Senate Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet

[J.P.]

Bit - Lobux

Both good points - posts!

Would not disagree at all minus the track record of this administration on control as we see more and more every day. That track record mixed with the wording of this bill makes me say wtf.

[Habious]

A few things on this.

One, if your network is THAT critical to national security...it should be isolated...not connected to the public Internet.

Two, this isn't giving the power to a committee...or a group...this is giving it to ONE PERSON. No veto, no override, no appeal. He says "shut it down" and it turns off.

Three, the bill doesn't define what a "cybersecurity threat" is. Is it a mass denial-of-service attack? Is it a mass attack with viruses or worms? Or is it "too much "incorrect information" about the current administration and/or it's policies"?

This, to me, seems to be just another "Father Knows Best" moment.

[lobuxracer]

The President currently has the power to ground all aircraft in US airspace. Why is no one complaining about it? The President currently has the power to declare a national emergency and martial law. Why is no one complaining about it?

An internet blackout? A lot of inconvenience and economic disruption, but if it keeps the lights on vs. mechanical damage to the bulk of the steam turbines used to generate electricity taking some 5 - 10 years to recover...hmmm...which would I choose?

[tromly]

Originally Posted by lobuxracer

The President currently has the power to ground all aircraft in US airspace. Why is no one complaining about it? The President currently has the power to declare a national emergency and martial law. Why is no one complaining about it?

An internet blackout? A lot of inconvenience and economic disruption, but if it keeps the lights on vs. mechanical damage to the bulk of the steam turbines used to generate electricity taking some 5 - 10 years to recover...hmmm...which would I choose?

Great points lobuxracer, Americans are more concerned that they won't have their cell phones and Email connections than with their total way of life. They have no idea what it takes to generate electricity and how vulnerable our entire grid is !

[FisforFast]

It has it ups and downs but this is one of those times (well, a majority of them) where I'm kind of happy to be a Canadian citizen.

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by lobuxracer

The President currently has the power to ground all aircraft in US airspace.

Not really. Even in national emergencies like 9-11, defensive military aircraft, police/law enforcement helicopters, and, of course, Presidential/Vice-Presidential aircraft still have clearance. There are also secret bunkers where high-ranking Government officials will be carried to (perhaps by aircraft) in event of a national emergency, and where emergency government functions will be carried out.....I don't know much about them (and don't need to), as they are highly classified.

Why is no one complaining about it? The President currently has the power to declare a national emergency and martial law. Why is no one complaining about it?

No one complaining about it? Come on. George W (unfairly, IMO), took tons of abuse and criticism for the way the handled security matters after 9-11. I can't remember the last time a President was villified so much in office; even when Clinton was impeached.........or, for that matter, Nixon and Watergate.

[4TehNguyen]

internet is far more valuable than clearing airspace. Your intel and information is dead in its tracks if internet access is cut off. You dont really fly to flee disasters

[lobuxracer]

Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen

internet is far more valuable than clearing airspace. Your intel and information is dead in its tracks if internet access is cut off. You dont really fly to flee disasters

Right. Tell that to the families of the people who died clinging to the landing gear on the aircraft leaving Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War.

Maybe I need to be crystal clear - steam turbines that generate electricity are produced at about 6 per year maximum capacity. Should some serious h4x0r decide for political or economic reasons he needs to overspeed and shatter even 50 of these units through an Internet linked SCADA connection it could black out the entire US and it would take YEARS to recover (6 per year is current global production capacity...). No power except for emergency power from generator sets. No Internet because the backbone would be crippled. No communications because even the cell towers would be without electricity. Is this a little more clear?

I've been to briefings from people who know a lot more about this than I do, and their statements have been pretty blunt: we've been very lucky so far. Sure some of what they say is FUD, but an unfortunate amount is not.

Sorry - the President needs this authority in a properly vetted and constructed law to prevent misuse and abuse of this power. Just like any other power the President has been granted. Could Obama use it for malicious purposes? Sure. Could any President, past, present, or future do the same? Yep, no doubt about it.

Is it necessary to pass THIS bill? Probably not. But at some point, this power will need to be enumerated and the limits will need to be established so the President can do what he's been charged to do - defend the US against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Quit being such a bunch of worry warts. This dude has the launch codes for cryin' out loud.

