H.R.3523 - Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011

To provide for the sharing of certain cyber threat intelligence and cyber threat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities, and for other purposes. view all titles (4)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To provide for the sharing of certain cyber threat intelligence and cyber threat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 as introduced.
  • Short: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act as reported to house.
  • Short: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act as passed house.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

rkw6086 06/19/2012 8:29pm
in reply to sparticvs Apr 09, 2012 12:05am

It’s not to censor. This bill removes all laws protecting your right to privacy on the internet, making it easier for big government to get access to your information on the web (through social networks, for example) without need of a warrant. Essentially, giving uncle same back door access to your information whenever he want, for whatever reason he so chooses.

JonSux6969 05/02/2012 2:47pm
in reply to kbthiede Apr 26, 2012 10:35pm

Mom?

JonSux6969 05/02/2012 2:46pm
in reply to biercenator Apr 29, 2012 8:29pm

You are a stupid idiot

JonSux6969 05/02/2012 2:46pm

Sometimes when I’m alone I like to cover myself in wet cardboard and do the hokey pokey

biercenator 04/29/2012 8:29pm

This bill is a disaster, for a very simple reason. It contemplates government reliance on data provided voluntarily by private companies. The companies concerned are multinational. Down the road, we can expect these firms to have similar arrangements with other governments. Think it through. How does that contribute to the national security of the US?

kbthiede 04/26/2012 10:35pm

Welcome to the 4th Reich

4 [18 USC § 231 – Civil disorders]
(3) Whoever commits or attempts to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) Nothing contained in this section shall make unlawful any act of any law enforcement officer which is performed in the lawful performance of his official duties.
[L:How’s that OWS workin’ out for ya?]

Perposterown 04/23/2012 2:46pm
in reply to Perposterown Apr 23, 2012 2:44pm

The people should not fear the government, the government should fear it’s peole. It feels like the US government is slowly taking away our freedoms so we will eventually have no more democracy.

richdick 04/23/2012 2:46pm

This national security thing has got to stop. If the government has the power to do anything for national security, they can take anything. Don’t give up your freedom for security.

Perposterown 04/23/2012 2:44pm

This bill is disgraceful and is essentially taking the constitution, rolling it up, spiting on it, and lighting it on fire. In this day and age, anonymity is something people need to be able to voice their mind without the fear of retaliation. The internet is a HUGE place for free speach. This bill takes away your privacy and is so broadly written that anything may be considered cyber terrorism which will in turn, infringe your right to freedom of speach. When will they realise that any bill that has to do with the internet is bad for the US citizens, bad for corporations, bad for small business, and most of all bad for the US economy? I guess they won’t ever see that and I guess these corporations that support the bill don’t understand that it WILL have a major negative impact on their business and may drive some companies to bankruptcy. A lot of bussiness is done online these days and if people are being watched, they will be reluctant to go online to do anything out of fear.

harv027 04/23/2012 2:07pm

Obama announces crackdown on Iran and Syria’s cyber oppressors

US president signs executive order targeting people and firms that help authoritarian regimes clamp down on dissidents

i wonder if the order “allows any private company or government organization that gets this clearance authorization to monitor and collect everything we do over the internet or their controlled assets AND share it with any other organization or company” ?

JamesLaCombe 04/21/2012 11:25pm
in reply to JamesLaCombe Apr 21, 2012 11:24pm

Essentially, CISPA would deem all existing privacy laws null and void for “cybersecurity” purposes.

Once the government has this information, there are no meaningful restrictions on its use, as its only qualifier is that it must be related to “cybersecurity” or to protect “national security.”

Finally, while the bill includes a requirement for the Director of National Intelligence’s Inspector General to issue annual reports on how the government is using the information shared under the bill, such reports would only be provided to congressional intelligence committees.

These reports would not constitute meaningful restrictions or do anything to dissuade the misuse of personal information shared under CISPA.

This fight won’t have the glamour or media attention that SOPA and PIPA received, so please take action immediately and show Congress the liberty movement is serious about defending our constitutionally protected rights no matter the odds.

