We thought we killed all those awful, horrible destroy the Internet-type bills in SOPA, PIPA and CISPA. We might've been wrong. Like a zombie looking for human blood or a sore loser demanding a rematch, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger and Rep. Mike Rogers plan to re-introduce CISPA to the House later this year.

The problem with CISPA, or the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, that made it so damn scary was that it would've allowed any company to give away all the data its collected on you if asked by the government. Sure that sounds okay but CISPA had very vague terms and very little oversight, it could have resulted in a free for all on privacy.

When CISPA came about last year, President Obama threatened its livelihood with a veto. This time around, Ruppersberger is working with the White House to let it go through (it passed the House). He told The Hill:

"We're working on some things…working with the White House to make sure that hopefully they can be more supportive of our bill than they were the last time."

Ideally, CISPA would prevent cyberattacks from happening and make it easier for companies to share info about cyber threats and attacks. But we'll see what shape it'll really take form as it's re-introduced later this year. [The Hill]



Cyber Intelligence Act, CISPA, to be resurrected in the House

The oft-reviled Cyber Intelligence and Sharing Protection Act (CISPA) will be reintroduced in the US House of Representatives this year, according to Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) who will work with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers on the bill.

Aiming to protect the private sector from cyberattacks, CISPA would allow government agencies to share internet traffic information with technology companies to keep private corporations better informed of looming threats against digital infrastructure.

The original form of the bill was introduced and abandoned last year, but there is no word yet on what changes will be included in this version.

The move comes as the government tries to strengthen the US’ ability to wage cyber war and defend against cyberattacks.

In a Senate hearing on Thursday, outgoing US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta discussed the looming threat of cyberattacks against the US. Panetta has stated several times that the “next Pearl Harbor” will come in the form of a cyberattack.

"We're working on some things…working with the White House to make sure that hopefully they can be more supportive of our bill than they were the last time," Ruppersberger (D-Md.) told The Hill.

Ruppersberger said talks with the White House were underway, and have been positive. The congressman may be attempting to assuage the privacy and oversight concerns expressed by the White House last year as the bill was being debated on the house floor.

The Obama Administration promised to veto the bill at the time, arguing that it did not provide clear legal privacy protections to citizens and lacked independent oversight, which would undermine the public’s trust in the government.

CISPA was originally abandoned when tnternet freedom activists issued a call to arms against the bill in April of last year fresh off their victory against the Stop Online Piracy Act, another bill that critics argued would destroy online privacy and the open internet.

In a flurry of tweets, petitions, and Reddit posts, the internet began to take action against the legislation last year after Mike Masnick of Techdirt composed a blog post bringing attention to the bill. In the post Masnick articulated a pressing need to stand against the legislation before it was put to a vote on the House floor, set to take place that following month.

Masnick also drew attention to CISPA’s long list of corporate supporters that includes social media websites, telecommunications companies and government contractors.

The Electronic Frontiers Foundation came out in opposition to the bill as well, arguing that the legislation directly targeted anti-government whistleblowers.

“The language is so broad it could be used as a blunt instrument to attack websites like The Pirate Bay or WikiLeaks,” wrote Rainey Reitman of EFF.

Other opponents included Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the ACLU, Reporters Without Borders and internet pioneer Tim Berners-Lee.

One key difference between CISPA and its even more reviled counterpart SOPA was the private sector’s support for CISPA. Without companies like Google and Wikipedia standing shoulder to shoulder with individual activists, CISPA is less likely to face the same level of opposition brought out against SOPA.

However, whether it heralds a crackdown on free speech on the internet or just adds another layer of bloated bureaucracy remains to be seen.



1, 2,