« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

On the Obama cybersecurity bill

As overbearing as it is impractical

So, the Cybersecurity bill is back, fully formed as the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA). When I first highlighted the bill in August of 2009, I summarized it like so:

S. 773, a bill by West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Democrat, would create new “emergency” powers for the President, a ‘cybersecurity’ Enabling Act of sorts, that would give the President the authority broad powers over any “non-governmental” computer networks, whether public or private, that are declared by the President to be “critical.”

These powers extend beyond declared emergencies, however. Rockefeller’s bill would immediately grant the ability of the government to control hiring and firing of jobs related to these so-called critical networks, because the President could unilaterally declare that jobs related to those networks would be required to be filled by people certified to the task by the government. And much like with the car dealerships, the Obama administration is fully expected to use its power to favor political allies for these jobs by granting or denying certification depending on your level of donations to Obama for America or the Democratic National Committee.

Yeah, so it’s back. Some parts of it may seem harmless, or even beneficial, such as the part highlighted by the good people at Bayshore Networks that seems to amount to an online Real ID act. But such things, if we want them, can and should be achieved without all the baggage associated with them.

Because you see: the emergency powers sought by the Democrats and the White House not only amount to a huge power grab over private computers that is unprecedented online, but the purported goal still won’t be achieved. The bill is as overbearing in its means as it is impractical in its ends.

Consider the premise of the bill: we have to defend ourselves against a hypothetical attack by a foreign power on this country’s computers over the Internet. It sounds just so reasonable that we should just be able to “shut off the pipe” to country X until the threat passes, doesn’t it? The problem is, there is no one pipe. The Internet is not like the system of roads, centralized and government owned. The Internet is a tangled web of private networks, any or all of the biggest of which (“the Backbone”) might have their own connections to private networks in other countries. Take a look at this diagram of the Internet backbone made by the Opte Project:

See the colors, and how they weave together in so many different places? They aren’t for show. Red is east Asia and Oceania, Green is Europe, the rest of Asia, and Africa, Blue is North America, Yellow is Latin America and the Caribbean, and nobody can say for sure what the White ones are. It’s all connected, all of it, in many different ways.

See also CAIDA’s diagram of the backbone which shows in pink the connections between the continents, all redundant and robust. That’s just it: the Internet is designed to resist a line being cut here or there, because the kind of deliberate shutdown the Obama administration wants is the kind of thing that can and does happen by accident!

So what would it take for the Democrats even to try this? Take a look at the diagrams again. Anywhere a North America dot connects with another country, let alone another continent, Government is going to demand to know who works at that dot, what computers are there, and insist on being able to give orders to the people at that dot whenever the President decides to say it’s an emergency.

We’re not just talking about the traditional Constitutional emergencies here, after all. The Constitution recognizes “cases of Rebellion or Invasion” as well as Congressionally declared War as special times, but this Cybersecurity bill is not limited to such specifically grave situations. As Bruce Henderson writes at The New Ledger:

S773 makes no attempt to outline and describe what form of emergency would trigger the use of these broad new powers to limit communication, nor any means by which it could be reviewed by anyone outside the executive branch. The bill also proscribes that the executive branch will perform periodic mapping” of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies “shall share” requested information with the federal government.

But again, remember those diagrams before: How are you going to close off the US from, say, China or Iran? The only way, given the Internet’s robust interconnectivity, is to close off the US from the entire world, which would mean the government taking dictatorial control over every major Internet provider in the country, isolating us, and without a doubt creating a greater disruption on the lives and businesses of Americans than any one attack could create. We, like North Korea, would end up a dark spot on a well-lit world.

So where are we left with the Cybersecurity bill? The problem the Obama administration wants to solve is impractical to solve. The power they want is vast. The solution they end up with is worse than the problem. So it’s time to make some noise. The bill has made it out of Senate committee. We have to get loud and get loud quickly if we want to stop the Internet Blackout Czar from becoming a reality.

In particular, let’s ask cosponsor Susan Collins to drop her support, and turn from the side of control and censorship, to the side that is less like Communist-controlled China. We expect huge expansions of government power from Democrats like Joe Lieberman or Jay Rockefeller, but Republicans should know better than to support more progressive crisis mongering. We need all hands on deck, and every Republican pulling for our side in order to ensure this bill goes down to a well-deserved defeat. The PCNAA is worse than snake oil: it’d kill the patient.

COMMENTS

  • shermantank

    How scary is THIS!

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ryan-Anthony/114226301953536 ranthony

    I’ve said it a few times before and I’ll say it again . . . it’s human nature to abuse power. Liebs should have thought of that too as he described the question of a large-scale cyber attack as one of “when” instead of “if.” There’s no way in Hell anyone should be allowed that kind of power – even without the unanswered questions:

    What are the “emergency response plans” required under Sec. 248(b)(2)(C)?

    What’s to stop the government from declaring the entire Internet as “critical to the direct fulfillment of military or intelligence missions?” If the White House needs “ethical hackers” to do its dirty work they’re going to need the tubes running. Plus which, we ARE in an Internet economy.

    Just ask the folks at E*TRADE.

  • Tbone

    now I are an innernet adminstrator.

  • aesthete

    Is there anything that can be done besides convincing Collins not to support it? It has to be killed now; I don’t trust Republicans as a whole to have the guts or the desire to repeal it.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Not really any other choices.

  • aesthete

    that I could influence. McCain and Kyl, loathsome as both are in many respects, won’t vote for this, and my Congresscritter, Raul Grijalva, is salivating to vote for it. Probably because Mexico and Marxism are awesome, and the US and classical liberalism suck, or somesuch reason.

