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 151-180 of 224 total comments.

mywhitehouse 10/02/2009 7:23am

All of these clowns are corrupt, please sign our petition. The right is only mad because the left now has the control of the corruption.

http://mywhitehouse.org/dont-tread-on-me/

cskrmetti 04/10/2010 10:07am

I am researching this bill for a college paper that I am writing. At first I was a little less interested in this bill as it was something that just fit the criteria that I was working in. However, I as I read the bill, I became more interested. While I agree that we do need to invest in Cybersecurity Defense, I cannot agree with this bill as is. First it places too much of the responsibility on the Secretary of Commerce. While it is obviously that preventing disruption to commercial networks (financial specifically) is very important, there are several more police-type agencies already in existence that would be more qualified and better equipped. More importantly, as this bill is written, it allows far to much interpretation as to what constitutes a critical “private” network and specifically allows government run clearing house to collect data from these ambiguously defined networks without regard to current law and statue. It also allows too much freedom for the Executive Branch…

Anonymous 01/19/2010 7:28am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_-nLI5w4Pk………………………..NO GUNS NO FREEDOM..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!YOU SUIT BOYS ARE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JustinCA 04/02/2011 7:34am

Unbelievable… DO NOT support this bill. This is a blatant attempt to gain control via information, and believe that’s where all the power is. The more information you give up, the more power you don’t have. Next you know, they’ll want to read your mail before you… That’s what they do to people in prison!

shortsaleassist.org
U.S.A.P.

jxfaughn 04/06/2011 9:52am
in reply to Koristar Feb 19, 2010 11:27am

On another note regarding the IT admin and security, it is common knowledge that the government “hires” hackers commonly to assist in its security.

cyberbillwatcher 06/09/2011 9:21am

ROCKEFELLER and his uncle David Rockefeller are the top illuminati in the U.S. and the internet is ruining their plans of the GLOBAL NWO takeover, and enslavement of people. They are DIRECTLY responsible for all these wars and the bankster thefts from Treasury to Wall Street. The Rockefeller Foundation financially backs 95% depopulation via toxic vaccines and chemtrails. He will CONTINUE to propose bills of this type unless he leaves congress. Vote fraud will keep him in. I’m OUTRAGED by his even proposing this bill. The U.S. is NOT secure BECAUSE OF congress’ open border policies. The internet has nothing to do with it, except to awaken people to his family’s EVIL. Rockefeller should turn his FULL ATTENTION to the ILLEGALS CROSSING THE BORDERS with no hindrance from Homeland INSecurity. THINK ABOUT IT: Has Senator Rockefeller EVER proposed anything GOOD for the American people?

jpope 11/06/2009 8:53am

Giving the President “emergency” authority to control the internet? REALLY?!?!?!? HAS ANYONE REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT THIS? WHERE DO MOST AMERICANS GET THEIR NEWS AND INFORMATION THESE DAYS? THE INTERNET!!!!!!! It sounds to me like someone wants to be able to keep the public in the dark.
This concept grossly over steps the boundaries set in place to keep the government in check.

tbgallien 10/16/2009 3:45pm
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.

pramsey 09/08/2009 2:43pm
in reply to rightwingextremist Apr 23, 2009 4:21pm

I’ve been saying that ever since BHO started campaigning! Glad I’m not the only one that has recognized this parallel. They should make Atlas Shrugged High School reading requirement, if that still exists. Although this has nothing to do with the subject bill, it has everything to do with the general philosophy. Atlas Shrugged and Fountain Head are must reads!

VincentGaines 11/09/2009 10:11am

Bush would’ve just claimed ‘executive priviledge’ on this and
rammed it down your throats…

rmcc4444 04/03/2009 10:03pm

The is only one discussion that needs to be had. Does government have the Constitutional authority to do this? HELL NO. Quit wasting time talking about if it might or might not work.

xander1776 01/04/2010 5:24am

Remember Katrina disaster & 2nd NRA is Suing Your pants off expect the same if you ever passed this

xander1776 01/04/2010 5:21am

The Rockefeller Cyber security bill makes it clear that the president’s authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster.
[Wording too vague this gives way to much power to feds] NO

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
I would like to introduce a bill that brings back Canning in the senate and house, We need a few people who know the constitution and want to protect it too give these people a good beating and then throw the constitution on them after their ass is wupped. The first amendment covers this and a natural disaster or severe attack dose not supersede the rights of the of the people or freedom of speech.

