OpenCongress Blog

Blog Feed Comments Feed More RSS Feeds

Lieberman Cybersecurity Bill Would Give DHS Broad Emergency Powers Over the Internet

June 14, 2010 - by Donny Shaw

Senate Democrats began their cybersecurity efforts this session of Congress with a bill from Sen. John Rockefeller [D, WV], S.773, that would have given the President unilateral authority to “limit or shutdown” traffic to any part of the internet he deems “critical” in an emergency situation. That didn’t fly with anyone.

Next came a major amendment to the bill from Rockefeller and Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME] as it went through the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. The amendment would require the President to develop an emergency “response and restoration” plan in coordination with private companies that could be implemented in the case of a presidentially-declared cybersecurity emergency. The revision did not explicitly grant the President “shutdown” powers (though it also did not explicitly prohibit them) and it added a few safeguards and oversight measures. But, alas, it seems to have stalled over civil liberties concerns as well.

Now, Sen. Joe Lieberman [I, CT] is stepping onto the cybersecurity legislation scene with his fresh, new Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010. He just introduced it on June 10 and it’s already scheduled for its first hearing in Lieberman’s Homeland Security Committee, tomorrow.

So, how does it do on protecting civil liberties and an open internet during cybersecurity emergencies?

The bill directs the director of the new National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications, which would be housed in the Department of Homeland Security, to establish a process by which the owners and operators of “critical infrastructure” can develop their own “response plans for a national cybersecurity emergency.” This follows the general direction of the bill, which puts more control in the hands of the companies that own private internet infrastructure, and less in the hands of government officials. There is very little in the bill describing what these emergency response plans should be, nor is there much in the bill describing the process the Director should be setting up for facilitating the plans.

But here’s the catch. Under Sec. 249, “National Cyber Emergencies,” if the President issues a declaration of national cyber emergency, all affected critical infrastructure will be required to implement their response plans, but the new DHS Cybersecurity Director will also be given broad power to “develop and coordinate emergency measures or actions necessary to preserve the reliable operation, and mitigate or remediate the consequences of the potential disruption, of covered critical infrastructure.” Owners and operators of critical infrastructure would be required to “immediately comply” with whatever emergency measures or actions the NCCC deems necessary.

Cyber attacks typically constitute attempts to interrupt reliable operation of critical infrastructure, so these emergency measures to preserve reliable operation may well require limiting or shutting down access to certain areas. There are absolutely no guidelines in the bill restricting such measures or preventing them from being, basically, kill switches, though the bill does state that they must “represent the least disruptive means feasible.”

All emergency measures and cyber emergency designations expire automatically after 30 days under the bill, but the NCCC Director or the President can extend the emergency designation indefinitely in 30-day intervals if they certify in writing that a threat still exists.

The text of the bill is not yet readable online, but you can download a 197-page PDF of it here. According to Tech Daily Dose, after tomorrow’s hearing, this bill could move fast. “The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the bill on Tuesday and Lieberman said he aims to markup the legislation the following week. He added that Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has indicated he wants to move cybersecurity legislation this year.”

Like this post? Stay in touch by following us on Twitter, joining us on Facebook, or by Subscribing with RSS.
 

Comments

Spam Comment

Chris51 07/03/2010 10:16pm

REPUBLICAN FILIBUSTER ON UI EXT BILLS!
Why don’t our Senators get that there is a great need?

The job market is broken.
The corporate executives are not going to give up their year-end profit bonus by adding jobs/payroll to their companies.

Here are a few stories on our jobless nation:

Job recovery hits a wall
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/02/news/economy/jobs_june/index.htm

Job gloom at all time high
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/03/news/economy/discouraged_workers/index.htm

7.9 million jobs lost- many forever
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/02/news/economy/jobs_gone_forever/index.htm

Jobless claims spike
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/01/news/economy/jobless_claims/index.htm

Thousands at risk for losing unemployment benefits
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/money/job_news/unemployment-benefits-jeopardy-6-28-2010

Chris51 07/01/2010 9:53am
in reply to justamick Jun 15, 2010 6:37am

Corporations have increased their cash reserves to $1.84 TRILLION, THE HIGHEST FIGURE IN HISTORY! Big business and the banks, after an unprecedented bailout by the public treasury, are hoarding the funds (Americans pay this back on their IRS tax bill). BIG CORPORATIONS EXECUTIVES ARE MAKING BIG BONUSES AND GETTING SALARY INCREASES FOR SHOWING HUGE PROFITS. The cash reserves of major corporations have jumped 26 percent in one year, the largest percentage increase in nearly 60 years. The cash reserves of working people, and particularly the unemployed, have not been so fortunate.

REPUBLICANS bloc, the SENATE vote and defeat sevaral proposed extension of unemployment benefits for unemployed workers. Many of these same Senators rushed through a $700 BILLION bailout of Wall Street in 2008 in a matter of days, cannot bring itself to support even the most meager subsistence for the unemployed workers who are the victims, not the perpetrators, of the economic crisis.
WWW.CHANGE.ORG

Spam Comment

Spam Comment

justamick 06/15/2010 6:37am
in reply to justamick Jun 15, 2010 6:35am

Perhaps you dont see how this could effectively be used to control or stop the flow of news from the media, blogs, discussion forums? (effectively being used to limit or eliminate free speech and/or freedom of press) As you should know from the Patriot Act, it doesn’t take much to effectively tap your phone lines and gather information that is EXPRESSLY forbidden by E.O. 12333 and the United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

Cyber security is of vital importance in an increasingly virtual world, but how far will we, US Citizens, allow the government to go to protect their IS assets?

justamick 06/15/2010 6:35am
in reply to Darryl_of_FH Jun 14, 2010 4:25pm

I dont know… maybe the provision that stipulates that the president can declare a cyber emergency and effectively shut down parts of the internet that he deems vital to national security?

No, I am not, as an Information System Security/ IT professional (among other things) I know and UNDERSTAND the vital importance of protecting the nations Information System Security assets. That does NOT mean that shutting down parts of the internet in a “cyber emergency”.

And I do, there are ways to completely close off the US Government’s Networks without shutting down the internet.

jeffshields 06/14/2010 10:42pm

Oh and I have seen and can tell you where you can find the Executive orders confirming Liebermans mentions not only on the internet but in your local library.

Darryl_of_FH 06/14/2010 4:25pm
Link Reply
+ -3
in reply to justamick Jun 14, 2010 1:37pm

Well, just, why don’t you enumerate “how far reaching” it is?

You aren’t suggesting there is no national security concerns in cyber security, are you?

And if you are rational (meaning you answered yes, cyber security is a national security issue), do you have a better suggestion on addressing it and/or a critique of the bill that will shed light on the issue instead of a politically charged whine?

justamick 06/14/2010 1:37pm

No, absolutely not. Anyone who does not see how far reaching this is, is a fool duped by a lie perpetrated by the Obama Administration and his cronies.

Due to the archiving of this blog, comment posting has been disabled.