Just tell the gun lobby that if any of the Gun Shops keep an online database of their customers that's subject to the law. No need to worry about a national gun registry, the GOV gets it for free. Get the NRA involved and ALL OF CONGRESS will run screaming about how this goes against the 2nd Amendment.
Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
11–20 of 113 posts
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#12One of the biggest (and most frustrating) problems with the legislative process is that the people who really want this to go through KNOW that we - "the masses" - eventually start to suffer from "protest exhaustion". They can propose a bill - we can rally our troops and get on TV and black out Wikipedia and do 100 interviews and maybe - just maybe - we can kill it. The first time. And maybe the second time. And mayb…
I worry that most of the opposition to this bill is based on FUD that EFF is spreading. Having experience actually working in the security industry and knowing the limitations that this bill is trying to address, the ability of the government and private sector to work together to keep malicious groups out of their networks, I recognize the necessity and intentions of this bill.
This isn't about spying on Americans. This isn't SOPA with a new name. This isn't about stopping piracy or spying on your facebook profile. This bill is about letting government agencies share intelligence on network threats with private companies so those companies can protect their customers information. None of the agencies or companies involved want to share any private information about their citizens or customers. There are lots of lawyers involved in the process to ensure that doesn't happen.
I wonder if some of that exhaustion is also what leads people to not read the bill or understand the context and just assume it's another anti-piracy bill.
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#13One of the biggest (and most frustrating) problems with the legislative process is that the people who really want this to go through KNOW that we - "the masses" - eventually start to suffer from "protest exhaustion". They can propose a bill - we can rally our troops and get on TV and black out Wikipedia and do 100 interviews and maybe - just maybe - we can kill it. The first time. And maybe the second time. And mayb…
I really don't think these kinds of bills will end until there is an amendment passed expressly guarenteeing rights relating to internet (or, perhaps more broadly, network) freedom. In fact, I doubt even that will stop these kinds of laws from being introduced. However, it will give a firm and easy foothold to dismissing them. Similarly, it will become that much easier to retroactively have them removed if they viola…
You need a heck of a lot more than a legal hacker to get a Constitutional Amendment passed.
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't think these kinds of bills will end until there is an amendment passed expressly guarenteeing rights relating to internet (or, perhaps more broadly, network) freedom. In fact, I doubt even that will stop these kinds of laws from being introduced. However, it will give a firm and easy foothold to dismissing them. Similarly, it will become that much easier to retroactively have them removed if they viola…
You need a heck of a lot more than a legal hacker to get a Constitutional Amendment passed.
Step one is to get a good, versatile amendment written. For that, you need a "legal hacker". Step 2 is getting support, which probably would not be particularly difficult. Step 3 is actually going through process, and is probably the most difficult step.
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#15One of the biggest (and most frustrating) problems with the legislative process is that the people who really want this to go through KNOW that we - "the masses" - eventually start to suffer from "protest exhaustion". They can propose a bill - we can rally our troops and get on TV and black out Wikipedia and do 100 interviews and maybe - just maybe - we can kill it. The first time. And maybe the second time. And mayb…
Go on the offensive. Instead of just fighting to kill legislation like CISPA, lobby for legislation that will guarantee the freedom of the internet. That will unequivocally protect people's liberties on (and off) the internet.
Getting such a law passed does nothing to prevent a future law from saying the opposite.
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#16One of the biggest (and most frustrating) problems with the legislative process is that the people who really want this to go through KNOW that we - "the masses" - eventually start to suffer from "protest exhaustion". They can propose a bill - we can rally our troops and get on TV and black out Wikipedia and do 100 interviews and maybe - just maybe - we can kill it. The first time. And maybe the second time. And mayb…
I worry that most of the opposition to this bill is based on FUD that EFF is spreading. Having experience actually working in the security industry and knowing the limitations that this bill is trying to address, the ability of the government and private sector to work together to keep malicious groups out of their networks, I recognize the necessity and intentions of this bill. This isn't about spying on Americans.…
What are the current barriers to agencies sharing intelligence with private companies? Can you give an anonymized/abstract example, where the FBI/etc might have actionable info about a 'cyber threat', and under current law can't pick up the phone or send an email warning private companies?
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#17One of the biggest (and most frustrating) problems with the legislative process is that the people who really want this to go through KNOW that we - "the masses" - eventually start to suffer from "protest exhaustion". They can propose a bill - we can rally our troops and get on TV and black out Wikipedia and do 100 interviews and maybe - just maybe - we can kill it. The first time. And maybe the second time. And mayb…
Go on the offensive. Instead of just fighting to kill legislation like CISPA, lobby for legislation that will guarantee the freedom of the internet. That will unequivocally protect people's liberties on (and off) the internet.
The special interests behind legislation like CISPA have professional lobbyists and millions of dollars to pay them. If you're a private citizen and want a law passed at the federal level, you need to have a cute and young white child who died due to something your law legislates against. Otherwise you don't stand a chance of being heard.
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go on the offensive. Instead of just fighting to kill legislation like CISPA, lobby for legislation that will guarantee the freedom of the internet. That will unequivocally protect people's liberties on (and off) the internet.
Getting such a law passed does nothing to prevent a future law from saying the opposite.
Unless you amend the Constitution. Good luck!
EDIT: Another option is for the courts to decide that freedom was guaranteed in the Constitution all along. But courts are unpredictable so again, good luck!
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#19Supporters include companies like AT&T, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Oracle Corporation, Symantec, Verizon, and Microsoft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Intelligence_Sharing_and_... I'm envisioning a web dashboard that lets federal agents do fuzzy queries on individuals, to see all the sites visited, emails sent, web searches, browsing habits, etc, from all the IP addresses used by the given individual in the past seve…
Don't forget an "add person to cyber threat watchlist" button!
It should automatically advise internet services that a person/account may be trouble, thus granting those private companies the blanket "exemption from liability... for decisions made based on cyber threat information identified, obtained, or shared under this [law]." (That's one of the most concerning vague and elastic provisions in the current proposed bill text.)
There should also be a 'redress number' subsystem, for when people on the watchlist start noticing their accounts being restricted or disabled, and want to make the case they're not the bad guy the agent who pressed the button thought they were.
Re: Civil Liberties Groups Speak Out Against CISPA in Lead Up to Hearings
#20Supporters include companies like AT&T, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Oracle Corporation, Symantec, Verizon, and Microsoft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Intelligence_Sharing_and_... I'm envisioning a web dashboard that lets federal agents do fuzzy queries on individuals, to see all the sites visited, emails sent, web searches, browsing habits, etc, from all the IP addresses used by the given individual in the past seve…
I would bet, at least for the NSA and probably the FBI, this already exists. It just isn't quite as real-time as they would like it to be. Instead of the instant fuzzy-search, it's a couple of quick letters, but the oversight seems to be about the same.