Extraordinary Powers
Mother Jones: Proposed bill would give Obama the authority to control traffic, shut down the Internet in an emergency.
Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
You know, if it was the Bush administration, I’d be more inclined to trust them. They sought extraordinary wartime powers, and used them to prosecute the war on terror. Never abused them, though, despite all the squawking.
It’s a cybersecurity measure, to keep us safe. But the GWOT’s over, and the world likes us better, so it isn’t clear what he needs this for. To save the bankers from all the peasants with the pitchforks?
Awaiting widespread lefty outrage, denunciations of Biden-Obamamchitlerburton regime.
(BTW, I get it. Actually, I wouldn’t mind seeing him shut China’s Internet access down for a day or two just to tweak them a little. You know … “Want to play?”)
Welcome, Hot Air, Grahamistas, etal. Being a sign of the Apocalypse rocks! Always good to see you. Come on in. Say hello to my tanker pals. Hey, can you feel it? It’s Eurolove. Yeah, enough of that. Be sure to stop by Crittenden’s Boutique Right-Wing Warmonger Bookshop and browse around while you’re here.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:53 am Comments (10) on Saturday, April 4, 2009
10 Responses to “Extraordinary Powers”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
April 4th, 2009 at 10:10 am
This is so medieval; the left believes that if it controls what is said, heard or read, that it controls thought. They are for the little guy, but happen to believe themselves to be lords and ladies of the manor and tell the great unwashed to go away (but pay taxes first).
April 4th, 2009 at 11:33 am
No, not medieval, rather Stalinesque or Hitleresque. Shutting down the communications networks (i.e. Internet) should be viewed as a Free Speech issue. This country has been under attack by cyber terrorists since the time Algore invented the Internet. Communication traffic has just been, or soon will be, opened further due to the move to digital TV signals (which also use the same network).
Just another Power Grab by the Maoist in the White House and his Merry Marxist Marching Society in Congress.
April 4th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I pooh poohed the concerns and complaints of people who were opposed to the PATRIOT Act. Sill me, I forgot that some day the Democrats would be back in control and their abuse of the law and due process knows no bounds. All for our own good, of course. Now I’m opposed to any new laws to give the President more power to control our lives. There is no innocent purpose for this law, only nefarious ones.
I’m not even surprised that Olympia Snowe is a sponsor of this bill. She’s a disgrace and hopefully the voters of Maine will figure that out by the next election.
April 4th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Snowe is a cross-dressing Dhimmicrat, not a RINO. She and the other so-called GOP “centrists” ought to be tossed out of the party harder and faster than the Dhimmicrats did to Lieberman. Preferably with a solid kick in the a$$.
April 4th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
As a Mainer, I must offer my apologies to the readership for the conduct of both our two Senators, as well as the voters who elected them. I honestly cannot fathom the mindset that keeps returning these two to office. They are a disgrace to all true citizens, and especially to what remains of the GOP in Maine.
Regarding the issue at hand, after the internet is blocked, you can be assured they will go after all private radios such as sideband, CB, etc. The idea here is NOT to “protect” the intertubes from attack. It is to prevent the citizenry from communicating with eachother. In an emergency, there is no better way to send warnings or ask for assistcance than through ham radios and the internet. You can reach a LOT of people in very short order. the government, however, doesn’t WANT you to be able to do that, as it puts power into the hands of the people.
After those items are secured, then they will go after the TV and Radio stations. One of the first things that both Stalin & Hitler did was to ban private ownership of ANY radio receiver, and to then offer for sale to the public radios that could ONLY receive the official state-sponsored stations. It’s no better than having the BBC or PBS in charge of what you get tp see or here.
Believe me, that will be coming, and right soon, if this bill gets passed.
This is a direct attack upon both the 1st and the 4th ammendments. Others will follow, rest assured.
April 4th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Jules, Ed at Hot Air makes a good point about this proposed law:
“It gives the President the authority to disconnect federal networks from the Internet in the case of cyberattack. That doesn’t seem like an outrageous provision to me; it sounds like a sensible option to protect vital government systems. In fact, I’d be surprised if that power doesn’t already exist within the various federal agencies.”
As I commented over there, the President (Obama or not), in effect, owns Federal servers and networks. He doesn’t need a law for this, and it’s already policy. So this law is, in large part, superfluous, and either reflects the degree of ignorance by the bill sponsors, or their indifference to existing policies and laws. That’s scary. Why not just acknowledge this as being current Federal policy, based on common sense?
The parts directed at non-Federal cyber systems is scary as well. It makes more sense to coordinate operations between government and non-government networks, which I believe is the case now. But directing operations? That’s what the Chinese government does.
The entire bill is a blatant grab for power.
April 4th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
The entire bill is a blatant grab for power.
As is everything the Democrats have done since they came into power. They are relentless, like maggots devouring the dead.
April 4th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
National emergency: Obama dropping under 30% in the polls.
April 5th, 2009 at 8:55 am
The problem with the bill is not that they are attempting to harden the security infrastructure of our networks and prepare it for attacks from outside. That’s long overdue. It’s *how* they are trying to do it. Pushing governmental control even further into the private sector; new departments that will accomplish nothing but will create additional patronage positions to be used by the executive branch; and truly childish ideas that will generate (as usual) plenty of government largesse, but very little return on the investment.
April 5th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
What’s more interesting to me are are sections 6 and 7 of the draft bill.
Section 6 directs NIST to develop and implement standards for configuration architecture and specifications for any ’software’ that may be ‘widely used’ by the feds or ‘in private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks’. What constitutes a ‘critical infrastructure information system or network’ is undefined and is presumably in the eye of the presidential beholder.
The draft goes so far as to specify a standard config language and settings for ALL software that may be used in the same ‘critical’ systems, with the requirement that such software must run without changing any of the standard config settings. ‘Software’ is undefined. In the engineering world, there’s configuration at every level of the system – network, OS, application and everything in between. The feds are now apparently going to be writing software specs for the entire industry, because configuration is at core of every system, at every level.
Section 7 creates a mandatory licensing regime for anyone who provides ‘cybersecurity’ services either to the feds or (that definition again) private ‘critical infrastructure information systems or networks’. You won’t be able to do work involving ‘cybersecurity’ without certification and licensing (which, on contemporary systems is just about everything).
So, in one move, the feds regulate – and indeed create – the keys to the software design kingdom (namely, config) and arguably license anyone who comes near it.