S.773 - Cybersecurity Act of 2009

A bill to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes. view all titles (4)

All Bill Titles

  • Short: Cybersecurity Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Official: A bill to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 as introduced.

Comments Feed

Displaying 91-120 of 224 total comments.

mastermeerkat 06/21/2010 8:54pm
in reply to ericiscool Feb 11, 2010 11:59pm

(un)funny story about that….

.. joe LIEberman used the arguement that china can do it

so he wants us to be like commies.

mastermeerkat 06/21/2010 8:57pm
in reply to justamick Nov 03, 2009 4:19am

it allows the govt to block out parts of the internet or just shut it off.

like iran, saudi arabia, china, and other repressive dictatorships like that

eliebig 04/13/2010 6:59am
in reply to justamick Nov 09, 2009 5:21am

A simple question from the “ignorant opposition” – Who is going to pay for this – see Sec 4.11.1 and 2, Sec 5.6.a. What is wrong with the current NIST 800-53 standards? How about COBIT and ISO 27001? Do we need a bill to start an effort to tell us what we already have spent years on developing just to grow government? What about the "certification aspect – Sec 7.8.a – Why should the government dictate “what certification” I should hold to “practice security”. I am a security professional and my certifications apply directly to the areas of security relevant to my practice. There is way more to “security” than any single certification can cover. This type of overarching regulatory quagmire is the same as the simple roots to Sarbanes Oxley – which, for the ignorant, costs millions nay billions to support and little benefit has been appreciated as many companies still need to “restate” their earnings each year. Be careful of snake oil salesmen that try to sell you the source.

lisalart 11/03/2009 2:43pm
in reply to justamick Nov 03, 2009 4:19am

Thank god!! Glad to see there’s someone else on here who is actually reading the bill!

giovannizero 08/09/2010 8:35am
in reply to Ocyris Apr 03, 2009 12:55pm

Some provisions of this bill could be considered under the 1st amendment. I can’t speak for everything in this but net neutrality is very important. The problem right now is that ISPs can and do discriminate on the types of information their users can access. There are very few ISPs so you essentially have a corporate takeover of free speech online.


It’s important that ISPs not be allowed to discriminate traffic. Again, I haven’t read the details of this particular bill but enforcing net neutrality should not be misconstrued as a government takeover of the Internet. Net neutrality guarantees that all of us can speak freely online without ISPs tipping the scales.

Anonymous 02/17/2010 6:32am


BenjaWiz 11/17/2009 8:56am

Bad bill, bad idea vote it down.

LarryFine 08/28/2009 7:39am

We will not stand for this nonsense. The continued power grab and attempts to control every aspect of our lives has gone too far. We The People need to stand up to this government and demand they respect and adhere to the laws set forth in our Constitution.

rmpayne2 08/28/2009 12:11pm

Congress is now afraid of the people of the United States having a free and open forum to express themselves and are trying to thinly veil it as a security issue- the only security they seek to protect is thier own position and wish to squelch any opinion that may differ from thiers- this is unlawful and against the will of the people. The jack booted Nazis tried to stop free speach as well.

tbgallien 08/29/2009 2:17pm

They are afraid of people waking up.

BSCrowley 08/29/2009 12:29pm
in reply to Mrs_B Apr 10, 2009 11:39am

" Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;" is NOT the whole internet.

Do you really think that the President is going to invoke “National Security” as an excuse to shut down Pogo?? or Yahoo?? Or MyCokeRewards??

Why don’t we all try actually thinking for a few minutes??

dvlfrmdnvr 08/30/2009 6:49am

"" Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;" is NOT the whole internet."

Just to clairify critical systems would be reffering to the core routers on the internet owned by AT&T, Nortel, Qwest etc.

Technically you could shut down these routers and kill the internet, one thig no one has mentioned is that the military already has this ability in case of an attack on the U.S. after all the internet was originally built by the military. Although the executive branch could access the core routers and block private IP addresses!!

Write your senators and congressmen/congresswoman to tell them if they vote for this you will vote them out!!

mazdastuff 08/30/2009 10:34am

This bill is loosely held together with a greater intent to lock down free speech. If you are worried about the power grids, banking and such then lock down your Intranet…not our INTERNET. Career Politicians have sold us out for too long. they don’t want Term Limits…Voter Imposed Term Limits are Coming.

FallenMorgan 08/30/2009 11:49am

Anybody else smell fascism?

justamick 12/04/2009 2:39am
in reply to BenjaWiz Dec 01, 2009 5:37pm

Wow, that was the most uninformed, ignorant comment, I’ve perhaps, ever seen.

First, EXPLAIN to me how this bill inflates Big Gov’t? Second of all, did you even READ the article I posted? No? I suggest you go read it.

Let me explain this to you from an Information System (IS) Security perspective, (yes, I actually have expertise in this as I have a MSM of IS Security), the US Government’s IS is one of the most vital areas. It is of great strategic importance. What do you think happens if a Chinese hacker is able to bring down our Defense Network?!? Or maybe another network infrastructure that is of vital importance to the Government IS infrastructure?

I’ve said this, I don’t know how many times, this Bill DOES NOT govern the public internet! IT GOVERNS US GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY POLICIES!

