Who Needs CISPA? White House Unveils Voluntary Data Sharing Plan To Fight Botnets

from the plus,-no-privacy-violations! dept

As the fight over CISPA continues (apparently with some concerns that the existing bill is effectively dead in the water), the White House announced a new voluntary program for companies to share info about botnets in order to stop them. This raises the question, yet again, why we need laws like CISPA in the first place. Companies and the government can already share threat information without violating anyone's privacy. All CISPA and similar bills are really doing is making it easier to violate privacy rules when sharing that kind of information.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 31st, 2012 @ 9:44am

    This is how I imagine the conversation at the White House after the robot takeover.

    "Sorry Mr President, but it appears we can't stop Skynet by using legislature."

    "But, but...I brought my favorite pen!"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), May 31st, 2012 @ 9:53am

    Because they're all tools

    This raises the question, yet again, why we need laws like CISPA in the first place.

    Because, when the only tool you have is a hammer ...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 31st, 2012 @ 10:27am

    the whole object of all bills like CISPA is to obtain information on and/or spy on private citizens. all established privacy rules and freedom of speech rules etc that were fought for are being destroyed by paranoid politicians, not because of what might happen but because of what might perhaps happen, perhaps at sometime, perhaps somewhere. although there are some people out there that are not completely honest, making everyone out to be a criminal is pretty frightening!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ninja (profile), May 31st, 2012 @ 10:40am

    Grammar nazi

    All CISPA and similar bills are really doing is making it easier to violates privacy rules

    Mike, I think you writes it wrong =/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    rabbit wise (profile), May 31st, 2012 @ 10:44am

    one word - infragard.

    yet more proof about what this legislation is absolutely not about.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    DannyB (profile), May 31st, 2012 @ 11:07am

    Who Needs CISPA?

    Tyrants and censors do. That's who.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 31st, 2012 @ 11:08am

    A little late to the party

    We've been standing on the rooftops screaming about botnets for a decade, and how they're far larger than (many) people are comfortable admitting. So NOW the White House decides to maybe think about the possibility of doing something about them?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 31st, 2012 @ 11:12am

    DUH!, because it's VOLUNTARY as opposed to REQUIRED.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Zane, May 31st, 2012 @ 8:44pm

    Botnets, politicians and botnet-politians

    The internet needs guidance if its going to move forward. These bills are to immature to create a good foundation... we are in an information age boom so it will take some time. The worst thing that we can do is let botnet-politians sell out the internet. Im sure there are enough smart people in this country to let sopa, cispa, .... etc... do any damage. If not then the repurcusion will hopefully wake everyone up. Either way i think that things will be fine. Just educate yourself and be proactive or else the botnet-politians will cause problems... long live the internet and the power that it will bring to our future world. Later everyone!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dave, Jun 1st, 2012 @ 9:59am

    Ohh dear -- but who is protecting the privacy of the botnets?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 13th, 2012 @ 1:51pm

    One of my Senators non reply reply, and it seems that the staff can't even take the time to use my name in the reply.

    Of course the other senator from NY hasn't even sent a reply which is typical of him.



    June 13, 2012





    Dear Friend,



    Thank you for writing to me about H.R.3523, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). I understand and share some of your concerns.



    The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act would allow information sharing between cyber security entities and the federal government to better protect our nation from a cyber-attack; however, there are concerns that CISPA would infringe on privacy protections for average citizens, and would allow private entities and the federal government to gain access to personal information. We need to balance protecting against an attack with preserving the civil liberties of all Americans.



    All New Yorkers should be able to agree on the shared goals of protecting against a cyber-attack without any unintended consequences of infringing on civil liberties. CISPA is currently being reviewed by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I will continue to monitor this and other legislation to ensure our national security needs are being met while not infringing on the rights of average Americans.



    Thank you again for writing to express your concerns, and I hope that you keep in touch with my office regarding future legislation and concerns you may have. For more information on this and other important issues, please visit my website at http://gillibrand.senate.gov and sign up for my e-newsletter.





    Sincerely,

    Kirsten E. Gillibrand
    United States Senator

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This