Washington Examiner  home delivery | classifieds | autos | jobs | real estate | home listings | advertise
   
Dining stimulus plan
Welcome,   My Account |  Log out
Welcome, Guest  Sign In |  Register
Monday, March 22, 2010 | Last Update 2:08 EDT
View today's E-Dition

click for forecast
Home News Politics Local Opinion Economy Sports Lifestyle Classifieds Jobs Autos Home Listings
Nation World Beltway Confidential Yeas & Nays Opinion Zone Weather Mobile Site RSS Feeds Contact
Nation World Science Education RSS Feeds
Beltway Confidential Yeas & Nays White House Congress Michael Barone Byron York Chris Stirewalt
Local Front DC Virginia Maryland Blogs Crime Transportation People Education Real Estate Events Calendar
Editorials Beltway Confidential OpinionZone Nate Beeler Columnists Mark Tapscott Dave Freddoso Mark Hemingway
Your Money Real Estate Technology K-Street
Blogs Redskins/NFL Wizards/NBA Caps/NHL Nationals/MLB United/MLS Colleges Golf
Yeas & Nays Movies Television Music Health Events Calendar

Opinion

Examiner Opinion Zone

[Print]  [Email]         Share    

What do 'Cybersecurity Emergency' Powers mean for the Internet?

By: Ryan Radia and Wayne Crews
Washington Examiner
09/05/09 8:39 PM EDT

Could President Obama soon gain the power to shut down the Internet? This is a question that has vexed security experts, legal scholars, and bloggers across the Web for the past week, ever since Cnet’s Declan McCullagh made public a leaked draft of S. 773, a cybersecurity bill currently pending in the U.S. Senate. Buried in the bill are a series of vague provisions that, depending on how you read them, can be construed as giving the President the sweeping authority to seize control of any computer in the United States.

In an opinon essay on CBSNews.com, writer Bruce Henderson observed that S. 773 “has unleashed a flood of criticism on how [the bill] would give the government a ‘kill switch’ for the Internet.”  But other experts have expressed skepticism toward such claims. According to Simon Ou, an assistant professor in computing and information sciences at Kansas State University, “the Internet is composed of a large number of small networks, both in the U.S. and abroad, that are interconnected through various networking protocols. I don't think any one nation has the authority or capability to ‘shut down’ the Internet."

Even if Obama were to merely gain the power to issue orders to operators of U.S.-based systems, there is still much to be concerned about. From telecommunications backbones to the power grid, virtually anything connected to some other computer in America would potentially be fair game for Obama to exercise “emergency” powers provided for by S. 773. In the event of a severe cyberattack, the federal government would gain the power to literally come in and take control of private computers, all in the name of safeguarding America’s “critical infrastructure.”

What, exactly, constitutes a “critical” network? It’s anyone’s guess – S.773 would give the President the sole discretion to define “critical information systems.” The bill does not provide for an independent review procedure.

Worried yet? You should be. After all, this is the same federal government that’s arguably the single greatest violator of individual privacy in the United States. If anything, government already has far too much power to control our lives and compel the disclosure of private information. Remember, it was only three years ago that the National Security Agency was found to be illegally wiretapping hundreds of millions of Americans without any court oversight using private telephone networks. To give the government even more power to impose dictates on private networks that transport sensitive personal data would be to ignore the important lessons from the post-9/11 era.

S. 773 is only the latest reminder of how tempting it can be for politicians in both parties to expand the federal government’s authority over “critical” private networks. Proposals to collectivize and centralize cybersecurity, however, threaten not only our freedom, but our security, too.

In fast-moving, competitive frontier industries like information technology, the small delays that inevitably accompany government “oversight” can have serious repercussions. When big government asserts authority over security technologies, it stymies the emergence of more robust information security practices. S. 773 aims to make America’s vital networks safer, but giving the government more power to impose mandates on private networks will make us less secure, not more secure.

Instead of granting new power to the federal government to control private networks, any cybersecurity legislation should restrict its focus to securing government networks and keeping government agencies on the cutting edge of communications technology. To be sure, if the nation does suffer a serious cyberattack, a swift response will be crucial. Government may well have an important role to play in identifying and punishing wrongdoers. But the ultimate responsibility and authority to defend private networks properly rests with network owners, not government.


Ryan Radia is an information policy analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. Wayne Crews is vice president for policy and director of technology studies at the institute.



More from Ryan Radia

  • Feds should free up airwaves to spur wireless growth
  • Feds should free up airwaves to spur wireless growth
  • Facebook changes Privacy Policy to appease Canadians
  • What do 'Cybersecurity Emergency' Powers mean for the Internet?
  • Is Google book deal a threat to privacy?

More from Wayne Crews

  • Andrew Cuomo should leave Intel alone
  • What do 'Cybersecurity Emergency' Powers mean for the Internet?


Follow The Examiner

beltway confidential
Health care, the fix, and a done deal in the House

The House just passed by a vote of 220-211 a bill that would make corrections to the massive health care reform legislation passed earlier Sunday evening. The second bill would...

—Susan Ferrechio

House passes health care reform; GOP attempts last ditch effort to kill it

The House has just passed the massive health care reform bill approved by the Senate in December. The vote was 219 to 212 and it concluded with jubilant Democrats cheering...

—Susan Ferrechio

Pro-Life group withdraws award scheduled for Stupak UPDATE: Was Stupak bought with $726,409 for airports?

More negative consequences for Rep. Bart Stupak, D-MI, flowing from his agreeing to support Obamacare tonight following President Obama's issuance of an Executive Order...

—Mark Tapscott

Biggest difference between 1994 and 2010?

With House Democrats passing Obamacare over the vociferous objections of a clear majority of Americans, Republicans are confidently predicting they will score big gains in...

—Mark Tapscott

More Beltway Confidential posts...





Featured Writers
Star Parker
Unions, public schools, and minority children
James Carafano
Tehran's terrible future, and maybe America's too
Gregory Kane
Here's a real 'Black Agenda'
Hugh Hewitt
What the NRCC needs to do now
Mark Hemingway
It's Obama versus the American people
Chris Stirewalt
Either learn to love Obamacare, or sue to stop it

To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines
  1. Rules Committee meeting descends into chaos
  2. Support surges for Stupak's re-election opponent after abortion funding deal with White House
  3. Democrats to America: Drop dead
  4. Questions about the Stupak deal
  5. Stupak is still a firm "no"
  6. William Saunders: Democrats' EO offer shows Obamacare does fund abortion
  7. Tea Party protesters refused entry into congressional buildings
  8. 16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare
  9. Health plan means bigger deficits and higher taxes
  10. 'Deem and pass' dead; Now it's the 'Supermax' rule with few amendments, little debate





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 200 words. Warning: If you comment, the Disqus platform default is set to email you when other reply to it. If you do not want to receive these replies to your comment, please uncheck the box.


blog comments powered by Disqus


Local

Deadly accidents involving iPods alarm officials

At least three people in the Washington region have died in accidents in the last year, while wearing headphones. Full story

Sports

NCAA Tournament: Games to watch, March 19, 2010

No. 5 Temple vs. No. 12 Cornell Where »... Full story

Scoop

Scoop: Bullock’s marriage called a total sham

More revelations are emerging about the... Full story

Internships | Maps | RSS | Twitter | Facebook | Mobile | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Rack Locations | Advertise