Congressman Who Supports Undermining Encryption Says We Need CISA (Which Undermines Privacy) To 'Protect Privacy'
from the up-is-down,-black-is-white,-day-is-night dept
Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee (the Committee that has most strongly been pushing versions of cybersecurity bills that undermine privacy and provide more surveillance powers) apparently believes that as long as he says day is night and up is down, the world will believe him. In response to Speaker Paul Ryan's decision to shove CISA into the omnibus funding bill, Schiff insisted that this was necessary to protect our privacy:“This is the most protective of privacy of any cyber bill that we have advanced and we need to keep in mind the overriding interest all Americans have in protecting their privacy from these innumerable hacks,” Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a cosponsor of his panel’s cyber bill, told The Hill. “Our privacy is being violated every day. And the longer we delay on measures like this, the more we subject ourselves to those kind of intrusions into our privacy.”Nearly everything Schiff says here is complete hogwash. This bill is far from "the most protective of privacy of any cyber bill" that has advanced. Other versions clearly had more privacy protections (mainly the one advanced by the House Judiciary Committee). And, this latest one clearly strips out privacy provisions and makes it that much more difficult to protect our privacy.
And the fearmongering about "these innumerable hacks" and how "our privacy is being violated every day" is totally meaningless, because CISA does nothing to stop these hacks. We've asked many times before how would CISA have stopped a single hack and no one ever answers. We've looked hard and cannot find a single online security expert who thinks that CISA would be useful in preventing online hacks and attacks. Because it wouldn't. There is nothing in there geared towards stopping attacks.
You know what would help in protecting our privacy and limiting the damage from hacks? Stronger encryption. I wonder what Rep. Adam Schiff thinks about that?
Take a wild... wild guess. Oh, you're right: He doesn't like encryption.
"While it remains too early to tell the role encrypted communications may have played in the devastating terrorist attacks in Paris, we do know that ISIS regularly instructs its operatives to use encrypted platforms precisely to help evade detection. These platforms are made overseas as well as in the U.S., and there are significant security, technological, economic and privacy issues involved in addressing the challenge posed to the intelligence community and law enforcement by encryption.Yup.
"That is why Chairman Nunes and I – months before these horrific attacks – requested that the National Academy of Sciences, an organization that two decades ago studied this very issue, produce an updated report that can help us to identify and design effective, technologically feasible and economically viable solutions to the increasingly dangerous problem known as 'going dark.' I am pleased that the Academy is proceeding with such a study, which will help inform policymakers and the public alike.
If Rep. Schiff was truly worried about hacks and keeping Americans' data secure, he'd be supporting strong encryption. Instead, he's looking to undermine it, while at the same time supporting a separate bill which, under the false pretense of protecting us from cybersecurity attacks, actually undermines our privacy even further.
So here's a challenge to Rep. Adam Schiff: Can you find a single recognized cybersecurity expert who thinks that the way to protect against hacks is (1) found in this Cybersecurity Act and (2) involves figuring out ways to stop encryption from letting people "go dark"? If not, perhaps you should stop saying these things and stop legislating about it.
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: adam schiff, cisa, cybersecurity, encryption, privacy
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Unusual Logic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Bombing for peace is like f@#king for virginity
same idea here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sometimes you have to destroy the village in order to save it. Call in another airstrike!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is simple, they do not understand privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is simple, they do not understand privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How cute. War is peace, slavery is freedom, and surveillance is privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NIST anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NIST anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To your congressional gophers who read these sites for you: If the world "goes dark" as you fervently believe it will (spoiler: it won't), its because you turned off the lights, not us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
His reasoning on why they attached it to the omnibus is interesting too
from http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/263537-cyber-bill-spurs-several-no-votes-on-omnibus
“You’ ve got to attach it to something,” said House Homeland Security Committee ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), who co-sponsored his panel’s bill. “We were not able to get a conference on the bill itself, so this is a vehicle. That’s how I see it.”
Schiff acknowledged that the process wasn’t perfect. But it was the best path under the circumstances, he said.
“In an ideal world we wouldn’t have omnibuses, but I think after three years of working to move this issue forward we were fortunate to get on the train that’s moving,” he told The Hill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: His reasoning on why they attached it to the omnibus is interesting too
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: His reasoning on why they attached it to the omnibus is interesting too
Hopefully this vehicle runs him over...a few times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: His reasoning on why they attached it to the omnibus is interesting too
There is no honor in undermining privacy. There is no law so just. There is no need like the needs of power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WHO HAS A PROBLEM with this??
NOW if they GO BY THE LAWS...do you think THEIR servers will be encrypted??
LETs load up that Mega server in Utah..and play video games..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If anything "goes dark"
Surveillance is the enemy of security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Our and we
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Doublespeak
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.”
― George Orwell, 1984
Protecting privacy requires intrusions on privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The U.S. was founded by terrorists! It just taking a while to undo everything they did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]