Will the President Shut Down Your Internet Traffic?

[Dan C. Rinnert]

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 would give the President the authority to limit or shutdown traffic to portions of the Internet, including those on private networks, as well as demand security data from those networks, in the event of a vaguely defined cybersecurity threat.

Here are two different viewpoints on the bill:

The Proposed Federalization of the Computer Security Field

Bill Would Grant President Unprecedented Cyber-security Powers

Apparently also includes language that could be used to determine the feasibility of providing everyone with a unique ID to use the Internet.

I'm sure such power won't be abused or misused, right? I mean, politicians would never over-react and do something like shut down the Internet on a certain day because a certain worm might do something on that day, right?

Time to hurry up and make your riches on the Internet!

[Quentin]

Yep all countries are trying to implement filters.

They all cried foul because China did it and now they all follow suit.

Giving governments this sort of power is scary in my opinion. They should provide public service that you can optin like open DNS.

Quentin

Quentin

[JimZ]

No matter what governments say a unique ID for everyone to use the internet will be the means of taxing you in the future. Taxes either for use of the internet or on what you purchase on the internet.

[Katatonic]

This whole internet censorship is getting out of hand.

It's highly a people's network, run for and by the people (non profit organisation such as ICANN). I don't see why Governments should be stepping in and monitoring every thing we do, given that every one will be connected to the internet either directly or indirectly.

Us Aussies are going through the same process at the moment.

[bgmacaw]

Who is John Galt?

[ProductCreator]

Maybe we'll eventually go back to the way of the BBS and the modem, just to keep away from filthy government meddling.

[blueice]

The problem with all these attempts by Governments to control the internet is the speed of technology. By the time it`s debated, costed and implemented it`s outdated with software and hardware advances.

At the moment, with Mobile phone technology, GPS, high speed wireless and encryption, most of the internet could easily be replaced with personal short range routers. No need for ISP`s or optical cables, although connecting across oceans still might need cable.

Governments always use this anti-terrorism angle to try and bring in legislations but it really just ends up controlling the population, the terrorists (if they really ever existed) etc have moved on. The no-fly-list is a good example of safety gone wrong.

[entry]

Originally Posted by Quentin

Yep all countries are trying to implement filters.

They all cried foul because China did it and now they all follow suit.

Giving governments this sort of power is scary in my opinion. They should provide public service that you can optin like open DNS.

Quentin

Quentin

How will these filters affect our sites/traffic?

[Quentin]

well they are not really interested in your average site however if they get too heavy handed with it they could slow the whole thing a lot and that's why you should be partitioning them not to do it or just the outter fringes, beastealitity and child porn etc.

But get them not to filter so much as self regulate. So like I said before something like open dns where you can do your own filtering.

The big problem is that it only applies to websites which is only about 20% of Internet traffic. The rest is peer to peer etc which they will have a lot of trouble filtering.

Since they closed down napster they shot themself in the foot because the companies went out and built a lot better systems with roaming etc.

Q

[IGotTheNews]

I have to agree that the internet censorship is getting out of hand, but there are a good deal of scum that go on the internet still. There has to be something that people can do to stop the constant worms and viruses that people are scared of. Sure, you can have an anti-virus and things in that nature, but do they really work? Granted, I don't like to think of anything with the government trying to stifle the internet from responsible people, but there has to be a step. This is not it. There needs to be baby steps.

[morwanneg]

Originally Posted by IGotTheNews

I have to agree that the internet censorship is getting out of hand, but there are a good deal of scum that go on the internet still. There has to be something that people can do to stop the constant worms and viruses that people are scared of. Sure, you can have an anti-virus and things in that nature, but do they really work? Granted, I don't like to think of anything with the government trying to stifle the internet from responsible people, but there has to be a step. This is not it. There needs to be baby steps.

Are you kidding me? These viruses and worms cannot stop! Antivirus companies will run out of business. If anything, they should create more viruses for them to stay in the biz. Going back to the topic, i don't think extreme internet censorship is even possible. Tell me, how do you censor something that is intrinsically designed to prevent and circumvent blocking? The answer is you cannot. There will always be ways to bypass internet censorship crap. Just my 2cents

[ss442]

"Quote, Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V.," This was posted on Worldnetdaily today and should be of concern to all of us who use the internet.

