Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 3510

Developing a Cybersecurity Strategy for the Dept. of Homeland Security

Argument in favor

DHS needs to be able to adapt and respond to cybersecurity threats, and developing a strategy is a logical step towards that goal.

bart's Opinion
···
10/07/2015
It's ridiculous that we need a bill to make this happen. But it appears be necessary. So vote for it.
Like (30)
Follow
Share
BTSundra's Opinion
···
10/07/2015
This sounds like something that should have been done a long time ago.
Like (5)
Follow
Share
jrs333's Opinion
···
09/17/2015
This is a good thing but get rid of the DHS.
Like (1)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Congress shouldn’t need to be asking DHS to come up with a cybersecurity strategy. DHS ought to refresh its strategy every few years automatically.

Wes's Opinion
···
10/06/2015
This shouldn't be an issue for Congress. This should be standard operating procedure and if it isn't, there is a leadership issue in the department.
Like (7)
Follow
Share
John's Opinion
···
10/06/2015
Congress wouldn't know a decent cyber security strategy unless it meant more dollars in their personal bank accounts. If DHS doesn't already do this every day to ensure they are at least 1 step ahead of the terrorists, terrorist states, and enemies like Russia and China, then they should fire the entire leadership immediately. They need to have leaders in place that are even more vigilant than we are in the private sector.
Like (5)
Follow
Share
Loraki's Opinion
···
10/20/2015
UPDATE: [THIS IS UTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS!!!] Obama: Federal Government Can #Hack Into Anyone’s Personal #Computers, #Phones, Whenever it Wants Obama’s “most transparent administration,” via the Department of Justice (#DOJ) is pushing for even greater federal overreach by legalizing the illegal act of law enforcement and intelligence agencies remotely hacking into anyone’s personal computer and mobile device, implanting malicious software on personal computers and mobile devices, and scanning through all personal contents of anyone’s computer– specifically those who have not been charged or used their devices for any criminal activity. Claiming to fight cybercrime, the DOJ has proposed changes to the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 (FRCP41), would expand government overreach in unprecedented proportions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_41 The Supreme Court already approved Obama’s changes to Rule 41. Only Congress can block or approve the change, and it has until December 1, 2016, to do so. In a letter to Sen. #RonWyden , who publicly announced his intent to introduce legislation to block this action, #RutherfordInstitute attorneys listed ways in which the federal government is seeking to spy on anyone it so chooses. http://rutherford.org/files_images/general/05-05-2016_SenatorWyden_Fed-R-Crim-P-41.pdf “Once again, the government is insisting that it needs greater powers to combat cybercrime, even if it means cutting through the very foundations of freedom in order to fight these modern devils,” John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, and author of “Battlefield America: The War on the American People,” said. http://www.amazon.com/Battlefield-America-War-American-People/dp/1590793099 He added, “Of course, it’s a devil’s bargain—much like the #PatriotAct was—that attempts to sell us on the idea that #safety, #security and material comforts are preferable to #freedom. The problem with these devil’s bargains, however, is that there is always a catch, always a price to pay for whatever it is we valued so highly as to barter away our most precious possessions. In the end, as we saw with the Patriot Act, such bargains always turn sour.” Obama’s changes to #FRCP41 give any judge in any area allegedly affected by criminal activity to issue a #warrant to law enforcement and intelligence agencies to search a person’s electronic storage of information and media files. Additionally, a single magistrate would be allowed to issue a warrant to search numerous computers if a cybercrime involving a virus or malware is believed to involve more than five computers– even if the computer’s owner is not suspected of having committed any criminal activity. Obama changes to FRCP41 greatly expand the federal government’s ability to implement remote #surveillance, which involves the government secretly installing #dataextraction software on an individual’s computer– without their permission or knowledge. This software would give the government free reign to remotely search a person’s computer’s hard drive and all stored information, transmit the information to agents, and remotely activate and control a person’s computer’s camera and microphone. And there are #nolimits imposed. Obama’s FRCP41 opens the door for ongoing, unlimited government surveillance of people who are not suspected of committing any criminal activity. And all of this is allowed, according to the #SupremeCourt, including never having to notify the person whose electronic devices the government has hacked. If the federal government insists that it needs more power to fight cybercrime, why is the DOJ insisting that non-suspected criminal activity be allowed under unlimited surveillance? Ironically, the agency responsible for enforcing the law as it applies to the Constitution, has thrown it, along with the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments of the Bill of Rights, into the black hole of #cyberspace. http://constitution.com/constitution-united-states-america/ http://constitution.com/bill-rights/ http://constitution.com/obama-federal-government-can-hack-anyones-personal-computers-phones-whenever-wants/ **HEADS UP, PEOPLE! DON'T SAY YOU HAVEN'T BEEN WARNED!