Obama internet 'kill switch' proposed
ASHER MOSES
June 18, 2010 - 2:19PM
The US President, Barack Obama, would be granted powers to seize control of and even shut down the internet under a new bill that describes the global internet as a US "national asset".
Local lobby groups and academics have rounded on the plan, saying rather than combat terrorists, it would actually do them "the biggest favour ever" by terrorising the rest of the world, which is now heavily reliant on cyberspace.
The proposed legislation, introduced into the US Senate by independent senator Joe Lieberman, who is chairman of the US Homeland Security committee, seeks to grant the President broad emergency powers over the internet in times of national emergency.
Titled "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act", the bill stipulates any internet firms and providers must "immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed" by a new section of the US Department of Homeland Security, dubbed the "National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications".
Lobby group TechAmerica told ZDNet it worried that the bill would give the US "absolute power" over the internet and create "unintended consequences".
One of Australia's top communications experts, University of Sydney associate professor Bjorn Landfeldt, railed against the idea saying shutting down the internet would "inflict an enormous damage on the entire world".
He said it would be like giving a single country "the right to poison the atmosphere, or poison the ocean".
"All our financial systems, all our security systems ... we're so reliant on the internet that if you shut it down there's a question of whether society will continue to operate normally anywhere in the Western world," Landfeldt said in a phone interview.
"By doing this they would do the terrorists the biggest favour ever because they would terrorise the rest of the world"
Landfeldt said the US would be the only country in the world with the ability to shut down the internet. He said such a move would be extremely difficult for the US to justify to other nations.
"Unfortunately too much of the core of the internet resides in the US - lets put it this way, they cannot shut down machines in Australia, but they can completely isolate us and shut down certain core functions like the DNS ... they can render the internet fairly useless for the rest of the world," he said.
Senator Susan Collins, co-sponsor of the bill, has said "we cannot afford to wait for a cyber-9/11".
Lieberman argued the bill was necessary to "preserve those networks and assets and our country and protect our people".
He said that for all its allure, the internet can also be a "dangerous place with electronic pipelines that run directly into everything from our personal bank accounts to key infrastructure to government and industrial secrets".
US economic security, national security and public safety were now all at risk from new kinds of enemies, including "cyber warriors, cyber spies, cyber terrorists and cyber criminals".
Geordie Guy, spokesman for the online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia, said governments around the world seemed terrified of some unidentified risk that they believe the internet poses.
"The proposal is from Joe Lieberman, a repeat offender on rights versus regulation, in a bill called Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010," he said.
"One wonders which nation Senator Lieberman considers the internet an asset of, and how proposing its destruction by presidential or homeland security order protects it.
"The internet is not a national asset of the United States, nor is it a media regulation problem of Australia. It is an international network used by millions upon millions of citizens and it needs to remain free and available."
The Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, did not respond to calls requesting comment. Google, one of the world's biggest internet companies, declined to comment as it was not yet official US government policy.
 
Link here:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology ... -20100618-yln6.html

I'm not sure about you guys but I wouldn't mind the world shutting down for a few days. We are so wired into the internet that I go through withdrawls if I don't log on within a day or two.

Realistically though I highly doubt this bill will go through.

Global Internet is US National asset... Even though majority of data packets are routed outside of US borders through non-US assets.

Rember the book 1984.  Think it makes sense to give it another and see where we stand.

I think that my crappy ISP at home has had that switch for a while, at least as far as my connection is concerned.

What craziness. If they can do something like that they should be the terrorists!

I don't think this will happen or if they do pass this bill the rest of the world will just build a system that isolates the USA so they will only shutdown themselves.

It's does seem the geopolitcal landscape is changing.  When there is a crisis though the world still buys the dollar. It seems the Obama may be the wrong follow on to bush.  Bush maybe went too far with US reigning supreme and Obama leans way too muchthe other way.  Obama opens the door.  Which is not good for the world.

Obama internet 'kill switch' bill approved
ASHER MOSES
June 25, 2010
The US senators pushing a controversial new bill that some fear would give President Barack Obama the powers to seize control of and even shut down the internet have rejected claims it would give Obama a net "kill switch".
The bill, titled "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act", has been unanimously approved by the US Homeland Security committee and will be put to a vote on the Senate floor shortly.
Lobby groups and academics quickly rounded on the bill, which seeks to grant the President broad emergency powers over the internet in times of national emergency.
Any internet firms and providers must "immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed" by a new section of the US Department of Homeland Security, dubbed the "National Centre for Cybersecurity and Communications".
The critics said that, rather than combat terrorists, it would actually do them "the biggest favour ever" by terrorising the rest of the world, which is now heavily reliant on cyberspace.
Australian academics criticised the description in the bill's title of the internet as a US "national asset", saying any action would disrupt other countries as most of the critical internet infrastructure is located in the US.
This week, 24 privacy and civil liberties groups sent a letter raising concerns about the legislation to the sponsors, including that it could limit free speech and free inquiry, Computerworld  reported.
"We are concerned that the emergency actions that could be compelled could include shutting down or limiting internet communications," the letter reads.
But the architects of the plan, committee chairman Senator Joe Lieberman and Senator Susan Collins, have this week released a "Myth v. Reality" document that hits back at these criticisms.
They say the threat of a catastrophic cyber attack is real and not a matter of "if" but "when". Cyber crime was also costing the US economy billions of dollars annually and the bill would "modernise the government's ability to safeguard the nation's cyber networks from attack and will establish a public/private partnership to set national cyber security priorities".
The senators rejected the "kill switch" claim, arguing that the President already had authority under the Communications Act to "cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication" when there is a "state or threat of war".
They said under the new bill the President would be far less likely to use the broad authority he already has under current law to take over communications. It would provide "a precise, targeted and focused way for the President to defend our most sensitive infrastructure".
Any action would be limited to 30-day increments and the President must use the "least disruptive means feasible" to respond to the threats. Action extended beyond 120 days would need Congressional approval.
The bill would not give the President the authority to take over the entire internet, target specific websites or conduct electronic surveillance.
"Only specific systems or assets whose disruption would cause a national or regional catastrophe would be subject to the bill's mandatory security requirements," the senators wrote.
Link here:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology ... -20100625-z8sf.html

If it's targeted at natural catastrophe them it'd a little late for the gulf spill.