"It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill," stated Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. Even Obama has admitted that the government is not prepared for an emergency. So why should the government be given more power since it has thus far not been responsible about security matters?
The government has been exceedingly lax about internet security. An new cybersecurity coordinator position supposedly would reflect a high degree of White House concern about the field. Yet, three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some pundits have wondered why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, an industry watchdog group, has already gone on record by expressing concerns about privacy for citizens. If the government regulates the internet, then the federal government will have access to all financial, health, and private data on individuals.
Section 201 permits a president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government.
This is a vaguely worded but unlimited access to private networks by the federal government. It is unprecedented in a free society to allow government agencies unlimited surveillance and the viewing of all personal and private data.
Most troubling, there are no limits on what the government can do when seizing control of the internet. This is a bad bill that should be killed in Rockefeller's committee and never see the light of day.
Cf. ByteStyle.TV
Posts