JamesLaCombe 04/21/2012 11:24pm

Unfortunately, it would allow the transfer of vast amounts of data, including information like your Internet browsing history or email content, to any agency in the federal government, including non-civilian agencies such as the National Security Agency or the Department of Defense Cyber Command.

One major problem with these alleged “cybersecurity” bills is their overly broad focus on what information private companies are encouraged to share with federal agencies.

CISPA currently contains no incentive for private companies like Facebook or Google to remove personally identifiable information from data they share.

In addition, the way this legislation is drafted, it currently overrides privacy presumptions found in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the Communications Act regarding the privacy of an individual’s online communications and related records.

knightenvy 04/21/2012 9:12am

This bill is dangerous for many reasons. To make it simple, I will use a list.

Allows private companies to give information to government to help stop cyber crimes.

In order to determine this, private companies are allowed to monitor and filter any information.

Should the private company give the information to the government, the user has little or now recourse to go after the company for invasion of privacy regardless of damages done.

Government (as of last revision) has to use the information for cyber security, but as long as that criteria is met, it can be used for any other reason or given to any government agency.

The bill does not adequately define just what cyber security purpose is.

The bill does not dictate a specific agency to use the information (you do not want the NSA to get anything).

The NSA and other government agencies can take actions outside the bills scope if they see fit.

Lastly, the bill states that it overrides ALL OTHER PRIVACY LAWS!

walker7 04/21/2012 12:38am

Stop trying to regulate the Internet.

Stop trying to censor the Internet.

Stop trying to control the Internet.

JUST STOP IT!

seekingthetruth 04/19/2012 3:43pm

This bill, like SOPA and PIPA and others to follow all have the same intention. That is, for “legal” surveillance of Americans under the guise of helping us against an invented adversary. We have been bombarded with a barrage of heavy artillery meant to continuously erode our civil liberties and get us used to being watched. Another step into the abyss of an Orwellian State as would be the goal.

ElliottZ 04/17/2012 1:55am

I think I could possibly support a bill that used very specific language and was extremely careful not to allow any abuse of freedom. As of now this bill is not specific enough. The internet is far too precious for retaining a free and open society to place restrictions on it. I do not buy into the Government’s fear tactics. I also happen to know that the internet allows more artists to compete with big corporations. That seems to be the main reason why corporations want to “protect” intellectual property. It seems like they want to limit competition and stay rich.

susanherrera777 04/09/2012 11:30pm
Link Reply
+ 10
in reply to sparticvs Apr 09, 2012 12:05am

You have to understand that the internet imposes a threat to National Security (as per the US Government) so they have to create any kind of bill possible in order to so called “censor” , or “secure”, or “protect”, us and themselves. Its all just another sham. The internet is a open book resource. Its actually, for the people, by the people. Hey, just like our American Government books in High School used to say until we woke up to the reality that our present Government is for Corporations and NOT FOR THE PEOPLE OR BY THE PEOPLE. WE HAVE STRAYED FAR FAR FROM OUR CONSTITUTION. WHY DON’T THEY JUST LEAVE THE INTERNET IN PEACE. We are not doing anyone harm by enjoying the liberties thereof.

sircurmudgeon 04/09/2012 4:52pm
Link Reply
+ 11
in reply to sparticvs Apr 09, 2012 12:05am

I’m uncertain about censorship, but it allows any private company or government organization that gets this clearance authorization to monitor and collect everything we do over the internet or their controlled assets AND share it with any other organization or company (with similar authorization) without legal recourse to sue them as long as they can prove their actions were in ‘good faith’ whatever that means. There is no legal requirement to inform anyone using their services that they participate in this practice, nor offer who they participate in information sharing with.

Also, they get to decide what the conditions are for selecting who and what to monitor, collect, and share. This is very open ended language that is virtually carte blanche permission to do whatever they want with our information. This makes facebook privacy issues look like a joke.

I wouldn’t feel protected at all. I would feel less safe. Normally, this level of data access would require a warrant from a judge.

sparticvs 04/09/2012 12:05am

I don’t see anything wrong with this bill, someone highlight which part of the text that would allow the government to censor the Internet…


Vote on This Bill

2% Users Support Bill

8 in favor / 461 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments