Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

america.aljazeera.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#81

Post by jellicle »

tptacek wrote: post #56
jellicle wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Example from today's AMA is FFTF's claim that CISA "exempts itself from FOIA", making it impossible to challenge in court: they're referring to Sec 4 (d) (4) (b), which exempts from FOIA individual shared indicators, which of course must be the case, because indicators are things like compromised account names and passwords. That's all the law exempts from disclosure. Nope. The bill clearly defines "cyber threat in…

I'm not sure who you're arguing with. Are there people advocating for CISA by saying it's only about metadata? I'm not one of those people.

I'm arguing with your lies that the only thing CISA exempts from disclosure are "compromised account names and passwords".

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#82

Post by tptacek »

jellicle wrote: post #81
tptacek wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure who you're arguing with. Are there people advocating for CISA by saying it's only about metadata? I'm not one of those people.

I'm arguing with your lies that the only thing CISA exempts from disclosure are "compromised account names and passwords".

You write that as if my comment isn't right there for everyone to read. That's obviously not what I said.

I even took the time, elsewhere on the thread, to summarize all the different classes of data that CISA deems "indicators":

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10454172

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#83

Post by oceanstone »

tptacek wrote: post #52
declan wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why you were downvoted for a reasonable post citing original sources (I upvoted you to try to correct that). I expect I will disagree with you about the desirability of CISA, just as we disagreed years ago about CISPA, but enjoy your posts on the topic nevertheless. They make thoughtful and reasonable points. Even if you end up on the wrong side. :)

Just to be clear: CISA is bad. I oppose it.

How many comments have you made expressing your opposition, versus painting groups fighting CISA in a negative light?

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#84

Post by oceanstone »

tptacek wrote: post #40
gknoy wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't one collect logs of all things, under the auspices of collecting logs that (may) contain "recon activity" and "exploits"? It seems on a surface reading that one could collect all those under the umbrella of collecting Indicators, and then also use it also for things like selling-to-advertisers or other business-related things. Of course, our terms of use on most sites already say they can collect + monetize…

I'm not sure I see the part of CISA that allows you to sell your logs to advertisers. I do see lots of places in the bill that allow sharing to other private entities or to the USG for cybersecurity purposes.

Sounds like a loophole.

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#85

Post by tptacek »

oceanstone wrote: post #83
tptacek wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear: CISA is bad. I oppose it.

How many comments have you made expressing your opposition, versus painting groups fighting CISA in a negative light?

I'm not "painting" anyone. People say things that are misleading, wrong, or outright dishonest. I point them out. I don't feel any need to justify that to you.

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#86

Post by oceanstone »

tptacek wrote: post #78
oceanstone wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Virtually all of EFF's policy advocacy, I find untrustworthy. I don't even believe they take it seriously. This is an interesting conspiracy theory. > Is it really that hard for you to see that as a plausible narrative? My theory is that they really believe in what they're doing. They are based in SF, so they are surrounded by well-funded startups offering high salaries. Employees of EFF could be making small fortu…

The people doing advocacy work at EFF are generally not technologists, from what I can tell.

I'm not sure what your point is, regarding technologists.

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#87

Post by tptacek »

oceanstone wrote: post #86
tptacek wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people doing advocacy work at EFF are generally not technologists, from what I can tell.

I'm not sure what your point is, regarding technologists.

Technologists working for EFF are probably giving up outsized salaries at SFBA startups. Advocacy journalists are probably not.

I'm sure they're all good people who believe in what they're doing. It does not follow that they believe in every individual position they advocate for; they're a nonprofit, so fundraising is a huge part of their job.

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#88

Post by tptacek »

oceanstone wrote: post #84
tptacek wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I see the part of CISA that allows you to sell your logs to advertisers. I do see lots of places in the bill that allow sharing to other private entities or to the USG for cybersecurity purposes.

Sounds like a loophole.

What specific part of the bill reads like a loophole that would allow Facebook to sell its security logs to advertisers?

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#89

Post by oceanstone »

tptacek wrote: post #85
oceanstone wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many comments have you made expressing your opposition, versus painting groups fighting CISA in a negative light?

I'm not "painting" anyone. People say things that are misleading, wrong, or outright dishonest. I point them out. I don't feel any need to justify that to you.

Well, wouldn't it be more productive to write your own blog post(s) on why CISA should be opposed?

Re: Despite privacy concerns, CISA bill poised for passage

#90

Post by oceanstone »

tptacek wrote: post #88
oceanstone wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a loophole.

What specific part of the bill reads like a loophole that would allow Facebook to sell its security logs to advertisers?

I was just responding to what you'd said above:

> I do see lots of places in the bill that allow sharing to other private entities or to the USG for cybersecurity purposes.

Post reply on HN