The bill would include placing the responsibility to secure civilian and federal networks—deemed critical to national security—under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It would also establish new cybersecurity organizations in the White House and DHS.
The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 was mired in controversy by rumors that it would place an Internet “kill switch” in the hands of the president.
The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.), refuted the rumors, saying that the bill would actually limit the ability of the president to shut down the Internet—authority which is already included in the Communications Act of 1934. The act allows the president to shut down “any or all facilities or stations for wire communication” for up to six months, if there is threat of war and it is deemed necessary.
Controversy surrounding the new bill shines light on a larger challenge the United States has with cybersecurity and securing its networks. Each cybersecurity bill teeters between Internet freedom or privacy, and this has been the balancing act that challenges those concerned with securing the Internet.
The frontier of the Internet is just beginning to see governance move in, and is quickly nearing a crossroads about how open it will remain, as threats from hackers and foreign governments continue to grow.
“The threat of a catastrophic cyberattack is real. It is not a matter of ‘if’ an attack will happen; rather it is a matter of ‘when,’” said a document issued by Lieberman and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).
The document stated there are an average of 1.8 billion cyberattacks each month on the computer systems of the executive branch agencies and Congress, reported the Senate’s sergeant at arms in March.
It added that “the former Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell testified in February, ‘If we went to war today, in a cyberwar, we would lose.’”
Internet Censorship
Alongside concerns of cybersecurity, concerns about Internet freedom are also increasing—and with good reason. The Internet has opened a window into every home, mobile device, and mobile network. It launched a new level of human communication, which transcends language and country, but it is also allowing increased surveillance, and information control around the world.
Many countries have already locked down the Internet with censorship and information blockades. Just last week, content on YouTube and other social networking sites were blocked in Pakistan, Turkey, and Afghanistan.
Internet users nearly doubled between 2006 and 2008, according to a study by the human rights organization, Freedom House. The organization said that 40 percent of the countries in its study introduced new Internet-restricting legislation during that time, and sentenced at least one blogger to prison.
Cuba remains the most repressive country when it comes to Internet control, where the only access is e-mail and is under heavy surveillance. China also ranks high on the censorship list, where control is not limited to just arrests, monitoring, and blockades, but also includes content manipulation.
Even the United Kingdom—one of the world’s freest countries—has its problems. The U.K. allows individuals, including those from authoritarian countries, to sue online writers for libel, according to Freedom House.
Lieberman’s bill has some groups concerned the U.S. may also be moving in this direction. “These battles over digital rights come up quite often,” said Rebecca Jeschke, media relations director of online civil liberties group, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) via e-mail.
The EFF and similar organizations have been fighting an ongoing battle on issues ranging from security legislation, to online property rights, and Facebook privacy.
Online Threats
Most issues in the online world have two faces, which makes the balance between freedom and security a difficult one to find. In the Wild West of the online world, not everyone uses the Internet for information sharing, shopping, and social networking.
“Malicious cyberactivity is occurring on an unprecedented scale with extraordinary sophistication,” said Dennis Blair, director of National Intelligence, in the Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
“We cannot be certain that our cyberspace infrastructure will remain available and reliable during a time of crisis,” said Blair, adding, “New cybersecurity approaches must continually be developed, tested, and implemented to respond to new threat technologies and strategies.”
Threats include terrorist networks, organized criminal groups, foreign cyberspies, and independent hackers. “Terrorist groups and their sympathizers have expressed interest in using cyber means to target the United States and its citizens,” said Blair, adding that cybercriminals have also “displayed remarkable technical innovation with an agility presently exceeding the response capability of network defenders.”
“We cannot protect cyberspace without a coordinated and collaborative effort that incorporates both the U.S. private sector and our international partners,” he said.
Given the current environment, it is questionable whether the Internet will continue as is, yet many U.S. officials have taken strong stances for Internet freedom.
When the Federal Communications Commission met in 2009 to determine whether the Internet should be subjected to federal regulation, primarily through net neutrality rules, Sen. John McCain introduced The Internet Freedom Act of 2009.
“This government takeover of the Internet will stifle innovation, in turn slowing our economic turnaround, and further depressing an already anemic job market,” said a press release from McCain’s office.
“Keeping businesses free from oppressive regulations is the best stimulus for the current economy,” McCain said.
During a Jan. 21 speech at the Newseum in Washington, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “Just as steel can be used to build hospitals or machine guns, or nuclear power can either energize a city or destroy it, modern information networks and the technologies they support can be harnessed for good or for ill.”
