Overshadowed by congressional action on guns and immigration is an Internet privacy bill that could affect most Americans, without them knowing it, on a daily basis.<\/p>\n
Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (or CISPA) is making its way through Congress, and it\u2019s passed a House vote on Thursday [18 Apr 2013].<\/p>\n
The final vote in the House was 248-168<\/a>, as 42 Democrats voted for the bill, while 28 Republicans voted against it.<\/p>\n And like gun control, it\u2019s far from a done deal after the House passes CISPA. It would need Senate approval, and President Barack Obama has indicated he\u2019ll possibly veto CISPA if it comes to his desk.<\/p>\n Both sides of Congress would need to muster a two-thirds majority vote to override the president\u2019s veto, which would seem unlikely in the current political atmosphere of Washington.<\/p>\n At the heart of CISPA is a Fourth Amendment<\/a> issue.<\/p>\n The amendment reads:<\/p>\n \u201cThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.\u201d<\/p>\n CISPA is designed to let the federal government work with private companies to fight hackers and cybercriminals in and outside of the United States. As part of the effort to detect cyber threats, private companies could voluntarily share with the government data about Internet users.<\/p>\n The sharing could be done in \u201creal time\u201d as the cybercops try to defeat and track down the evildoers. Companies could also share data among themselves as part of the effort.<\/p>\n There are major drawbacks about the legislation, say CISPA\u2019s critics. The privacy provisions for consumers, they claim, are vague or nonexistent. The government and companies can\u2019t look at your personal data, such as medical records and tax returns, if they are part of the \u201cdata dump\u201d that is shared in real time. But the law doesn\u2019t require that companies excise, or edit out, that information in the transfer process.<\/p>\n Another criticism is that a warrant isn\u2019t needed for the government to obtain that information. And companies that share your information won\u2019t be held legally liable for sharing that information, a practice that seemingly conflicts with privacy policies on existing websites.<\/p>\n CISPA\u2019s biggest critic in Congress is a representative from Colorado, Jared Polis. The Democrat told the House on Wednesday, \u201cThis is the biggest government takeover of personal information that I\u2019ve seen during my time here in Congress.\u201d<\/p>\n Mike Rogers, a Republican representative from Michigan and the House Intelligence Committee chairman, is leading the CISPA effort, along with Dutch Ruppersberger, a Democrat from Maryland.<\/p>\n Rogers believes the measure is long needed. \u201cPeople were stealing their identities, their accounts, their intellectual property, and subsequent to that, their jobs,\u201d he recently said. \u201c[Web users] began to question the value of getting on Internet and using [it] for commercial purposes. Their trust in the free and open Internet \u2026 was at risk.\u201d<\/p>\n He has also stressed that participation in CISPA is voluntary for companies.<\/p>\n The Intelligence Committee also released a five-page document<\/a> to counter what it calls \u201cmyths\u201d about CISPA, including how much personal data would be shared with the government\u2014which it says would be a rare occurrence.<\/p>\n The American Civil Liberties Union, however, calls CISPA \u201cfatally flawed.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe core problem is that CISPA allows too much sensitive information to be shared with too many people in the first place, including the National Security Agency,\u201d it says.<\/p>\n Unlike SOPA, the failed legislative attempt last year to halt online piracy, large tech companies are supporting the efforts to get CISPA passed.<\/p>\n At one time, Facebook and Microsoft had signed on to support CISPA, but now they are reportedly backing away. Google appears to be on the fence about the issue.<\/p>\n