New cybersecurity bill clears House committee
April 10th, 2013
08:34 PM ET

New cybersecurity bill clears House committee

By Pam Benson

The House Intelligence Committee has overwhelmingly passed a new cybersecurity bill that would enhance data sharing between the government and private industry to protect computer networks and intellectual property from cyber attacks.

By a vote of 18-2, the panel on Wednesday approved the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA).

The measure sets up a voluntary system for companies to share threat information on their networks with the government in exchange for some liability protections.

The bill also allows the government to share intelligence and other cyber threat information with industry.

A similar bill died in the Senate last year after a number of Republicans argued that proposed cybersecurity standards allowed for too much government regulation.

The White House had threatened to veto that bill over privacy concerns.

The Intelligence Committee revised the legislation this time to address some of those issues.

The proposal strikes a provision that would have allowed law enforcement and other government agencies to use cyber data it receives from companies for broader national security purposes.

The private sector is restricted from using cyber security information for marketing or any other commercial purposes.

Companies would have no legal protection if they hack other companies to retrieve data they believe was stolen from them.

The bill requires the government to establish procedures that would minimize the acquisition and retention of personal information it might receive from a company. These might include addresses and phone numbers, which are not relevant to a cyber threat.

Finally, it would strengthen oversight to ensure civil liberties and privacy are protected.

Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, who co-sponsored the bill with ranking member Dutch Ruppersberger, said it does not create a surveillance program as some critics have charged.

"It does not allow any government agency, the NSA or the CIA, to monitor domestic internet content in any way, shape or form," Rogers said.

"We think we struck the right balance. It's 100 percent voluntary. There are no big mandates in this bill, and industry says under these conditions they think they can share back, and the government can give them information that might protect them," he added.

Rogers said they consulted the White House while drafting the bill, but the Obama administration has not indicated whether it will support it.

A spokeswoman for the National Security Council, Caitlin Hayden. said that while changes made to the bill "reflect a good faith effort to incorporate some of the administration's important substantive concerns ... we do not believe these changes have addressed some outstanding fundamental priorities."

And the changes are not enough to satisfy the concerns of some privacy groups and the two members of the committee who voted against it.

Adam Schiff, D-California, and Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois, said they will push to amend the bill when its debated on the House floor later this month.

They think it should require companies to remove personal data not associated with cybersecurity before they share information with the government.

And they argue a civil agency like the Department of Homeland Security should be in charge of information sharing with industry. They fear the National Security Agency and the military will have access to American's personal information.

Rogers and Ruppersberger expect the full house will adopt the measure. Then it will be up to the Senate to pass its own version. If that happens, a House-Senate negotiating committee would attempt to hammer out a final bill.

Post by:
Filed under: Cybersecurity • Pentagon
soundoff (28 Responses)
  1. Juliane Molinar

    Great site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to a few pals ans also sharing in delicious. And obviously, thanks to your sweat!

    May 12, 2021 at 3:55 am | Reply
  2. Normand Walund

    March 4, 2021 at 10:22 am | Reply
  3. Thad Gallante

    I'm still learning from you, while I'm trying to achieve my goals. I certainly enjoy reading all that is written on your site.Keep the posts coming. I liked it!

    January 28, 2021 at 10:11 pm | Reply
  4. Hobert Ladika

    January 24, 2021 at 3:31 pm | Reply
  5. Mark Causey

    I love this line: "The White House had threatened to veto that bill over privacy concerns." I wonder if Obama will appoint the NSA to oversee this program if passed?

    November 19, 2013 at 2:19 pm | Reply
  6. Kewocap

    I don't believe that even with this newly improved CISPA bill, that it will actually go through seeing as how Obama had threatened to veto this.

    April 29, 2013 at 7:17 am | Reply
  7. Jupman

    Here we go again. Bypass the privacy at to get information.

    April 20, 2013 at 5:56 pm | Reply
  8. Kevin

    The Cyber Jobs Report and How You Can Help Transform a Generation

    With the dramatic proliferation of computing and communications technologies across the globe, the cyber security industry has experienced unprecedented growth. This growth has created an urgent need for qualified individuals to fill current job openings and to develop the skilled workforce necessary to address the expected dramatic job growth in the future.

    Learn more about the open cyber security jobs across the country and discover how your company can play a crucial role in preparing the future workforce that you will be hiring.

    Register for this complementary 15 minute webinar and join the conversation on Tuesday, April 23rd at 11:30am EST (seating is limited for this webinar):

    Can’t make Tuesday, April 23rd? Check out other upcoming session dates.

    I hope you and your team are able to join the webinar and feel free to forward this invite to others who may be interested.

    April 19, 2013 at 10:09 am | Reply
  9. MOCaseA

    Meh... The government and private industry already work hand in hand. However private industry gains nothing from it, and the govt can't do anything to protect them. This bill will allow private industry to work with the government in exchange for certain protections.

    Anyone who thinks this is SOPA or any other privacy concern related bill needs to reread it.

    Additionally the PII (Personally identifiable Information) that would be provided to the government would allow them to track those who would steal and abuse that information outside the US. So removing that information (which would be voluntarily provided anyways!) would pretty much negate any input the government would have.

    I know. I work in one of the governments information security areas.

    April 16, 2013 at 12:03 am | Reply
  10. nsputnik

    No citizens want this bill. Expect SOPA-level action against it in the next few days.

    April 12, 2013 at 4:12 pm | Reply
    • NitroNoah

      Ok, seeing how you didn't even read past the first few paragraphs allow me to explain why this isn't SOPA. The bill only allows the private sector to share information if there has been a breech in security. Domestic use, such as what most of the people against SOPA/CISPA are arguing, is not threaten at all. I highly suggest re-reading the article again to make sure you understand the information laid out there.

      April 18, 2013 at 10:02 pm | Reply
      • Jupman

        Have you read the bill do know what information they will share it does not say...It gives the government access to data what data, how much, the companies also get no repercussions for misuse.

        April 20, 2013 at 5:46 pm |
  11. ulfmattsson

    I agree with the comment "Cyber security, in today's world, is something we must take more seriously. Making anything ‘voluntary’ is worthless! Corporate America will not participate in any voluntary program".

    I think that it should be a requirement to protect or remove sensitive personal data before sharing information with the government. The payment card industry successfully implemented a similar approach. The technology is available.

    Ulf Mattsson, CTO Protegrity

    April 11, 2013 at 3:18 pm | Reply
  12. Sdftuj Jgdrtyj


    April 11, 2013 at 12:25 pm | Reply
    • tom

      LOL...that makes absolutely NO sense at all whatsoever.

      April 25, 2013 at 4:48 am | Reply
      • Mark Causey

        It does kind of makes sense in a Palinistic sort of way.

        November 19, 2013 at 2:16 pm |
  13. StanCalif

    Another boondoggle approach! Politicians just don't get it! Cyber security, in today's world, is something we must take more seriously. Making anything "voluntary" is worthless! Corporate America will not participate in any voluntary program. Worse yet is assigning this to the worthless Dept. of Homeland Security!

    April 11, 2013 at 8:27 am | Reply
  14. wjm

    It sounds like a man of ill repute saying to a woman getting undressed "go ahead I won't peek".

    April 11, 2013 at 12:52 am | Reply

Leave a Reply to Sdftuj Jgdrtyj


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.