaign site here: http://bongino.com/

tsai3904
04-18-2013, 11:02 AM
House just passed HR 624, CISPA.




Y
N


R
196
29


D
92
98


Total
288
127

Kevin_Kennedy
04-18-2013, 11:53 AM
Roll call:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

WarAnonymous
04-19-2013, 04:03 AM
Roll call:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

Congratulations to Ohio! Every house rep minus Tim Ryan(D) voted for this awesome bill!

Bern
04-19-2013, 06:46 AM
Sent the following to Randy Weber (TX-14) this morning:
I read this morning that you voted for CISPA ( http://gizmodo.com/5994997/every-representitive-who-voted-for-cispa-and-how-to-contact-them ). Words fail to adequately express my disappointment. I am not a "14 year old tweeter" and I'm extremely troubled by the invasion of privacy issues raised by CISPA (Please check with the Electronic Frontier Foundation [ eff.org ] for more info). Congress can and should do better. While I hope that the Texas delegation to the Senate does a better job in representing the citizens of this State, I realize I will need to be more active in contacting your office in the future to express my concerns before you vote on troubling legislation - something I rarely had to do when your predecessor held the office.

Anyone on this forum not know who his predecessor was?

FSP-Rebel
04-19-2013, 08:58 AM
Mullin really turned out to be a disappointment in many more ways than one. Mulvaney, Chaffetz and Schweikert still inconsistent and such a shame they would vote for this. H/t to Bentivolio for voting No and obviously all of our other trusted allies who don't need to be named did their duty.

sailingaway
04-19-2013, 02:38 PM
bump for Senate action

sailingaway
04-19-2013, 02:50 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BIPgR-2CIAEAfqk.jpg:large

WhistlinDave
04-22-2013, 02:10 AM
Got this response from Feinstein. To be honest it sounds good at first, but then some of the language toward the end kind of concerns me a little. I wonder if she's dancing around real reform in the same way her 2013 NDAA amendment seemed to still leave open a loophole in the language to keep indefinite detention without due process legal. Here is her e-mail response. Am I worrying about this wording for nothing? (Part that concerns me in bold.)


"Dear Mr. ......:

Thank you for your letter concerning the "Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act" (H.R. 3523). I appreciate your taking the time to write and welcome the opportunity to respond.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act was introduced in the House of Representatives on February 13, 2013 by Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI). The bill would, among other things, establish procedures to allow the Intelligence Community to share cyber threat intelligence with the private sector.

I agree with the authors of the House bill that our nation faces a serious and growing threat from cyber attacks and espionage—threats to both our national security and our economy. Effective cybersecurity requires that information on cyber threats and defenses in our government's hands be passed to the private sector, and that information from industry be shared with the government.

At the same time, it is critical that our efforts to improve cyber security include robust privacy protections. In particular, we must ensure that our constitutional rights and liberties are protected, and place proper limits on the government's use of cyber security information that it obtains from the private sector.

Last Congress I authored the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2012 (S. 2102). While that legislation accomplished many of the same goals as the House legislation, it included robust privacy protections and safeguards against the private sector abusing information sharing authorities. As Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I will shortly be introducing a bill on information sharing which allows sharing of cyber intrusion data with the government with full immunity. In this way we hope to encourage a major effort between the public and private sector to share data so that cyber intrusion can be prevented.

Once again, thank you for your letter. I am pleased that you are engaged in this important issue and hope you continue to inform me of issues that matter to you. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my office in Washington, D.C. at (202) 224-3841, or visit my website at http://www.feinstein.senate.gov.


Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator"


What exactly does "cyber intrusion data" include? Does that include when the government wants to cyber intrude on my data with immunity? (I know I should probably research the wording of whatever she is proposing... Just wanted to post the response and as I'm typing this, now realizing I just need to look into it more.)

Edit: And I just now realized the bill referenced in the first paragraph isn't the same bill number we're talking about here for CISPA... ?? I used a pre-made form for CISPA on a site to send her a letter, I wonder... I think I need to re-do a new letter to her just to be sure. As they say on the news, "F***ing Sh**."

MelissaWV
04-22-2013, 03:59 PM
~b~u~m~p~

sdsubball23
04-23-2013, 02:27 PM
do you guys believe if this passed, that our ability to discuss the liberty movement online would be threated?

Bastiat's The Law
04-23-2013, 02:28 PM
Make those phones ring off the hook.

Bern
04-23-2013, 03:00 PM
do you guys believe if this passed, that our ability to discuss the liberty movement online would be threated?

Your ability would not be threatened, but it might be chilled. This bill gives FedGov a powerful tool to track anyone expressing political dissent (of any flavor).

DGambler
04-23-2013, 03:23 PM
Your ability would not be threatened, but it might be chilled. This bill gives FedGov a powerful tool to track anyone expressing political dissent (of any flavor).

Private VPN in another country + TOR would help in situations where you want maximum privacy. Couple that with PGP for your emails and for the most part you should be protected.

Lucille
04-25-2013, 03:03 PM
CISPA DOA in the Senate, For Now
http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/25/cispa-doa-in-the-senate-for-now


A representative of the Senate committee that would have to hold hearings on the cybersecurity bill CISPA, passed last week by the House, said the committee won’t be taking the legislation up, according to U.S. News. President Obama has threatened a veto, though the Democratic chairman of the committee Jay Rockefeller, certainly echoes the administration when he says CISPA is nevertheless important.

The White House’s veto threat, meanwhile, isn’t couched in a call to limit federal power, nor even in a defense of privacy, but to make sure corporations are “held accountable.” The White House is satisfied that the legislation charges the federal government with protecting privacy, essentially policing itself, but also wants corporations to be required to remove certain personal information from data shared with the federal government.

But the problem with CISPA is the sharing of data itself; terms of service govern the privacy of data shared voluntarily between consumers and corporations. As supporters of CISPA claim those corporations want this legislation, the solution would seem not to require it. Companies are free to include provisions in their privacy policies allowing for data sharing with the governments, just as consumers are free to reject them. As for the companies themselves, their cybersecurity would seem to be their responsibility, not an excuse to extend federal powers into the private sector. Hacking and other cyberattacks are already federal crimes after all.