LederSko 04/05/2009 1:18pm

Seriously? The bills they are trying to push through now go so far beyond CRAZY that something has to be done to stop them !!!

hellifiknow 03/31/2010 6:20am
in reply to Koristar Feb 19, 2010 11:27am

Like your comment but would interject one thing….. “their own” should be
“our own”… we the people of America its our government not some mysterious “their”…lol

xander1776 01/04/2010 5:21am

Remember Katrina disaster & 2nd NRA is Seeing Your pants off expect the same if you ever passed this

xander1776 01/04/2010 5:01am

All I see in this bill, is whole bunch of extra red tap and costs that will be passed on to the tax payer at the federal and state levels and many of us having to pay higher bills to our isp so they can maintain these high standards, I see major motivation in this bill is to hand out billion dollar contracts to our buddies. NO

thecat 04/12/2009 2:37am

This is another way Obama’s group can control the information reveived by the American people. He’s already trying to control radio, television and the newspapers. He does’t want the people to know what’s really going on, and obviously neither to some of the Senators and Congressmen, that may be the only way they can preserve their positions. Everyone knows Knowledge is power, and they are trying to control the Knowledge. As far as internet security, if you want it secure, don’t put in on the internet. You have no privacy on the internet, telephones or cell phones.It’s for communications, not secret information…………..

thecat 04/12/2009 2:51am

As far as the Rockefellers go, they have not had to go through the same life as the general public, like so many other of the Senators and Congressmen. Their arrogance to think that they really know what’s best for this Country is ridiculous. If you want to help something, donate your money to medical research, or the prevent the cruelty to animals, but don’t whine about how badly you think your family has been labeled over the years.

MrJonson 01/03/2010 3:41pm

I think Americans have to wake up and get this Agent of the NWO out of government. This bill is preparing for when they push the Martial Law button to prevent communication between patriots; which they shall label terrorists because we oppose their World Government Bank.

LucasFoxx 04/13/2010 7:52pm
in reply to eliebig Apr 13, 2010 6:59am

Those are certianly not ignorant considerations.

The standards you mention are just that: standards for best practices. What this bill does is pushes the Executive and Legislative branches to gather information from sources like you’ve cited, and to inventory what should be considered national security, and seeks processes by which critical infrastructure can be best protected.

I’m not sure what costs you are referring to (Sec 4.11.1 and 2, Sec 5.6.a.)

As a security professional, your certifications are constantly evolving. All this means is that there will be national standards which only effects the providers of your certifications and what you will need to know to be certified.

On one hand, I agree: Sarbanes-Oxley is a quarterly pain in the ass. On the other hand, S-O has probably saved investors and employees (and probably taxpayers at large) millions (if not billions) in loses because of the slacker/hackers in the IT departments of publicly traded companies.

LBPruitt 04/27/2009 5:00pm

Please call the sponsors of this bill as well as your Senators. Numbers count to them. It seems like we are not doing anything, but in fact we are. If each of us would encourage at least 10-20 others to call and encourage them to do the same it will add up. Keep a data base of all your friends and family that are like minded. Create a data base of your own and get other people to act. We can’t give up. We have to fight this!

TheBillGuy 03/12/2010 11:09pm
in reply to mel Apr 09, 2009 5:16am

faxing them, e-mailing them, TEA party protests, mailing and e-mailing all of my friends, family and e-mail contacts……………what else do we do??
All these are good ideas. Posters work to. We can also use our voting power at the polls. If our elected representatives aren’t working for us, fire them!

kevinmcc 05/07/2009 11:32am

SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.

Just read that section. This bill is so stupid.

No wonder congress is not getting things done, they think the virtual world is real life too.

Abramsgavin 03/23/2010 9:56pm
in reply to cadaverousmob Apr 07, 2009 6:17pm

That big bully bastard just start calling David Rockefeller 3BR

SilkWhispers 06/24/2009 10:51am

Hm. I’m not seeing the words “government” or “federal” mentioned anywhere, but I’m sure as seeing a lot of “public”, “private”, and “commerce”, words oft associated with Freedoms..

Simultaneously need to be keeping an eye out on that rumored deal where DC has expressed extreme interest in controlling the laying of the future (highspeed) Internet..

BLD 08/28/2009 12:10pm
in reply to rmcc4444 Apr 03, 2009 10:02pm

I wish someone would file a suit to challenge the appointment of these czars and some of these other actions. A good start would have been for the CEO of GM to challenge his dismissal. At some point they have to get so overly confident with their actions that they violate the Constitution and someone will file. My hope is that someday he does something that could rise to the level of an impeachable offense at a time when Repubs/moderates are in power and can get him out.

HenryMorgan 07/05/2009 6:55am

The federal government has no right to interfere with communications and the dissemination of information. Aside from that, did anyone notice that the committee would report to the president? Were this a legal thing in the first place, the appropriate place for them to report to would be Congress!

kcman011 10/21/2009 10:35am

So, this is basically the iPatriot Act.

justamick 11/11/2009 3:16am
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to Psalm14 Oct 21, 2009 9:00am

Well, he hasnt broken any law so there is no way to do that. (although his Czars come close but still dont brake any laws. I think we should watch it carefully and ensure that it doesnt happen.)


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