** RE: Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), S. 754 The Senate intends to pass a new warrantless surveillance bill granting government broad new authorities for collecting your personal information from private businesses, and it's up to you and me to stop them. On Wednesday the Senate may hold its first vote on the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), S. 754. Promoted as a "much-needed" "cybersecurity" bill, Congress devised a new way for intelligence agencies to collect your emails and sensitive data. The bill "encourages" private companies like Google, Facebook, and Yahoo to monitor their networks and share "cyber threat indicators" broadly with agencies like the FBI, NSA, and CIA. Worse yet, the bill allows the government to share and use your information for reasons completely unrelated to cybersecurity! And on top of all that, this bill grants companies immunity to ensure they give the government as much information as possible... Without having to make any effort to redact your sensitive information. Let that sink in for a moment... The same government that can't protect its own data on 22.1 million federal employees, contractors, and their families and friends wants private businesses to share your personal information freely with them. And if (more likely, when) your information is misused either by government agencies, private businesses, or both, you will be unable to hold anyone accountable. You and I can both see this isn't going to end well. CISA is justified as necessary to stop hackers... But sharing your Google searches and emails with Homeland Security will not stop hackers. In fact, nothing in this bill would stop any of the cyber-attacks publicized in the press this year. When it comes down to it, this is nothing more than a new warrantless surveillance bill. Congress should be rolling back intelligence agencies' surveillance powers, not granting new ones. Recently, the President of the American Library Association, Sari Feldman, spoke out against the bill saying, "When librarians oppose a bill with 'information sharing' in its name you can be sure that the bill is decidedly more than advertised." Businesses like Twitter, Yelp, Facebook, and Google all oppose this bill. You only need to look at who is sponsoring this bill to realize it isn't for your benefit or mine. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Richard Burr (R-NC), two of the biggest surveillance state proponents in the Senate, are working diligently to ram this legislation through. And that makes the first potential vote on Wednesday crucial. Per standing Senate rules, the Senate needs 60 votes to proceed on the bill. Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), have all vocally opposed this legislation. But it's going to take an outpouring of opposition from grassroots Americans like you to stop this warrantless surveillance bill from passing the Senate.
Like (2)
Follow
Share
    It's ridiculous that we need a bill to make this happen. But it appears be necessary. So vote for it.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    This shouldn't be an issue for Congress. This should be standard operating procedure and if it isn't, there is a leadership issue in the department.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Congress wouldn't know a decent cyber security strategy unless it meant more dollars in their personal bank accounts. If DHS doesn't already do this every day to ensure they are at least 1 step ahead of the terrorists, terrorist states, and enemies like Russia and China, then they should fire the entire leadership immediately. They need to have leaders in place that are even more vigilant than we are in the private sector.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    This sounds like something that should have been done a long time ago.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    We do not need ANY MORE agencies that have done NOTHING but add red tape plus the operating cost to the federal budget. I.e., NEA testing scores worst ever; Dept of Energy highest price ever for gas yet this dept has an annual budget in excess of 50 BILLION DOLLARS.....this is just two divisions or agencies that have not only failed to do what they were designed to but caused an even higher tariff in the form of a burden on the American middle class!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    UPDATE: [THIS IS UTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS!!!] Obama: Federal Government Can #Hack Into Anyone’s Personal #Computers, #Phones, Whenever it Wants Obama’s “most transparent administration,” via the Department of Justice (#DOJ) is pushing for even greater federal overreach by legalizing the illegal act of law enforcement and intelligence agencies remotely hacking into anyone’s personal computer and mobile device, implanting malicious software on personal computers and mobile devices, and scanning through all personal contents of anyone’s computer– specifically those who have not been charged or used their devices for any criminal activity. Claiming to fight cybercrime, the DOJ has proposed changes to the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 (FRCP41), would expand government overreach in unprecedented proportions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_41 The Supreme Court already approved Obama’s changes to Rule 41. Only Congress can block or approve the change, and it has until December 1, 2016, to do so. In a letter to Sen. #RonWyden , who publicly announced his intent to introduce legislation to block this action, #RutherfordInstitute attorneys listed ways in which the federal government is seeking to spy on anyone it so chooses. http://rutherford.org/files_images/general/05-05-2016_SenatorWyden_Fed-R-Crim-P-41.pdf “Once again, the government is insisting that it needs greater powers to combat cybercrime, even if it means cutting through the very foundations of freedom in order to fight these modern devils,” John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, and author of “Battlefield America: The War on the American People,” said. http://www.amazon.com/Battlefield-America-War-American-People/dp/1590793099 He added, “Of course, it’s a devil’s bargain—much like the #PatriotAct was—that attempts to sell us on the idea that #safety, #security and material comforts are preferable to #freedom. The problem with these devil’s bargains, however, is that there is always a catch, always a price to pay for whatever it is we valued so highly as to barter away our most precious possessions. In the end, as we saw with the Patriot Act, such bargains always turn sour.” Obama’s changes to #FRCP41 give any judge in any area allegedly affected by criminal activity to issue a #warrant to law enforcement and intelligence agencies to search a person’s electronic storage of information and media files. Additionally, a single magistrate would be allowed to issue a warrant to search numerous computers if a cybercrime involving a virus or malware is believed to involve more than five computers– even if the computer’s owner is not suspected of having committed any criminal activity. Obama changes to FRCP41 greatly expand the federal government’s ability to implement remote #surveillance, which involves the government secretly installing #dataextraction software on an individual’s computer– without their permission or knowledge. This software would give the government free reign to remotely search a person’s computer’s hard drive and all stored information, transmit the information to agents, and remotely activate