Tone Deaf Dianne Feinstein Thinks Now Is A Good Time To Revive CISPA
from the what-is-she-smoking? dept
We had believed, along with a number of others, that the Snowden leaks showing how the NSA was spying on pretty much everyone would likely kill CISPA dead. After all, the key component to CISPA was basically a method for encouraging companies to have total immunity from sharing information with the NSA. And while CISPA supporters pretended this was to help protect those companies and others from online attacks, the Snowden leaks have reinforced the idea (that many of us had been pointing out from the beginning) that it was really about making it easier for the NSA to rope in companies to help them spy on people.Also, if you don't remember, while CISPA had passed the House, the Senate had shown little appetite for it. Last year, the Senate had approved a very different cybersecurity bill, and had expressed very little interest in taking up that fight again this year. Except now, in an unexpected move, Senate Intelligence Committee boss, and chief NSA defender because of reasons that are top secret, has now announced that she's been writing a Senate counterpart to CISPA and is prepared to "move it forward."
Yes, it seems that even though the NSA gleefully hid the evidence of widespread abuses from Feinstein's oversight committee, she's playing the co-dependent role yet again. Yes, there's a chance that this new version of the bill will actually take into account privacy and civil liberties, but I doubt many people would take a bet on that being likely.
Right now what the public is concerned about are not "cyberattacks" from foreigners -- they're concerned about our own government undermining the security and privacy of Americans themselves. Giving those responsible for that destruction of privacy and trust more power to abuse the privacy of Americans is not what people are looking for. Quite the opposite.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cispa, cybersecurity, dianne feinstein, nsa, nsa surveillance, security
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Why yes, I'll bet on it. I also bet I can grab that little mischievous leprechaun and make it give me his pot. (Got it? POT!). I also bet Obama is going to change in his 3rd mandate and will stop mass surveillance. Cheers!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
SO CENSOR ME AGAIN, KIDS! Even though I'm RIGHT.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
out_of_the_blue, Aug 13th, 2013 @ 2:01pm
GOOD! That'll prevent legalizing what Google is doing!
THAT was a main purpose of it.
Where Mike fights CISPA without mentioning major data sources Google and Facebook.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
It's already legal, otherwise we could sue Google and Facebook for participating in PRISM. It only helps shield new companies from doing the same thing.
Do you not SEE "legalize" in QUOTES to indicate de facto yet questionable legality?
It's only Google, other corporations, and gov't which regard spying as fully legal, while manifestly the public which is being spied on and tracked everywhere regards it as an outrage to rights including privacy.
I HOPED that distinction was made clear by my punctuation, and am now glad that used those marks to show was aware of it before your post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
Of course it won't stop as long as the RIAA/MPAA don't want it to stop. With that kind of internet intelligence, the RIAA/MPAA will be in a better position to stop innovators, censor speech they find distasteful or embarrassing, and send in black helicopters in armed police raids when it turns out that they may not have any actual case at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
There you go. It's all RIAA/MPAA.
Listen, silly, not only are you off-topic stoopid, but you've entirely failed to address topic, are manifestly unable to. It's nearly impossible for me to believe that you think you've accomplished anything there except proven how feeble are Mike's fanboys. THAT you went with it proves how faulty is your thought process. Silence would be FAR better.
I APPRECIATE your efforts, though! You're one of Techdirt's most prolific fanboy-trolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
Blue lecturing anyone of being off topic.
10/10 I wet myself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA is to "legalize" Google / Facebook giving NSA access.
"SPYING mega-corporations"
The simplest difference (that has been pointed out to you more times than youv'e taken a dump) you can opt-out of facebook/google/whatever 'spying' on you online, however you cannot opt-out of the NSA spying on you. Get a clue blue, you know exactly why people flag you all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not so fast...
On the contrary, she thinks she will be SAVING US by PROTECTING US.
Feinstein's quotes:
"I knew -- hell, EVERYONE knew -- about the NSA's shady past when I hooked up with it. Why's everyone so outraged?"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130827/18512124329/nsa-is-dianne-feinsteins-mike-roge rs-abusive-cheating-spouse.shtml
As I have said previously, the committee has never identified an instance in which the NSA has intentionally abused its authority to conduct surveillance for inappropriate purposes.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130817/02254824218/nsa-defenders-insist-their-lawbreak ing-should-be-ignored-because-they-didnt-mean-it.shtml
Typically Big Govt Puke who thinks they know best...