In my view, government can't do anything right. The problem with government intervention is it is always over-reaching and often kills the very industries it supposes to protect.

Recently, the Department of Agriculture proposed a rulemaking bill for public comment that would require this anyone who wanted to load their horses into a trailer for a weekend ride someplace, they would have to report that treck to the Department of Agriculture within 48hrs! You would also be required to install tracking RFID equipment into each animal and buy equipment to read the RFID tags.

The intended purpose is said to track critters that may have some disease like mad cow or something but this is far too reaching. And this is my point, goverment places the burdons on us and says do this my way or we will fine or encarcerate you. They don't ask, this is an issue, "how can we help you solve it?"

It's also a safe bet a new government agency will be created and someone will have to pay for it and you know who that is.

Yes, there is a concern about cyber security but government needs to stay out of the way and allow private industry to come up with "market based" methods of defeating cyber attacks.

What government "should" do is work with private industry to come up with ideas that;

1. will best solve these issues without restricting the very livelihoods of those who earn their living, or strive to on the internet
2. offer incentive to develop solutions to prevent problems and secure the internet
3. means test (most internet entrepreneurs test ads and systems) solutions before slamming new regulation that may affect all internet users

Regardless, we no longer can sit back and say "there isn't anything I can do".

There is!

Write, phone, fax, email your representatives and demand action. We've all forgotten that government works for us and government has developed the culture that they can now dictate regulation on us under guise of solving this or that issue.

[affenpinscher]

IGottheNews - the whole country of China is behind a firewall and it's pretty effective (I work for a Fortune 500 company that has offices and people living in China).

Four years ago, we had a native Chinese woman come to our office for training and she had never heard of the government killings in Tiananmen Square!

Technology is always a two way street.

[Floyd Fisher]

Newsflash: You already have a unique ID to use the internet....it's called a MAC address.

[Sam101]

Originally Posted by Daisuke

wat? .

Read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand to get your answer.

[Johnathan]

Originally Posted by entry

How will these filters affect our sites/traffic?

Well, interesting. If you are deemed a "threat", then it seems like your site could be shut down. maybe if you sell an e-book someone "doesn't like" (aka got the girlfriend a politician wanted so he/she is annoyed at you), so decides to shut you down.

[archer29]

Keep your proxy list handy. At least until they confiscate your laptop and ipod then you won't need them because you won't even have an ISP.

ACTA opens the doors for serious abuse of power

Originally Posted by affenpinscher

IGottheNews - the whole country of China is behind a firewall and it's pretty effective (I work for a Fortune 500 company that has offices and people living in China).

Four years ago, we had a native Chinese woman come to our office for training and she had never heard of the government killings in Tiananmen Square!

Technology is always a two way street.

That's pretty amazing.

The valid point has been made about technology staying ahead of the debates but also you really should know how your congress reps will be voting for this.

I can't say which reps are serious about their jobs and which ones are along for the ride, so to speak, but organizing a dozen or so calls and a few hundred letters to your reps office will only take a small amount of time and it's something anyone can do.

One step further: it's likely that your local COC has a few people who contributed to your state reps campaign. What do they think about this and related bills, and are they willing to make a phone call?

Things are way out of hand in this society but the masses still have power if we'll simply agree to use it rather than sit idly by.

[SteveJohnson]

What never ceases to amaze me is the sheer number of people that really actually believe that governments are benevolent and are there to help...

Government, by its very nature, is a power grab by a group of people. For the most part, that is the nature of people that gravitate to elected office. Very few send themselves through the emotional and financial wringer that is our election system just so they can 'serve the people'.

So how can it surprise anyone that elected people try to grab more power?

Originally Posted by SteveJohnson

What never ceases to amaze me is the sheer number of people that really actually believe that governments are benevolent and are there to help...

Government, by its very nature, is a power grab by a group of people. For the most part, that is the nature of people that gravitate to elected office. Very few send themselves through the emotional and financial wringer that is our election system just so they can 'serve the people'.

So how can it surprise anyone that elected people try to grab more power?

Of course I agree with this Steve. But the fact is there are still some people in Congress and the Courts who don't realize they're supposed to be scum bags, and are thus still trying to work for the people.

It's in the minority I'm sure but these folks do exist. And generally I haven't found telling people the abrasive truth about the government to be very effective as a point blank measure.

You'll get more resistance that way. I typically save the heavy stuff for the "back end" if you will.

Another point of interest is that technology-based companies were heavy in the president's top 10 campaign contributors, i.e. Google, Microsoft, IBM, and a couple of others.

So this bill that originated with White House input is likely also a product of the major techno corporations. The corporations appear to have the greater power in our society so it's a point of interest to wonder how they would benefit from a bill like this.

[ss442]

I think that in some ways the internet is the "wild, wild west" and all of us even in this forum work to make it better.

Now on the subject of cyber warfare where another rogue country has enough internet savvy to reek havoc on another countries internet services in general, again I think that government needs to work with private industry and service providers to get safeguards and backup plans in place.

My understanding is that there is engineering going on right now to make the system faster and much more robust. It still amazes me that I can shoot a couple hundred photos and some video with all of it coming from an SD card less than the size of a quarter.

It seems there should be a simple and economical end to the concern, but then, what does the government know about economics?

Ed

[ss442]

Originally Posted by Tim Whiston

Of course I agree with this Steve. But the fact is there are still some people in Congress and the Courts who don't realize they're supposed to be scum bags, and are thus still trying to work for the people.

It's in the minority I'm sure but these folks do exist. And generally I haven't found telling people the abrasive truth about the government to be very effective as a point blank measure.

You'll get more resistance that way. I typically save the heavy stuff for the "back end" if you will.

Another point of interest is that technology-based companies were heavy in the president's top 10 campaign contributors, i.e. Google, Microsoft, IBM, and a couple of others.

So this bill that originated with White House input is likely also a product of the major techno corporations. The corporations appear to have the greater power in our society so it's a point of interest to wonder how they would benefit from a bill like this.

Man, you hit the nail on the head. You are exactly right and it is quite possible that this or these bills could be like this "Employee Freedom Act" where the unions want to see who voted against them so they can key their cars.

They give it an attention grabbing headline but the substance is all BS.

So, in review I wonder who is pushing this bill, specifically. We know who the sponsor is.

[SteveJohnson]

Tim, you're right, and that's why I qualified my statement with 'for the most part'.

It's all a big conspiracy

Originally Posted by SteveJohnson

It's all a big conspiracy

Yep LOL.

Originally Posted by ss442

It seems there should be a simple and economical end to the concern, but then, what does the government know about economics?

Great point. It so often seems the "solutions" offered are sweeping drives around the whole block rather than just crossing the darn street, as it were.

[timpears]

Steve & Tim - You guys are right on the mark. I have yet to find a damn thing that the government (I live in the USA, but I am actually a Brit.) does well. They are pretty good at the armed forces, but I would be willing to bet even that could be out sourced and done better. But other than that, everything they touch they screw up and make worse. Now they want to take on health care. I remember that nightmare when I was a kid, with all the long waiting. Why people keep electing these same bone heads into office, I will never know.

Like someone previously posted, hopefully technology will keep one step ahead and not allow the governments to screw the internet up.

[Elliott]

Oh yeh, ain't government awful.

Government was responsible for the funding and initial development of the interstate highway system, jet aviation, semicinductors, computers, the Internet, global positioning systems, laser technology,MRI technologiesfiber-reinforced plastics, high-strength steel alloys, nanotech, and a host of other innovations and progressive development.

Not to mention the defeat of the Nazis in WWII, and contributing to the fall of the Soviet Union. Terrible things those, our government did there, eh? Who would be ruling the US right now, do you suppose, if we had done away with "government" at some point in the past....?

Please explain what kind of a world you see, in which no "government" exists? And what you would see as the desirable qualities of such a world, that had no "government" at all.

Would there be any rule of law at all? How would the roads be maintained? What about public utilities?

Would we all still be using leaded gas in our cars, which would be running along with no emission control systems? Would our air quality be like that of Mexico City, or Beijing, or Teheran, where the elderly and babies die at a high rate because of the bad air, and a high percentage of the populations suffer from asthma and other respiratory maladies?

Would our baby food manufacturers be free to adulterate their products with poisonous fillers, as happened in China, because there was no "oppressive governement" regulation of the industry.

