The Hijacking Of The Internet
NewsAdmin Staff Writer

I'm going to give everyone a break, and skip the feeble attempts at humor that appear within my weekly articles. This week is a different because... well... I can't find anything amusing about the following topic. On April 1st, Sen. John Rockefeller (West Virginia) & Olympia Snowe (Maine) proposed a piece of legislation called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 that could drastically alter the Internet as we know it today. Upon my first review of the bill, I thought it was simply a bad April Fools joke, but to my dismay these Senators are absolutely serious about their bill's content and intent.

The Cybersecurity Act gives the President the ability to declare a cybersecurity emergency, and in the interest of national security, shut down or limit Internet traffic within a critical information network. Unfortunately the bill does not define a "critical information network" nor does it define "cybersecurity emergency", so those definitions would ultimately be left in the hands of the President. The bill also gives the Secretary of Commerce the power to access all relevant data associated with a "critical" network without regard to any provision of policy or law that may restrict such access. Simply put they can monitor any data within private or public networks whenever they want, without any regard to privacy laws. The White House appears to be in a power grab frenzy, and if their recent dealings with financial institutions and car manufacturers are any indication, they'll be controlling cyberspace in the near future.

Maybe I enjoy playing devil's advocate, but I have several concerns as it relates to the bill in its current form, and maybe a few of them will touch a nerve or two for you readers out there. The first issue that comes to mind is one of privacy, and how this bill could impact an online community such as Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, or Usenet. Lets say that the National Cybersecurity Advisor (one would be appointed under this bill) is of the opinion that the Usenet newsgroups could be used to exchange thoughts or plans that might pose a threat to national security. As a precaution the National Cybersecurity Advisor or Secretary of Commerce begins to monitor conversations within the groups, while profiling & flagging users they deem to be a problem. I've been involved with Usenet for close to 20 years now, and while I've never used the newsgroups for a purpose that the government would consider nefarious... at least I don't think so... I'm not comfortable with the idea of any organization watching my coming's & going's within Usenet or any Internet location I choose to visit.

The second concern is one of censorship. Given the current language of the Cybersecurity Act the President could shut down a government or private network that presents a security risk. Nowhere within the bill will you find a definition of "security risk", so you essentially have one person... a security advisor or the President... determining what is and isn't a security risk. For example, a person within the "alt.politics" newsgroups decides they want to express their displeasure with our current President, and their comments lead to an lively discussion thread with other people expressing similar dissatisfaction. The federal government might suggest that continued conversation could inspire civil unrest, and as a precautionary measure decides to censor newsgroup posts from specific individuals, or censor the Usenet community as a whole.

While the bill has been presented as a measure to save the world from cyberterrorists, I can't help but think that money is also responsible for the government's sudden interest in safeguarding the Internet. The bill calls for the creation of an advisory panel to consult the President on cybersecurity issues. Translation... we need to create another bloated government agency with a huge staff and runaway costs... that will be paid for with tax payer dollars. The bill also promotes the idea of integrated national licensing, certification, and periodic recertification program for cybersecurity professionals. Translation... if you operate an online business big or small, anyone on your staff that comes in contact with your network operation will have to pay routine licensing & certification fees to the federal government. Just one person's opinion, but this sounds like a creative way for the government to get the Internet tax they've always wanted. Additionally, this legislation proposes that a standard should be established that defines the configuration of software on computer systems used by government & private networks. Translation... you can no longer use innovative software that you developed in-house to gain an advantage over business competitors or improve the site experience for your users, instead you'll need to purchase software from a short list of vendors endorsed by the federal government.

I understand that this is the first draft of the Cybersecurity Act, and that it will initiate debate, and possible changes to the bill's current language. With that said rather than take a passive position and hope that Congress handles this correctly, I think it's in everyone's best interest to contact your elected representatives and voice your concerns about this bill sooner rather than later. The present administration has a history of pushing legislation through Congress before anyone has an opportunity to review & understand the content of those laws, so you may want to ask them to put on the brakes before we rush ourselves into consequences we may not fully understand at this time.

Return to the main "News & Commentary" index