Wait until the NSA teams up the local SWAT teams to start knocking down doors like other agencies do now...
U.S. Department of Education agents raids California home
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/education-department-swat-team-raids-califor nia-home/2011/06/08/AGUxlKMH_blog.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not so fast...
We don't have to wait. They're already doing that.
Amongst the myriad Bad Things that we now know the NSA does is that when they find evidence of ordinary crime, they tip off local cops and advise them about how to hide the fact that the NSA tipped them off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What I want to know . . .
Oh, wait. CISPA is about:So the government could share information with its corporate owners like the RIAA / MPAA, and anyone else who has an interest in stopping innovation, criticism or whistleblowing.
Nevermind. Dianne is doing her job working for the government's corporate owners.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What I want to know . . .
I think we are going to see more revealed on this in the future because all that data has to be too tempting for the NSA, et. al. not to have. As an example, look at all the major retailers and their store security. That has to be piped to one of our overlords.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It makes them above the law
If others get immunity, why would they follow the laws of Congress? They'd *have* to follow NSA, and there is no legal penalty for ignoring US law while doing so, so of course they'd ignore whatever Congress writes and obey the NSA.
It creates a dictatorship with companies loyal to the NSA General rather than the legal framework of the USA. They would be above the law.
At this point, you need to remove the immunity from the telcos. By doing that they will ensure the NSA can't spy outside the legal framework of warrants.
Current Congress can write whatever laws it likes and repeal whatever laws it likes, but the telcos don't have to obey.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Since I was censored in the prior item, I'll cross-post:
No, what I state is observable FACT that Mike opposes it without mentioning that it would HELP Google. CISPA is a PRO-SPYING bill that'll move Google and Facebook from operating in legal gray area to fully legal. This doesn't in any way prove that Mike isn't a Google shill, because he needs to publicly oppose it to maintain his credibility, but the bill ... is now back on the table AS IF been on rails all along, so at the VERY least, Mike was WRONG here about it being dead! I bet it was just tabled while the NSA flap dies down.
So long as Mike keeps opposing CISPA without mentioning Google and Facebook, how can you NOT suspect he's a Google shill? Over a period of months LEAVING OUT KEY POINTS indicates concealed motives.
SO, guess you can choose to keep faith in Mike, who's been proved wrong here, and who definitely never mentions Google or Facebook as benefitting from this bill, while reviling ME who's merely proved right and warns of mega-corporations...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Since I was censored in the prior item, I'll cross-post:
Moreover, you retain the assumption that voluntary sharing with Facebook or google is somehow the same as non-voluntary, no opt-out, secret NSA data collection. I know what data Google and Facebook stores, and what data its Privacy Policy says it can share. The NSA sharing is greater then the expected scope...but the problem is on the NSA side. Sharing with the law is a valid clause, but its the FISA court which has overreached, not google.
I limit the Data I share with Facebook specifically because I do not agree with its data handling. I can't limit which data gets shared with the NSA. That is why CISPA is a problem, because now Google, Microsoft, and/or facebook Have no incentive to not share your information, As mike has already pointed out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
tldr; version
The line of thought you're exspousing sounds an awful lot like the mirror image of the fear-mongerers. Discussion of issues, and introduction of legislation, no matter how stupid, is not anti-American. The legislation itself may be, but we should never stoop to their level and start labeling people as anti-American. Let them introduce the legislation, and then in a functioning democracy, the people can object to kill or fix it, and vote them out of office for being stupid at the first oppurtunity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, I think it's time to force her to retire to an old person's home and only let her have a small allowance every month.
I think $300 USD should be enough for her.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Dianne Goldman Berman Feinstein, born Dianne Emiel Goldman. Born: June 22, 1933 (age 80)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Huuuh...
Reagan was 69 when he elected President and 93 when he died in 2004.
Just a little comparison note for ya.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If they were acting legally within the laws laid down by Congress, then why do the companies need immunity?
Immunity from what exactly? The laws of congress!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA and domestic surveillance
Not just the NSA but government agencies of any kind. That is the key difference between CISPA and FISA. CISPA would do for domestic surveillance what FISA has done for foreign (and, illegally, domestic) surveillance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"EVIL Dianne Feinstein"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "EVIL Dianne Feinstein"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hunting Season
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]