TJWashington 03/24/2010 5:48am
in reply to lisalart Nov 03, 2009 2:42pm

Obviously advances in technology have brought us to an existence that no one could have ever imagined. That being said, the only reason our world is different socially and politically is because we have relinquished so many of our rights for the sake of convenience and security. The Constitution will always stand strong, regardless of what we are driving or what medical advances we have made. To justify the lack of consideration for the Constitution because we aren’t living the same type of lifestyle as Thomas Jefferson is ludicrous.

jgides 09/01/2009 8:32am

Correction….I meant drive my car. I’m so angry my fingers are moving faster than my eyes!!

ZAPEM 09/01/2009 8:36am

The solution is vote the people OUT who sponsor these bills. Look at the names on this bill and you can easily see they’ve been part of every scam the gov’t. has been trying to pull. These people have gone beyond arrogant. They think they’re GOD!

dcgirl 09/02/2009 6:26am
in reply to jml6m Jun 06, 2009 7:45am

Talk to the citizens of China whose government controls what they can and can’t see on the internet. This won’t be a problem for the true computer geeks but for the everyday folks that don’t know how to get around firewalls, etc. (or their ISP has simply been shut down) it will be a problem.

dcgirl 09/02/2009 6:24am
in reply to ZAPEM Sep 01, 2009 8:36am

I would love to vote out those that are sponsoring the bills, however they are not in my state. (But what all the representatives and senators do affect ALL of us.) How do we communicate with the voters that have the power to vote these guys out? What can be done about the blatant unconstitutional actions of both the executive and legislative branches? You sure can’t depend on the judicial branch since much of what they do is unconstitutional as well.

dcgirl 09/02/2009 6:21am

Remember that this administration will “not let a ‘crisis’ go to waste”. This is just another way the government is trying to seize complete control of our lives and ensure that they control all speech so that no dissent is possible.

ssanetwork 09/03/2009 10:57pm

I suspect the feds (now Socialists) will attempt to “shoe horn” this presumed power in using the Erie Doctrine that extended federal jurisdiction over all matters that traveled in “interstate commerce.” Naturally, information passed on the Internet / Intranets (it could be argued) “travels” in interstate commerce… So … watch out for this approach.

dtop2000 09/06/2009 10:31am

I don’t support this bill for one reason, this bill will allow for the continued sharing of personal information regarding the citizens of this country with foreign entities. It astounds me that data on citizens is so readily shared with other countries via the practice of offshoring/insourcing (h1b). Social security numbers, credit card numbers, addresses, names, birthdays, etc. It is apparent this practice should be deemed illegal. I would support any bill that makes illegal the practices of offshoring/insourcing (h1B) any IT function/data containing the personal information of citizens of this country. If for nothing less, than the peace of mind of the citizens.

BenjaWiz 11/17/2009 8:58am
in reply to VincentGaines Nov 09, 2009 10:11am

I couldn’t agree more and we as a people of this nation need to protect our privacy not discard it for BIG Government.

tbgallien 10/16/2009 3:05pm

Whose house of cards has the most to lose in this light of day? For those who know what I know, this bill makes total sense. Kinda like Nazi mass murderers trying to hide their past deeds and future plans from the people. The German Nazis didn’t have the internet, but they did have books. The fascists of today are one in the same. The internet is the single most powerful weapon to defend ourselves with.
If Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, amongst others, had the internet in their time, what would they have done with it? Destroying it, is too obvious. To CONTROL it, in the name of national security is an easy sell to the ignorant masses. Give it a name like CYBER SECURITY. Who can be against that? The saxon game is slow. But that is why it seems to work. Little by little, liberty will fail, if people stay ignorant in apathy. If you fail to wake up, you will love your new home. If you wake up at all, you’ll realize that you’ve lost everything. except freedom.

justamick 12/16/2009 11:58am
in reply to BenjaWiz Dec 16, 2009 5:47am

Dont confuse the Patriot Act with this Cyber Security Act. The Patriot act is a gross violation of civil liberties. All it does is exercise more control over Government IS Policies and Procedures.

TSpringer59 10/31/2009 11:48am

Any “additional Power” given to any President is a major, MAJOR, mistake. It is exactly the kind of government that we revolted away from 250 years ago. BEWARE, BEWARE!

cwhunbun 11/06/2009 4:34am

Our forefather are turning in there graves on this one! Can we please have an election to vote this man out of office. Are you sure he does not think he is the Messiah ?

TeaTossserr 11/09/2009 5:25pm

As Nero fiddled, Rome burned! Will we allow this insult to happen?
Hear that drum in the background, slowly beating but getting closer/louder? That is a call to action for patriots to once again ensure they are safe from this new form of government tyranny. It’s powers are far too easy to abuse, and too tempting!

The “handwriting is on the wall” in this bill; who is courageous enough to call-out our “representatives” on this? WHEN THE VOTE IS COUNTED, THE LIST OF SUPPORTERS will be revealing once and forever. And these new POWERS will become next to impossible to ever be changed. THINK ABOUT IT!

While the issues addressed are valid concerns, of far greater concern should be the additional powers granted SOLELY to the Executive Branch. We should be very, very concerned about these particular powers. They are too easy to abuse, and far more tempting to do so that all the gold in Fort Knox!

Anonymous 02/16/2010 5:13am
in reply to Curly Dec 18, 2009 9:40am


Vote on This Bill

6% Users Support Bill

182 in favor / 2691 opposed

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments