CISA passes in Senate 74-21

[moral_victory]

EFF Disappointed as CISA Passes Senate
CISA passed the Senate today in a 74-21 vote. The bill is fundamentally flawed due to its broad immunity clauses, vague definitions, and aggressive spying authorities. The bill now moves to a conference committee despite its inability to address problems that caused recent highly publicized computer data breaches, like unencrypted files, poor computer architecture, un-updated servers, and employees (or contractors) clicking malware links.

The conference committee between the House of Representatives and the Senate will determine the bill's final language. But no amount of changes in conference could fix the fact that CISA doesn't address the real cybersecurity problems that caused computer data breaches like Target and the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

The passage of CISA reflects the misunderstanding many lawmakers have about technology and security. Computer security engineers were against it. Academics were against it. Technology companies, including some of Silicon Valley’s biggest like Twitter and Salesforce, were against it. Civil society organizations were against it. And constituents sent over 1 million faxes opposing CISA to Senators.

With security breaches like T-mobile, Target, and OPM becoming the norm, Congress knows it needs to do something about cybersecurity. It chose to do the wrong thing. EFF will continue to fight against the bill by urging the conference committee to incorporate pro-privacy language. And we will never stop fighting for lawmakers to either understand technology or understand when they need to listen to the people who do.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/eff-disappointed-cisa-passes-senate

Libertarian Gary Johnson on CISA

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/10/gary-johnson-act-now-to-stop-cisa/

Tech companies against

http://news.filehippo.com/2015/10/a...-mongst-22-tech-companies-opposing-cisa-bill/

NAYs ---21
Baldwin (D-WI)
Booker (D-NJ)
Brown (D-OH)
Cardin (D-MD)
Coons (D-DE)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daines (R-MT)
Franken (D-MN)
Heller (R-NV)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lee (R-UT)
Markey (D-MA)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Risch (R-ID)
Sanders (I-VT)
Sullivan (R-AK)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-NM)
Warren (D-MA)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 5
Cruz (R-TX)
Graham (R-SC)
Paul (R-KY) (I find this weird)
Rubio (R-FL)
Vitter (R-LA)

 

[moral_victory]

The Franken amendment was put forth by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) to narrow the bill’s definitions of “cybersecurity threat.” It would have limited that designation to actions that are “reasonably likely to” cause damage to the company’s network, as opposed to CISA’s default “may.” The provision would also limit an aspect of the definition of “cyber threat indicator” to include only information necessary to describe actual harm caused by an incident, not “potential harm,” as in the original bill.

The Franken amendment failed 35 to 60.

While the White House came out in support of the bill just last week, opposition remains staunch from tech industry leaders. Groups that have come out against CISA include tech giants such as Google, Apple and Yelp, as well policy advocacy organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, FreedomWorks and Center for Democracy and Technology.