[Habious]

Originally Posted by lobuxracer

Should some serious h4x0r decide for political or economic reasons he needs to overspeed and shatter even 50 of these units through an Internet linked SCADA connection it could black out the entire US and it would take YEARS to recover (6 per year is current global production capacity...). No power except for emergency power from generator sets. No Internet because the backbone would be crippled. No communications because even the cell towers would be without electricity. Is this a little more clear?

Sorry - the President needs this authority in a properly vetted and constructed law to prevent misuse and abuse of this power. Just like any other power the President has been granted. Could Obama use it for malicious purposes? Sure. Could any President, past, present, or future do the same? Yep, no doubt about it.

Quit being such a bunch of worry warts. This dude has the launch codes for cryin' out loud.

If that's the big concern (or situations like that), why doesn't the bill require critical infrastructure systems to be on their own government-controlled secure network? Or why doesn't the bill give the president the power to disconnect these systems from the Internet?

"Taking down the Internet" is a big deal. You're talking about completely stopping commerce...and shutting down the free-flow of information....because of 50 sites scattered throughout the US?

[lobuxracer]

Originally Posted by Habious

If that's the big concern (or situations like that), why doesn't the bill require critical infrastructure systems to be on their own government-controlled secure network? Or why doesn't the bill give the president the power to disconnect these systems from the Internet?

"Taking down the Internet" is a big deal. You're talking about completely stopping commerce...and shutting down the free-flow of information....because of 50 sites scattered throughout the US?

Because that's completely separate legislation and regulation.

Seriously, you guys have NO CLUE what you're talking about from an infrastructure perspective. Shutting down the 'Net for a day is a whole lot better than a 70% reduction in generation capacity that would take 5 to 10 years to restore. No President is going to take shutting down the Internet lightly - the repercussions would be massive.

NO IT'S NOT 50 sites scattered throughout the US. It's HUNDREDS of sites, HUNDREDS of generation facilities, and a potential LONG TERM blackout. Would you piss and moan about being cut off from the Internet if you had no electricity, no refrigeration, no lighting...please, you're just not paying attention and you only want to view this as a political act. IT'S NOT POLITICAL.

Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen

ridiculous comparion, the US isnt going to fall to invading communists. We aren't fleeing the country. Nor is an airplane necessary to flee a major earthquake or hurricane. So if the US starts doing a huge protest Iran style the president would have the authority to shut down the internet, just like what the Iranian govt did.

KEEP ME SAFE GOVT, SAVE ME (at the expense of my liberties)

And while communists won't be taking over the US, there are always people leaving disasters on aircraft as long as it's somewhat safe to take off. Time and time again, people have been found in wheel wells hypoxic and frozen to death because they feared staying more than dying airborne.

Funny how you would ridicule those who used blackout lights on their cars, stayed off the streets at night, and kept their windows dark all through WWII even though there was no practical chance of a German or Japanese invasion. Were they fools for surrendering their civil liberties and succumbing to rationing by the government to support the war effort?

[Habious]

Originally Posted by lobuxracer

Because that's completely separate legislation and regulation.

Seriously, you guys have NO CLUE what you're talking about from an infrastructure perspective. Shutting down the 'Net for a day is a whole lot better than a 70% reduction in generation capacity that would take 5 to 10 years to restore. No President is going to take shutting down the Internet lightly - the repercussions would be massive.

NO IT'S NOT 50 sites scattered throughout the US. It's HUNDREDS of sites, HUNDREDS of generation facilities, and a potential LONG TERM blackout. Would you piss and moan about being cut off from the Internet if you had no electricity, no refrigeration, no lighting...please, you're just not paying attention and you only want to view this as a political act. IT'S NOT POLITICAL.

lobuxracer,

You clearly have more insight into this than many do...and obviously more than I do.

Believe me, I'm not making light of this. I understand that it's serious.

My point is...if it's really THAT critical...and the systems are THAT vulnerable...take them off the public internet!

Somehow we managed to generate power in this country for a hundred years without the power plants being connected to the Internet.

If it's that important, it shouldn't be connected to a publicly-accessible network.

I see the problem...I just think this is the wrong solution.

Even if we agree that the President would only use this power in a "real" emergency. Aren't we assuming that we'll catch the threat before it's too late?