and control a person’s computer’s camera and microphone. And there are #nolimits imposed. Obama’s FRCP41 opens the door for ongoing, unlimited government surveillance of people who are not suspected of committing any criminal activity. And all of this is allowed, according to the #SupremeCourt, including never having to notify the person whose electronic devices the government has hacked. If the federal government insists that it needs more power to fight cybercrime, why is the DOJ insisting that non-suspected criminal activity be allowed under unlimited surveillance? Ironically, the agency responsible for enforcing the law as it applies to the Constitution, has thrown it, along with the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments of the Bill of Rights, into the black hole of #cyberspace. http://constitution.com/constitution-united-states-america/ http://constitution.com/bill-rights/ http://constitution.com/obama-federal-government-can-hack-anyones-personal-computers-phones-whenever-wants/ **HEADS UP, PEOPLE! DON'T SAY YOU HAVEN'T BEEN WARNED!** RE: Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), S. 754 The Senate intends to pass a new warrantless surveillance bill granting government broad new authorities for collecting your personal information from private businesses, and it's up to you and me to stop them. On Wednesday the Senate may hold its first vote on the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), S. 754. Promoted as a "much-needed" "cybersecurity" bill, Congress devised a new way for intelligence agencies to collect your emails and sensitive data. The bill "encourages" private companies like Google, Facebook, and Yahoo to monitor their networks and share "cyber threat indicators" broadly with agencies like the FBI, NSA, and CIA. Worse yet, the bill allows the government to share and use your information for reasons completely unrelated to cybersecurity! And on top of all that, this bill grants companies immunity to ensure they give the government as much information as possible... Without having to make any effort to redact your sensitive information. Let that sink in for a moment... The same government that can't protect its own data on 22.1 million federal employees, contractors, and their families and friends wants private businesses to share your personal information freely with them. And if (more likely, when) your information is misused either by government agencies, private businesses, or both, you will be unable to hold anyone accountable. You and I can both see this isn't going to end well. CISA is justified as necessary to stop hackers... But sharing your Google searches and emails with Homeland Security will not stop hackers. In fact, nothing in this bill would stop any of the cyber-attacks publicized in the press this year. When it comes down to it, this is nothing more than a new warrantless surveillance bill. Congress should be rolling back intelligence agencies' surveillance powers, not granting new ones. Recently, the President of the American Library Association, Sari Feldman, spoke out against the bill saying, "When librarians oppose a bill with 'information sharing' in its name you can be sure that the bill is decidedly more than advertised." Businesses like Twitter, Yelp, Facebook, and Google all oppose this bill. You only need to look at who is sponsoring this bill to realize it isn't for your benefit or mine. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Richard Burr (R-NC), two of the biggest surveillance state proponents in the Senate, are working diligently to ram this legislation through. And that makes the first potential vote on Wednesday crucial. Per standing Senate rules, the Senate needs 60 votes to proceed on the bill. Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), have all vocally opposed this legislation. But it's going to take an outpouring of opposition from grassroots Americans like you to stop this warrantless surveillance bill from passing the Senate.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Businesses have regulatory compliance that require us to have cyber security policies and response plans. Government should be held to the same standards.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a good thing but get rid of the DHS.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    What took the Federal Government so long. Sounds like a 2nd rate government. Have I been clear?
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I see nothing in this bill that addressed the extra manpower necessary to accomplish this paperwork activity. I would think that the HS team should do this regularly.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Congress has nickeled & dimed the executive branch historically when it comes to technology. And then, they are shocked, simply shocked, when the technology fails or is hacked. Get a grip!! Appropriate the funding so the US government is not the least technically able in the world!
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    HOW IN THE WIDE WIDE WORLD OF SPORTS DOES THE DHS NOT ALREADY HAVE A "CYBERSECURITY POLICY?" Disband them immediately and launch a full dereliction of duty investigation....
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    DHS can't even do there job much less than this.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I'm shocked they don't already have a vibrant one in place in which we're recruiting the top analysts and hackers whether from basements or board rooms.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    "the urgent need to advance a new agenda to improve our nation's cybersecurity." [dailydot.com]
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I agree wholeheartedly with the statement opposed. If Congress has to ask for a cyber security strategy, there needs to be a new director over there. Our national security needs to be fluid to adapt to the ever changing threats.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    It should be standard procedure, if not change the leadership & get rid of DHS while you are at it.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to make an effort for our government to be able to handle cyber attacks. The way that some cyber crime cases have been handled have been extremely poor, and that needs to change, before technology advances even more.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Homeland Security is a racist and xenophobic construction of our government. They shouldn't exist, period.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    If DHS isn't doing this already, they should all be fired.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    MORE