Internet “Kill Switch” Proposed For U.S.
Internet “Kill Switch” Proposed For U.S.
A new US Senate Bill would grant the President far-reaching emergency powers to seize control of, or even shut down, portions of the internet.
The legislation says that companies such as broadband providers, search engines or software firms that the US Government selects “shall immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed” by the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone failing to comply would be fined.
That “emergency authority” would allow the Federal Government to “preserve those networks and assets and our country and protect our people,” Joe Lieberman, the primary sponsor of the measure and the chairman of the Homeland Security committee, told reporters on Thursday. Lieberman is an independent senator from Connecticut who meets with the Democrats. Are we missing something here, or does Mr. Lieberman think his new 3-D widescreen computer monitor actually allows viruses to enter his bloodstream. Oh wait… on second thought… Now seriously, this is getting to be far too much for even those in the dark to accept. Since when did Homeland Security care about the protection of our access to information? Except when it is information about them that they do not want accessed!
Due to there being few limits on the US President’s emergency power, which can be renewed indefinitely, the densely worded 197-page Bill (PDF) will undoubtedly encounter some stringent opposition, or one would hope.
TechAmerica, one of the largest US technology lobby groups, said it was concerned about “unintended consequences that would result from the legislation’s regulatory approach” and “the potential for absolute power”. The Center for Democracy and Technology stated concerns that the Lieberman Bill’s emergency powers “include authority to shut down or limit internet traffic on private systems.” That is okay, I believe the White House is working to have the word private removed from the English language.
A Presidential-controlled kill-switch is not new idea. A draft Senate proposal that CNET obtained in August allowed the White House to “declare a cybersecurity emergency”, and another from Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) would have explicitly given the government the power to “order the disconnection” of certain networks or websites. Curtains you say? We have a wide selection… iron curtains to the right.
On Thursday, both senators lauded Lieberman’s Bill, which is formally titled Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, or PCNAA. Rockefeller said “I commend” the drafters of the PCNAA. Collins went one step further, signing up at a co-sponsor and stating publicly that “we cannot afford to wait for a cyber 9/11 before our government realises the importance of protecting our cyber resources”. Government control. Mao could you?
Under PCNAA, the Federal Government’s power to force private companies to comply with emergency decrees would become unusually broad. Any company on a list (yes, yet another list) created by Homeland Security that also “relies on” the internet, the telephone system or any other component of the US “information infrastructure” would be subject to command by a new National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC) that would be created inside Homeland Security.
The only obvious limitation on the NCCC’s emergency power is one paragraph in the Lieberman Bill that appears to have grown out of the Bush-era flap over wiretapping without a warrant. That limitation says that the NCCC cannot order broadband providers or other companies to “conduct surveillance” of Americans unless it’s otherwise legally authorised. Phew! That makes me feel much better. Not.
Lieberman said on Thursday that enactment of his Bill needed to be a “top congressional priority”. “For all of its ‘user-friendly’ allure, the internet can also be a dangerous place with electronic pipelines that run directly into everything from our personal bank accounts to key infrastructure to government and industrial secrets,” he said, Gary McKinnon no doubt somewhere in the hollow recesses of his mind. “Our economic security, national security and public safety are now all at risk from new kinds of enemies — cyber-warriors, cyber-spies, cyber-terrorists and cyber-criminals.”
A new cybersecurity bureaucracy
Lieberman’s proposal would form a powerful and extensive new Homeland Security bureaucracy around the NCCC, including “no less” than two deputy directors, and liaison officers to the Defense Department, Justice Department, Commerce Department, and the Director of National Intelligence. (How much the NCCC director’s duties would overlap with those of the existing assistant secretary for infrastructure protection is not clear.)
The NCCC also would be granted the power to monitor the “security status” of private sector websites, broadband providers and other internet components. Lieberman’s legislation requires the NCCC to provide “situational awareness of the security status” of the portions of the internet that are inside the United States — and also those portions in other countries that, if disrupted, could cause significant harm.
Selected private companies would be required to participate in “information sharing” with the Feds. They must “certify in writing to the director” of the NCCC whether they have “developed and implemented” federally approved security measures, which could be anything from encryption to physical security mechanisms, or programming techniques that have been “approved by the director”. The NCCC director can “issue an order” in cases of non-compliance.
The prospect of a vast new cybersecurity bureaucracy with power to command the private sector worries some privacy advocates. “This is a plan for an auto-immune reaction,” says Jim Harper, director of information studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. “When something goes wrong, the government will attack our infrastructure and make society weaker.”
To sweeten the deal for industry groups, Lieberman has included a tantalising offer absent from earlier drafts: immunity from civil lawsuits. If a software company’s programming error costs customers billions, or a broadband provider intentionally cuts off its customers in response to a federal command, neither would be liable.
If there’s an “incident related to a cyber vulnerability” after the President has declared an emergency and the affected company has followed federal standards, plaintiffs’ lawyers cannot collect damages for economic harm. And if the harm is caused by an emergency order from the Feds, not only does the possibility of damages virtually disappear, but the US Treasury will even pick up the private company’s tab.
Another sweetener: a new White House office would be charged with forcing federal agencies to take cybersecurity more seriously, with the power to jeopardise their budgets if they fail to comply. The likely effect would be to increase government agencies’ demand for security products.
Tom Gann, McAfee’s vice president for government relations, stopped short of criticising the Lieberman Bill, calling it a “very important piece of legislation”.
McAfee is paying attention to “a number of provisions of the Bill that could use work,” Gann said, and “we’ve certainly put some focus on the emergency provisions.”