The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, is headed to a full vote in the House of Representatives Wednesday or Thursday of this week.
CISPA passed the House Intelligence Committee last week following a closed-door debate, during which committee members approved four amendments. One particularly significant change was made which disallows the government from using information collected under CISPA for national security purposes — language opponents argued was overly vague and easily manipulatable.
However, most of the amendments which would have made a significant impact on CISPA’s privacy implications were voted down. Despite the insistence of CISPA authors Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), pictured above, that "multiple amendments were made based on input from privacy and civil liberties groups," many of those groups are still opposing the bill.
"The changes to the bill don’t address the major privacy problems we have been raising about CISPA for almost a year and a half," said Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel at the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office, in a statement. The Center for Democracy and Technology’s Greg Nojeim warns "CISPA could shift control of the federal government’s cybersecurity program for the private sector to a secretive military intelligence agency."
Apparently not content to let CISPA opponents dominate the online conversation around the technology policy bill, the House Intelligence Committee published a five-page CISPA Q&A which Ruppersberger referred to on Twitter as a "mythbuster." The document hits back against privacy advocates’ most common criticisms of CISPA, claiming the bill "has nothing to do with government surveillance" and that CISPA contains "rigorous" privacy oversight.
"During our markup, we added an amendment that expanded our privacy protections and oversight requirements by adding an extra layer of review by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board and requiring senior privacy officials from the government agencies to complete annual reviews evaluating the cyber threat information sharing regime’s effect on privacy," reads the document.
Boston Bomber Carjacking Unravels 2014 03 11 An exclusive WhoWhatWhy investigation has found serious factual inconsistencies in accounts provided by the only witness to the alleged confession of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects.
Why does this matter? Because this witness is the sole source for the entire publicly accepted narrative of who was behind the bombing and its aftermath—and why these events occurred.
In case we’ve forgotten how convoluted ...
3 Years On: Events, Questions Mark Fukushima Anniversary 2014 03 11 Three years on and the extent of the environmental, human and economic repercussions of the Fukushima incident continue to reveal themselves. Fukushima “fallout” is both literal in terms of radioactive materials, and figurative on a global scale. The politics and opinions around the nuclear issue are far from settled.
In Japan anti-nuclear sentiment runs high, with protesters recently marking the anniversary ...
Real Ukraine Issue: Rogue Reactors and Putin’s ’No-Bama’ Zone in Crimea 2014 03 11
Another week into the ‘Crimea Crisis’ and the kamakizi war rhetoric is still spewing out of Washington, London and their multinational corporate media arms.
You’d think it was Red Dawn all over again, only it’s not.
It all sound very impressive and pumped up in the news rooms, but is there any real substance in it – other than keeping oil and ...
Spraying Chemtrails to ’Reduce Pollution’ 2014 03 11
The noxious smog choking Chinese cities is globally notorious, with photos showing the grey darkness that swallows citizens as they try to go about their lives. The thick clouds sometimes turn day to night, and wreak havoc for those with respiratory ailments. Reports of how toxic and damaging the smog is to humans and the environment completes the nightmare scenario, ...