|
By Mark Henricks
Deposed Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak’s moves to raise what The
Atlantic called a “digital Iron Curtain” to block Internet access to
citizens of the country before protests swept him from power recalled
cyber-security legislation proposed in the U.S. last year that critics said
would grant President Barack Obama similar powers over the web. But a new
version of the bill introduced in the Senate last week prohibits any such “kill
switch,” according to a report in The Washington Post.
The Cyber Security and Internet Freedom Act of 2011
co-sponsored by Senators Joseph Lieberman and Susan Collins is a sweeping piece
of legislation aimed at protecting the U.S. against cyber-attacks. Among other
features, PC Magazine said it defines the circumstances in which a cyber-emergency could
be declared and what authorities would then be granted to the president or
other executives, including the head of the proposed National Center for
Cybersecurity.
The major difference between the current proposal and the
one from last year is the explicit prohibition against the use of executive
power to block widespread access to the Internet. “Neither the President nor
any other federal official should have the authority to ‘shut down’ the
Internet,” Collins said in a statement read to the Senate.
The proposal would grant the government some ability to
control or limit Internet access. However, the revised bill is actually an
improvement over current law, which isn’t specific enough about what the
president can and can’t do with regard to the Internet, according to the
senators.
The new legislation would limit the president to acting “in
a precise and targeted way” in order to protect electric power and
telecommunications networks, financial systems and other infrastructure deemed
vital. Collins said the restrictions would rule out blocking access to the
entire Internet, the Internet backbone or services provided by specific
companies.
Any such actions would only be permissible when a national
or regional catastrophe was declared. Such a catastrophe was defined as one
potentially involving in excess of 2,500 human deaths or more than $25 billion
in economic losses. A catastrophe might also be declared in the event of a
requirement for mass evacuations lasting more than a month, as well as severe
damage to national security.
The proposed bill gives the president the ability to declare
a cyber emergency, but only when a catastrophic cyber attack was either under
way or imminent. The president would be required to restrict any
countermeasures to the those involving as little disruption as possible. And
the cyber emergency could not last beyond 120 days before additional
authorization would have to be granted by Congress.
The owner or operator of an infrastructure asset designated
as critical would be able to challenge the designation, if desired, through an
administrative process. And final agency could also be challenged in federal
court. Finally, the proposal said that Internet systems and assets couldn’t be
labeled as critical infrastructure purely because of speech or other First
Amendment-protected activities.
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. |