  • snowshooze

    Oh yeah,
    Obama with a kill switch on his cell phone?
    What if he makes a bad putt or Michelle won’t let him go play ball with the boys?
    That’s right…we would be stuck with spoonfed information from the White House approved media outlets.
    This is our primary line of communication.
    How long would it take to contrive an emergency to justify pulling the plug?
    They probably already wrote that one.
    I love the representation map of the net…it will take the formation of a huge Federal Agency to manage it.
    Neil, thanks for staying on this one, I keep yelling to all my friends that this particular issue is potentially THE biggest one out there.

  • American Common Sense

    The government, specifically this administration, seem to think that the they are the remedy for all of the world’s problems. The fact that what they are trying to do is virtually impossible and would make the situation significantly worse further highlights their irrational need to control every aspect of our lives. And to top it off, I’m familiar with the government’s ability to secure networks and can confidently say that it is something they don’t do very well.

    This is a great topic that I plan to take up soon.

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com/ Veronica

    “The only way, given the Internet?s robust interconnectivity, is to close off the US from the entire world, which would mean the government taking dictatorial control over every major Internet provider in the country, isolating us, and without a doubt creating a greater disruption on the lives and businesses of Americans than any one attack could create. ”

    Ya gotta think larger, Neil.

    The UN’s been playing with “issues” of cybersecurity since 2007, at least:

    “Experts at a United Nations-backed conference have agreed to jointly take action to combat the constantly evolving and increasingly sophisticated challenges posed by cybercrime.

    ‘The legal, technical and institutional challenges posed by cyber-threats and cybercrime are global and far-reaching, and can only be addressed through a coherent strategy taking into account the role of different stakeholders and existing initiatives, within a framework of international cooperation,’ Hamadoun Tour?, Secretary-General of the UN International Telecommunication Union (ITU), said at the meeting on 5 October in Geneva.

    This was the first-ever gathering of the High-Level Experts Group for the ITU?s Global Cybersecurity Agenda, and it drew 60 experts from governments, the private sector, academia, research institutions and regional and international organizations.

    [The clencher]

    ‘New and emerging threats to cybersecurity cannot be solved by any one nation alone,’ President of Costa Rica and Nobel peace prize laureate ?scar Arias S?nchez said in a special address.”

    Gee.. doesn’t this “no one nation” sound familiar? How about Das Administration’s dependence on the hookey “Nobel” pedigree?

    Ok… so that was 2007. Here’s 2010 news:

    Delegates Consider Best Response to Cybercrime as Congress Committee: Takes Up Dark Side of Advances in Information Technology [Yeah.. they said "Dark Side"]

    While advances in information technology held many benefits for society, its dark underside ?? computer-based fraud and forgery, illegal interception of private communications, interference with data and misuse of electronic devices ?? required States to develop an organized, international response, delegates said today at the Twelfth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice.

    But in their discussion on the use of science and technology to combat crime, speakers remained undecided about the nature of the required response, with supporters of the Council of Europe?s Budapest Convention on Cybercrime suggesting an expansion of the treaty, and others floating the idea of fresh multilateral negotiations.

    Leading the discussion, titled ?Recent developments in the use of science and technology by offenders and by competent authorities in fighting crime, including the case of cybercrime?, was Matti Joutsen ( Finland), Chairman of Committee II of the Congress. He said that initially the subsidiary body had focused largely on laws, policies and national capacity-building exercises aimed at stemming cybercrime, and on the need to boost the ability of less developed countries to fine-tune technology through training and learning from experimental projects.

    Some within the Committee had underscored the usefulness of the Budapest Convention as a platform for international cooperation, while others had spoken of a need for a brand new global convention, he said. But, regardless of their stance on a possible new instrument, delegates were largely in agreement on the importance of cross-border cooperation to tackle a crime that knew no boundaries.”

    Ok.. crime that knows no boundaries. Which means we probably need a multi-lateral body to monitor, prevent etc .. which means the UN draws up yet another convention.

    Right, there’s Congress and legislation, but there’s also Executive Order and Executive Memorandii calling for recommendations based on UN Conventions — which is what Obama did with the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force.

    Yes, I keep bringing up the IOPT, because it’s the most current example of this leftist administration citing international conventions to impact our sovereign nation.

    My point here is — once international law or conventions are created via these multilateral institutions, it would be very easy to shape policy to fall in line with “international norms.”

    We wouldn’t need Congress.

    More and more, I’m thinking Congress is just for show to calm the populace and make them feel as though they are part of the process.

    We all know of the other devious ways the progressives like to railroad their agenda — by force, fiat or fraud.

    And there’s more than one way to shackle and chain the Internet wild cat, especially when the international set (aka transnational progressives) claim it can’t be harnessed by “any one nation alone.”

    Thanks for staying on top of this, Neil.

    Please let us know if you see any other transnational progressive linkage — discussing it has to stop being taboo.

  • gamechange11two

    and any platforms that will give the white house monolithic emergency communications capabilities and an army of inspectors who will certify compliances and you have…a tax. Isn’t this a piece of the package Genachowski wants enacted?

    Wow, police powers over the internet, a new revenue stream for the statists to divvy up and a new regulatory structure that rewrites the rules of the road whenever it wants.

    I just love it when the constitutionally separated powers of the federal government all pull together to get things done.

    Now all we need is a national security crisis that doesn’t go to waste. Anyone for August or September of 2012?