This is a blog post that makes two very broad claims:
1. That Chrysler can exploit CISA to avoid liability for vulnerabilities in their cars simply by sharing the flaws with the USG as an "indicator".
2. That the USG can use CISA to collude with private companies to avoid warrant requirements and spy on their customers.
Both of these points are, I think, false. I've linked upthread to the text of the bill and provided a summary. In particular, I don't think the "Chrysler reading" of the bill finds any support at all in the text; Chrysler is immunized from suits stemming from their own sharing, and even in the sharing, they are explicitly on the hook for negligence and misconduct.
If it's helpful, here's the entire limitation of liability in CISA. Notice: companies are exempt from liability for monitoring, sharing, and receipt of indicators. They aren't exempt from liability for having vulnerabilities in the first place!
6.Protection from liability
(a) Monitoring of information systems
No cause of action shall lie or be maintained in any court against
any private entity, and such action shall be promptly dismissed,
for the monitoring of information systems and information under
section 4(a) that is conducted in accordance with this Act.
(b) Sharing or receipt of cyber threat
indicators
No cause of action shall lie or be maintained in any court against
any entity, and such action shall be promptly dismissed, for the
sharing or receipt of cyber threat indicators or defensive
measures under section 4(c) if—
(1) such sharing or receipt is conducted in accordance with this
Act; and
(2) in a case in which a cyber threat indicator or defensive
measure is shared with the Federal Government, the cyber threat
indicator or defensive measure is shared in a manner that is
consistent with section 5(c)(1)(B) and the sharing or receipt, as
the case may be, occurs after the earlier of—
(A) the date on which the interim policies and procedures are
submitted to Congress under section 5(a)(1); or
(B) the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(c) Construction
Nothing in this section shall be
construed—
(1)to require dismissal of a cause of action against an entity
that has engaged in gross negligence or willful misconduct in the
course of conducting activities authorized by this Act; or
(2)to undermine or limit the availability of otherwise applicable
common law or statutory defenses.