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

Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 230 posts

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#71

Post by tptacek »

dhimes wrote: post #68
tptacek wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are reasons not to like CISA. I'm pretty irritated by it: I think organizations like Fight For The Future organized a campaign against CISPA based on a whole lot of FUD, and for their efforts got us a law that actually justifies (a very little bit) of that FUD. Unlike CISPA, CISA allows shared information to be used for law enforcement purposes. Ideally, threat information shared with the government should be u…

Law enforcement outside of cyber security? OK, I did miss that. Thanks.

Law enforcement can use indicators to RESPOND TO, PREVENT or MITIGATE "an imminent threat of death, serious bodily harm, or serious economic harm" (e.g. almost anything), but can only use it to assist in the PROSECUTION of identity theft, trade secret theft, or espionage.

(PCNA had broader language that enabled prosecutions of a variety of crimes with indicator data).

Again, CISPA, the bill FFTF takes credit for killing, had none of this language.

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#73

Post by oceanstone »

bradleyankrom wrote: post #66
robotkilla wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm honestly starting to think sander's is our last hope -- I was on the fence until seeing this. Meanwhile he is getting undermined by the media.

Not to mention the DNC.

"Remove Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC Chair" http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/remove-debbie-wasserman?sou... 40,491 signatures so far

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#74

Post by tptacek »

zanny wrote: post #10
mixedmath wrote: post #5

There have been very many versions of laws similar to CISA that have been proposed, modified, and changed/passed/failed/delayed. When I try to understand exactly what this CISA version includes, most rhetoric I read is alarmist and not conducive to actually knowing what can and cannot be done under CISA. Is there a digestible explanation of what this CISA entails?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersecurity_Information_Shar... The core problem is it lets major industry players like MS / Google / Apple give the fed access to all the personal info they record without investigators needing a warrant and with no liability on the companies part (ie, you cannot sue them for state disclosure of your personal info that then resulted in harm against you). It basically means do not be s…

There is no way to have actually read the short text of CISA and come away with the conclusion that it "lets major industry players like MS / Google / Apple give the fed access to all the personal info they record without investigators needing a warrant and with no liability on the companies part".

No part of this summary squares with the text of the bill: not the kinds of information shared, nor the methods by which it's shared. Just for absolute ground-floor starters, CISA private->government sharing is PUSH, not PULL, and there is no mechanism whatsoever for the government to request (even by asking nicely) any indicator data.

Wherever you got this summary from, they just fucking made it up.

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#75

Post by bratsche »

robotkilla wrote: post #60
randomname2 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 14 votes against, FWIW: Baldwin (D-WI) Booker (D-NJ) Brown (D-OH) Coons (D-DE) Franken (D-MN) Leahy (D-VT) Markey (D-MA) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Paul (R-KY) Sanders (I-VT) Udall (D-NM) Warren (D-MA) Wyden (D-OR) https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151022/10133932597/cisa-...

I'm honestly starting to think sander's is our last hope -- I was on the fence until seeing this. Meanwhile he is getting undermined by the media.

There's a group of tech volunteers working on apps to try to help out his campaign. I'm sure they would welcome any additional help from HN people.

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#76

Post by tptacek »

ck2 wrote: post #12

By the way, I haven't heard CNN or NBC mention CISA once this week. So apparently corporate media has no problem with CISA for some reason. Since congress rarely write their own laws and let the industry write it for them - who actually wrote CISA ? There's no way congress would know what to ask for. Did the NSA write CISA?

Like everyone else, CNN covered CISA aggressively when it passed the Senate in October; they even called it "historic".

They're not covering it now because this is boring procedural stuff. There's no story this week. Obama has been on record all year saying he'd sign it. The one dramatic thing that could have happened --- a showdown between the House and Senate over whether the language would be closer to the (bad) PCNA bill --- didn't happen.

All you're noticing is that CNN isn't covering a nonstory.

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#77

Post by tptacek »

twoodfin wrote: post #58
merpnderp wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's useful to note that Paul Ryan gained his position by saying shady backroom deals like this, plus giving Congress almost no time to read and think about the bill themselves, were the exact things he promised to stop. So his very first act as speaker is to break every single promise he made to become speaker.

It's useful to note that Paul Ryan gained his position by saying shady backroom deals like this, plus giving Congress almost no time to read and think about the bill themselves, were the exact things he promised to stop. He did? I thought he got the job (after much cajoling) because he was the only candidate the moderate and right wings of the GOP could agree on.

Yes. He had to be courted; the House Freedom Caucus had to make concessions for him to accept the job. The modal HN user has either a DailyKos or RedState (mostly Kos) understanding of US politics.

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#78

Post by DanielBMarkham »

tptacek wrote: post #45

CISA passed the Senate with almost 3:1 bipartisan support in October. PCNA, the House's (worse) version of CISA, passed with similar margins in April. Obama has publicly supported the bill all year. As much as HN and Twitter wants to believe CISA was enacted in some shady backroom deal, the process that actually occurred, including publicly available amendments and months-long review, is pretty close to "Schoolhouse…

I must disagree. I believe you are overstating things.

Schoolhouse rocks, last I checked, had one bill moving from one house to the other. Citizens could lobby at any point, including the conference committee.

Each of these were passed in isolation, then stuck together, then stuck into a budget bill. Then the only question was whether you wanted the entire bill to pass or not.

It's a fair interpretation to say that some reasonable public feedback -- if nothing else than what kinds of compromises needed to occur between both bills -- was missing from the mash-up we got this past week. Yes, majorities approved of similar bills in both houses. But there was no point in time where the public was informed "Hey, this is your last chance if you want to change what's going to go into the law"

Another way of looking at this is asking this question: if we're going to use the rules for budget bills on everything else that might be controversial, why have conference committees at all? Just pass kinda the same thing in each house and then look for the right political moment and the right combination of things to lump together so that you can do whatever you want to.

This is just leadership writing laws. If they want to do things like that, fine. I believe the logical conclusion is that we should start having direct election of house and senate leadership.

Re: Obama Signs CISA Bill into Law

#79

Post by steve19 »

robotkilla wrote: post #60
randomname2 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 14 votes against, FWIW: Baldwin (D-WI) Booker (D-NJ) Brown (D-OH) Coons (D-DE) Franken (D-MN) Leahy (D-VT) Markey (D-MA) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Paul (R-KY) Sanders (I-VT) Udall (D-NM) Warren (D-MA) Wyden (D-OR) https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151022/10133932597/cisa-...

I'm honestly starting to think sander's is our last hope -- I was on the fence until seeing this. Meanwhile he is getting undermined by the media.

When do I remember hearing that before.... back in 2008. Everyone was saying the exact same thing. If you really expect Sanders will be any different if he gets in power, you are kidding yourself.

If anything he is being undermined by the DNC, not the media. The DNC should be ashamed of themselves for thier blatant support of one candidate over the other(s) .

Post reply on HN