Thursday, April 9, 2009
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Friday, April 3, 2009
Should Obama Control the Internet?
Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.
story continues below
story continued from above
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this bill.
"We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs—from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records—the list goes on," Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her colleague, saying, "if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina."
But the wide powers outlined in the Rockefeller-Snowe legislation has at least one Internet advocacy group worried. "The cybersecurity threat is real," says Leslie Harris, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), "but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy."
The bill could undermine the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), says CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim. That law, enacted in the mid '80s, requires law enforcement seek a warrant before tapping in to data transmissions between computers.
"It's an incredibly broad authority," Nojeim says, pointing out that existing privacy laws "could fall to this authority."
Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that granting such power to the Commerce secretary could actually cause networks to be less safe. When one person can access all information on a network, "it makes it more vulnerable to intruders," Granick says. "You've basically established a path for the bad guys to skip down."
The bill's scope, she says, is "contrary to what the Constitution promises us." That's because of the impact it could have on Internet users' privacy rights: If the Commerce Department uncovers evidence of illegal activity when accessing "critical" networks, that information could be used against a potential defendant, even if the department never had the intent to find incriminating evidence. And this might violate the Constitutional protection against searches without cause.
"Once information is accessed, it can be used for whatever purpose, no matter the original reason for accessing something," Granick says. "Who's interested in this [bill]? Law enforcement and people in the security industry who want to ensure more government dollars go to them."
Nojeim, though, thinks it's possible the bill's powers could be trimmed as it moves through Congress. "We will be working with them to clarify just what is needed and how to accomplish that," he says. "We're hopeful that some of the very broad powers that the bill would confer won't be included."
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.
story continues below
story continued from above
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this bill.
"We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs—from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records—the list goes on," Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her colleague, saying, "if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina."
But the wide powers outlined in the Rockefeller-Snowe legislation has at least one Internet advocacy group worried. "The cybersecurity threat is real," says Leslie Harris, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), "but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy."
The bill could undermine the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), says CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim. That law, enacted in the mid '80s, requires law enforcement seek a warrant before tapping in to data transmissions between computers.
"It's an incredibly broad authority," Nojeim says, pointing out that existing privacy laws "could fall to this authority."
Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that granting such power to the Commerce secretary could actually cause networks to be less safe. When one person can access all information on a network, "it makes it more vulnerable to intruders," Granick says. "You've basically established a path for the bad guys to skip down."
The bill's scope, she says, is "contrary to what the Constitution promises us." That's because of the impact it could have on Internet users' privacy rights: If the Commerce Department uncovers evidence of illegal activity when accessing "critical" networks, that information could be used against a potential defendant, even if the department never had the intent to find incriminating evidence. And this might violate the Constitutional protection against searches without cause.
"Once information is accessed, it can be used for whatever purpose, no matter the original reason for accessing something," Granick says. "Who's interested in this [bill]? Law enforcement and people in the security industry who want to ensure more government dollars go to them."
Nojeim, though, thinks it's possible the bill's powers could be trimmed as it moves through Congress. "We will be working with them to clarify just what is needed and how to accomplish that," he says. "We're hopeful that some of the very broad powers that the bill would confer won't be included."
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Upbeat Economic Indicators Give Americans Hope That Worst May be Over
Upbeat Economic Indicators Give Americans Hope That Worst May be Over
By Harold BrubakerPrint Article Print Article
business-web3RISMEDIA, March 28, 2009-(MCT)-A run of encouraging economic reports that have recently been released may mean the worst, panic-inducing stage of the economic downturn is over. Emphasis on the word may. “I think there are signs of economic life,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com in West Chester, PA, said. “The downturn is no longer intensifying, and the clearest evidence of this can be found in the retail sector as retail sales have turned since the beginning of the year,” Zandi said.
Upbeat economic indicators, including government reports showing gains in durable-goods orders and new-homes sales, may not mean the economy has struck bottom, however. Job losses will continue, and growth is not expected until late this year, economists said.
Gloomier economic forecasts, by the likes of Martin Feldstein, a Harvard University economics professor and a member of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, have pushed the turnaround well into next year, according to a Reuter’s interview.
Even relatively optimistic economists are quick to warn that not too much should be read into reports like these released by the Commerce Department on new-home sales and durable-goods orders.
New-home sales in February jumped 4.7% to an annual pace of 337,000 from a record low in January. February marked the first increase in sales since the summer, and the report added to a string of “better-than-expected” housing data, according to Wachovia Bank economist Adam G. York.
New orders for computers, machinery, and other durable goods climbed an unexpectedly strong 3.4% in February as well. “This was a surprisingly strong bounce in view of the severe global recession,” said Brian Bethune, chief U.S. financial economist at IHS Global Insight Inc., “but we would not read too much into it,” as he said he expected the overall downward trend to continue for several more months.
Zandi called the climb in durable-goods orders a hopeful sign and pointed to other reasons for optimism, including the rally in the stock market. “That’s important in terms of the collective psyche,” he said.
The Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index has gained 20% since March 9 - when it closed at a level last seen more than a decade before and The Dow Jones industrial average has risen 18.4% in the same amount of time.
The tax portion of the federal-stimulus program is kicking in, as a decline in tax withholding is starting to boost take-home pay, Zandi said, which could bolster the positive trend in consumer spending seen earlier this year.
William C. Dunkelberg, an economics professor at Temple University, said pent-up demand in the economy was huge because consumers had reduced spending out of fear. “As confidence returns,” he said, “they’ll spend.”
Dunkelberg went out on a limb and said that the economy had bottomed, citing the gain in construction, the upturn in new-home sales, and the decline in inventories to record lows.
An executive at National Penn Bancshares Inc. is not ready to go that far. “I think our stance here is to prepare for the worst and be pleasantly surprised if things turn out better,” said Michael R. Reinhard, the Boyertown, Pa., bank’s chief financial officer. “We’re not ready to call this the bottom, and everything’s uphill from here.”
Copyright © 2009, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
By Harold BrubakerPrint Article Print Article
business-web3RISMEDIA, March 28, 2009-(MCT)-A run of encouraging economic reports that have recently been released may mean the worst, panic-inducing stage of the economic downturn is over. Emphasis on the word may. “I think there are signs of economic life,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com in West Chester, PA, said. “The downturn is no longer intensifying, and the clearest evidence of this can be found in the retail sector as retail sales have turned since the beginning of the year,” Zandi said.
Upbeat economic indicators, including government reports showing gains in durable-goods orders and new-homes sales, may not mean the economy has struck bottom, however. Job losses will continue, and growth is not expected until late this year, economists said.
Gloomier economic forecasts, by the likes of Martin Feldstein, a Harvard University economics professor and a member of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, have pushed the turnaround well into next year, according to a Reuter’s interview.
Even relatively optimistic economists are quick to warn that not too much should be read into reports like these released by the Commerce Department on new-home sales and durable-goods orders.
New-home sales in February jumped 4.7% to an annual pace of 337,000 from a record low in January. February marked the first increase in sales since the summer, and the report added to a string of “better-than-expected” housing data, according to Wachovia Bank economist Adam G. York.
New orders for computers, machinery, and other durable goods climbed an unexpectedly strong 3.4% in February as well. “This was a surprisingly strong bounce in view of the severe global recession,” said Brian Bethune, chief U.S. financial economist at IHS Global Insight Inc., “but we would not read too much into it,” as he said he expected the overall downward trend to continue for several more months.
Zandi called the climb in durable-goods orders a hopeful sign and pointed to other reasons for optimism, including the rally in the stock market. “That’s important in terms of the collective psyche,” he said.
The Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index has gained 20% since March 9 - when it closed at a level last seen more than a decade before and The Dow Jones industrial average has risen 18.4% in the same amount of time.
The tax portion of the federal-stimulus program is kicking in, as a decline in tax withholding is starting to boost take-home pay, Zandi said, which could bolster the positive trend in consumer spending seen earlier this year.
William C. Dunkelberg, an economics professor at Temple University, said pent-up demand in the economy was huge because consumers had reduced spending out of fear. “As confidence returns,” he said, “they’ll spend.”
Dunkelberg went out on a limb and said that the economy had bottomed, citing the gain in construction, the upturn in new-home sales, and the decline in inventories to record lows.
An executive at National Penn Bancshares Inc. is not ready to go that far. “I think our stance here is to prepare for the worst and be pleasantly surprised if things turn out better,” said Michael R. Reinhard, the Boyertown, Pa., bank’s chief financial officer. “We’re not ready to call this the bottom, and everything’s uphill from here.”
Copyright © 2009, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.