"Government" is by definition is the exercise of some control to get things accomplished. Without some control, there is a free-for-all chaos of conflicting purposes and a complete lack of justice of any kind, only the rule of brute force.

There will always be a "government" of some kind, because government is simply a way of getting things organized and accomplished.

You folks who rail against and decry the "the government" as an evil thing are actually part of the problem, not part of the solution.

You are not taking responsibility for our government, which is also YOUR government. Instead of taking some responsibility and working to improve it, correct it, and make it more responsive and effective for us, the people, you just stand back and talk about "how bad it all is." Talk about suppressive generalization!

Enough said.

Elliott

[Pete Egeler]

Well, while everyone has time to piss & moan about this, is anyone taking the time to do anything about it?

Don't like the bill? Let it be known! Contact Elected Officials: USA.gov

Oh, ya. Before someone starts to dump on a particular party, here's something else that might enlighten you: Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., Fellow co-sponsor Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)

That means that BOTH political parties are involved doesn't it boys & girls.

Pete

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by Sam101

Read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand to get your answer.

YouTube - The Relevance of Atlas Shrugged in...

The guy's accent is a bit distracting though.

Also this: The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: "The Nature of Government", by Ayn Rand

Well, that's about enough discussing politics for me...there's no money in it.

[ripsnorta2]

Originally Posted by Elliott

Oh yeh, ain't government awful.

Government was responsible for the funding and initial development of the interstate highway system, jet aviation, semicinductors, computers, the Internet, global positioning systems, laser technology,MRI technologiesfiber-reinforced plastics, high-strength steel alloys, nanotech, and a host of other innovations and progressive development.

Not to mention the defeat of the Nazis in WWII, and contributing to the fall of the Soviet Union. Terrible things those, our government did there, eh? Who would be ruling the US right now, do you suppose, if we had done away with "government" at some point in the past....?

...

Elliott

Government was also responsible for invading Poland, sending millions to the gas chamber during WW2, and the purges in the Soviet Union. It was also responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbour, and the deaths of millions throughout the ages in wars and brutal crackdowns on free speech.

Your particular government may not have been responsible for all of those things, but in any case the US govt of ages past doesn't have blood free hands either.

There's always going to be a need for some form of government, you're right there, and we can't do away with it. What can and should be done however, is that the people should limit it, and limit the amount of power they give to it.

The people should allocate power to their government grudgingly, and take it back zealously.

[Scott Anson]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

Who is John Galt?

Right On, I am so glad to see others with their eyes open.

[Elliott]

I agree 100%, ripsnorta.

My objection is to people who moan and groan and talk about how bad it all is, ignoring the positive aspects and indiscriminately painting all and any government black, while at the same time not interacting with their government, and completely ignoring, by not mentioning, any of the good works people in government have done.
That is just plain irresponsible.

Our government in particular is relatively responsive to citizen action - it's designed that way. At the same time, "Eternal Vigilance is the price of Liberty," as someone once said....

I had relatives who lived and died in the Soviet GULAGs. That's what can happen. Kids died in Tiananmen Square. people died in Europe during WW2.

Americans have it good. But it takes vigilance and action to keep'em honest, simply because there are dishonest people, and they get into government, just as they get into Internet Marketing. But to say "government" by it's very nature is a bad thing, is just plain silly, and may be even ill-intentioned. There is nothing constructive about talking like that. "well, I know some IMers are crooks, therefore IM is a bad thing, we should do away with it." Does that make sense? Well, I'm belaboring the point, I'll stop now.

I actually feel threads like this don't belong in a marketing forum. At least, most of the posts don't. They go way off-topic, and are mostly rank speculation about shadowy figures, nefarious intentions of unnamed government figures, and other "Information" apparently derived by psychic means...

I'm outta here....

Elliott

[MichaelHiles]

lol... the .gov can't even stop drugs from crossing our borders after billions of dollars spent for decades.

All the might and force of the US military cannot eliminate a rogue faction of radical Islamists in some ghetto neighborhoods of a single city in Iraq.

Any government only has the power that is given to it by the governed. It seems that lately, the US population has misinterpreted mainstream media coverage of elections with Dancing With The Stars.

Meanwhile, the techies will always outpace the law.