We're concerned about someone breaking into these systems and over-spinning the generators...if they're smart enough to do this...I bet they're smart enough to do it all at once so, once we realize what's going on...it'll be too late. Once the virus is planted, unplugging the network cable is a waste of time.

[4TehNguyen]

Originally Posted by lobuxracer

Right. Tell that to the families of the people who died clinging to the landing gear on the aircraft leaving Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War.

ridiculous comparion, the US isnt going to fall to invading communists. We aren't fleeing the country. Nor is an airplane necessary to flee a major earthquake or hurricane. So if the US starts doing a huge protest Iran style the president would have the authority to shut down the internet, just like what the Iranian govt did.

KEEP ME SAFE GOVT, SAVE ME (at the expense of my liberties)

[oohpapi44]

I guess understanding the phrase 'ABOVE YOUR PAY GRADE' is just really too complex.

We've survived before the Internet and if it were taken away completely tomorrow, we'd still survive. Shutting down the Internet would not completely stop commerce nor would it stop the free flow of information. GOD forbid people would have to read a newspaper again or wait a little longer to receive a bit of information.

It's a shame how 'soft' we've gotten in this country where we need instant gratification for every little thing.

[J.P.]

Originally Posted by oohpapi44

I guess understanding the phrase 'ABOVE YOUR PAY GRADE' is just really too complex.

We've survived before the Internet and if it were taken away completely tomorrow, we'd still survive. Shutting down the Internet would not completely stop commerce nor would it stop the free flow of information. GOD forbid people would have to read a newspaper again or wait a little longer to receive a bit of information.

It's a shame how 'soft' we've gotten in this country where we need instant gratification for every little thing.

It’s more than having access to a news paper.

Over the last 5 years the people are more aware of the issues than EVER. This is simply because of the internet which includes unfiltered personal opinions and news reports from non-conglomerates. We seen this come alive during the last term of Bush were people became more and more active in caring what their president and congress did and they paid for it.

It was a TAD bit easier to be a politician before the internet.

I know it’s a long shot that our government would ever use the kill switch for their own personal gain but to be completely honest when a couple of weeks ago the president is complaining about the news and emails on the net about the health plan then ASK for people to report to them flag@whitehouse.gov is does really bother me that now we see something like this right now.

I am not up to date 100% like lobux is but I did come from the industry, I am not Joe computer illiterate so I do understand much of the things going on with internet security.

What is needed and how that bill is worded is two different things. Which if you go read it you will see the way it was worded for the use it is suppose to be INTEDNED for it is just a tad bit odd.

[oohpapi44]

Originally Posted by J.P.

It’s more than having access to a news paper.

Over the last 5 years the people are more aware of the issues than EVER. This is simply because of the internet which includes unfiltered personal opinions and news reports from non-conglomerates. We seen this come alive during the last term of Bush were people became more and more active in caring what their president and congress did and they paid for it.

It was a TAD bit easier to be a politician before the internet.

I know it’s a long shot that our government would ever use the kill switch for their own personal gain but to be completely honest when a couple of weeks ago the president is complaining about the news and emails on the net about the health plan then ASK for people to report to them flag@whitehouse.gov is does really bother me that now we see something like this right now.

I am not up to date 100% like lobux is but I did come from the industry, I am not Joe computer illiterate so I do understand much of the things going on with internet security.

What is needed and how that bill is worded is two different things. Which if you go read it you will see the way it was worded for the use it is suppose to be INTEDNED for it is just a tad bit odd.

I'm not questioning your background or understanding of the issue at all nor do I even pretend to understand the full scale of what we are talking about if this situation were to ever arise.

Much of this thread isn't even discussing what's included in the bill as most people who aren't from a computer security background like you and Lobux have never given this issue a thought before today. To compare the loss of the internet for a day or two as opposed as to what could happen in the aftermath of an attack is just silly.

Which goes to the last point you made and I would definitely like more information on where the intent of the bill has changed as the OP made this sound like this is some 'new power' the govt has granted itself. Is there a comparison we can make regarding when these emergency powers can be used as opposed to a previous bill (or Presidency since your whitehouse.gov statement seems to return this back to an issue of politics).

I'm just curious what is being debated here (Security, convenience or politics).