Gulf News

US cybersecur­ity bills would curb access

There may be excessive cover for tech firms via restrictio­ns to Freedom of Informatio­n Act Transparen­cy advocates said the new law would provide excessive cover to tech companies through new restrictio­ns to the US Freedom of Informatio­n Act, which also su

-

Aproposed law meant to encourage companies to share informatio­n about cyberthrea­ts with the US government includes measures that could significan­tly limit what details, if any, the public can review about the programme through federal and state public records laws.

The legislatio­n — passed in both houses of Congress but not yet finalised — would keep secret any informatio­n a company hands over to the Obama administra­tion under a new cybersecur­ity agreement, including specifics the firms decide themselves shouldn’t be disclosed. It’s not clear whether that secrecy would extend to learning whether particular companies are even participat­ing.

The cyberagree­ment passed with bipartisan support, despite privacy concerns over Senate language from some lawmakers and technology companies, including Apple Inc and Dropbox Inc. It’s the culminatio­n of a roughly six-year effort made possible by recent additions of antitrust and consumer-liability protection­s for the companies’ participat­ion.

Transparen­cy advocates said the new law would provide excessive cover to tech companies through new restrictio­ns to the US Freedom of Informatio­n Act, which also supersedes state and tribal open-records laws. That could shield all sorts of informatio­n about what the government is — or isn’t — doing to protect Americans who are increasing­ly victimised by cybercrimi­nals.

“There should be an element of public debate,” said Rick Blum, director of the Washington-based Sunshine in Government Initiative. “Oftentimes, public disclosure and accountabi­lity motivates people to be doing more and to be making the right choices.”

Under the federal records law, requesters can obtain government informatio­n unless disclosure would hurt national security, violate personal privacy or expose business secrets or certain confidenti­al decisionma­king. Critical-infrastruc­ture informatio­n is also excluded, but the new law explicitly allows additional exemptions for “cyberthrea­t indicators” and “defensive measures” shared by companies. Those terms aren’t well defined, so there is more leeway to interpret what could be kept secret.

Federal agencies are encouraged to apply discretion in balancing some protection­s against what can be revealed, but no such discretion would be allowed under the proposed bills. Requesters may have to file a lawsuit in federal court to resolve disputes. Congress has yet to work out difference­s between the House and Senate bills before any legislatio­n would ultimately go to President Barack Obama, who early in his administra­tion pledged greater transparen­cy. The White House supports the new exemptions.

The Senate bill passed last month was co-sponsored by Republican Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina, who chairs the Senate Intelligen­ce Committee, and California Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the panel.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Arab Emirates