A cyber security bill moving swiftly through Congress would give government intelligence agencies broad powers to work with private companies to share information about Internet users. While some critics are beginning to organize online against the legislation, defense contractors, many already working with the National Security Agency on related data-mining projects, are lobbying to press forward. Like many bad policy ideas, entrenched government contractors seem to be using taxpayer money to lobby for even more power and profit.

The proposal, H.R.3523, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011, introduced by Congressmen Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), provides companies and the government “free rein to bypass existing laws in order to monitor communications, filter content, or potentially even shut down access to online services for ‘cybersecurity purposes.’” Though the bill has been compared to SOPA given its potential to smother free speech on the Internet, the ill-fated copyright legislation that inspired an intense lobbying battle earlier this year, much of the tech community has has joined with copyright interests to support CISPA.

A full list of companies and trade groups supporting the legislation, from Facebook to AT&T, can be found here. Combing through the lobbyist disclosure forms, Republic Report noticed that two of the top firms spending a lot of money to pass CISPA are major National Security Agency (NSA) contractors:

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC): A major government IT firm, CSC has several large contracts with U.S. intelligence agencies. CSC provides “secure information technology infrastructure for the NSA … [to] secure and non-secure telephony and network services, distributed computing services, and enterprise and security management at the NSA headquarters and its surrounding offices.” CSC already works on a pilot program that directly relates to the data-mining project envisioned by CISPA. According to disclosures reviewed by Republic Report, CSC currently contracts with Navigators Global LLC, a Republican-led lobbying firm, to promote CISPA.

Sciences Applications International Corporation (SAIC): Another major defense contractor, SAIC provides a variety of services to the NSA. The NSA is one of SAIC’s “primary clients” — the firm is helping the intelligence agency build a massive data-mining center in Utah. Lobbying disclosures reviewed by Republic Report show that SAIC has contracted with the firm Dennis Miller Associates to lobby on CISPA.

As the Center for Democracy and Technology explains, CISPA vastly expands a current information gathering effort between the NSA and private firms:

The legislation is being billed as an expansion of a collaboration between the National Security Agency (NSA) and major ISPs dubbed the Defense Industrial Base Pilot. Under the DIB Pilot, the NSA shares classified cyberattack signatures and information about cybersecurity threats with large ISPs that provide Internet service to major defense contractors.

Other current NSA data-mining contractors are lobbying to pass CISPA. Northrop Grumman has at least 10 registered lobbyists promoting the bill. Lockheed Martin has a comprable number of lobbyists doing the same.

But CSC’s team of 26 registered lobbyists reflects the company’s dependence on government contracts for profit. And registered lobbyists are only part of the influence operation. CSC also helps finance trade associations, like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is also pushing hard to pass the CISPA.

Like the for-profit college industry, which uses taxpayer money to lobby for even more taxpayer money while defrauding students, the extent to which private sector firms with government spy contracts are lobbying for broader power should alarm everyone.

UPDATE: Watch EFF’s Travor Timm discuss the legislation with Bloomberg Law’s Lee Pacchia.

Filed under: Lobbying

Add a comment
  • http://twitter.com/kylemaxwell Kyle Maxwell

    There are some falsehoods in this report. The text of the bill does *not* allow any sort of filtering or blocking, for starters. Just because somebody makes inaccurate comparisons, other organizations need not alter their views based on the reality of the bill. This bill doesn’t do anything except (a) put the responsibility for coordinating this sharing under the office of Director of National Intelligence (not the NSA, though the NSA will probably be involved at some level), and (b) give certain exemptions from liability and FOIA to firms sharing information about attacks on their networks.

    The bill isn’t perfect and needs tightening, but this isn’t anything like SOPA in any way. You do a disservice to your readers by pretending otherwise.

    • Lenticular Solace

      The author qualified that statement by linking to the post he was quoting. There you will see that the bill allows these things through omission and purposeful lack of clarity.

      “The term ‘cybersecurity purpose’ means the purpose of ensuring the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of, or safeguarding, a system or network, including protecting a system or network from–

      ‘(A) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or

      ‘(B) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information.”

      How exactly do you propose that a ‘cybersecurity provider’ ensures the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of, or safeguarding, a system or network, including protection of a system or network from efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or
      theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information, if they don’t act on ‘intelligence’?

      What if a particular website or user hogs bandwidth and therefore degrades or disrupts your system or network? Do you do nothing or would you actively safeguard, protect and/or maintain the integrity of your system or network? If so, by what means? Would you limit access to the site or your network? Would you strip data or reroute access to a sub-tier network so as not to impact your other customers? Would you begin actively tracking the user’s browsing habits to make a determination at a later date? Before excepting new users would you check the shared history to see he’s a problem user? If he uses too much bandwidth do you put him on a more expensive plan? Can he be denied because self-protected cybersecurity provider ISP “A” shares threat level history with self-protected cybersecurity provider ISP “B” even if such history was a false alarm?

      They worded the bill so poorly to hide the fact that this information will be traded like currency in the same way that data is currency to entities like facebook and google. Why do you think AT&T wants in on the deal?

      Lenticular Solace

    • ptburcher

      Call me cynical (I am), but any time that big corporations spend so much time, effort and money (key word there, follow the money trail) to actively get something passed it just can’t be good. Maybe it’s not as nefarious as creating that police state (although it certainly could open the door even wider to that than it already is. The NSA isn’t spending billions building that nice new data collecting facility in Utah for kicks ya know. Did I mention that I’m paranoid? But am I paranoid enough…). However, it will most certainly allow the corporations lobbying for it to make bigger bucks, most likely at our expense, either in taxes, higher fees or by selling our personal data for financial gain as Lenticular Solace suggests (which I consider a violation of my privacy) . It’s also back door ‘fees to my friends’ for helping to finance my political ambitions.

  • Pingback: Links, 4/13/12 « naked capitalism

  • Pingback: Links, 4/13/12 | Scripting4You Blog

  • Pingback: CISPA, aka SOPA 2.0, Pushed Forward By For-Profit Spying Lobby

  • Terry

    REmember last winter when we(I) shut down the internet for 24 hours in support of freedom of dpeech, well here we go again.,guess I`ll have to shut down my computeer again for another 24 hour protest in favor of free speach again, and we`ll all problibly do again just to show the NSA that you won`t be allowed to spy on me EVER!

  • Pingback: Obama’s dismal civil liberties record | SHOAH

  • Pingback: How Obama Became a Civil Libertarian’s Nightmare

  • Pingback: TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE » CISPA, aka SOPA 2.0, Pushed Forward by For-Profit Spying Lobby

  • Pingback: Obama Has Authoritarian Powers Bush Could Only Dream Of | QW Magazine

  • Pingback: Is New Cyber Security Bill (CISPA) An End-Run around Privacy Restrictions? » The Original N-D-N's Blog

  • Pingback: CISPA | Change-Links

  • Pingback: Obama and Civil Liberties | Change-Links

  • Pingback: Obama Has Authoritarian Powers Bush Could Only Dream Of contributed by AllGov on Government in The Lab

  • Pingback: Is New Cyber Security Bill (CISPA) An End-Run around Privacy Restrictions? contributed by AllGov on Government in The Lab

  • Pingback: Get Ready For 4 More Years of Anti Gay Policies and PATRIOT Acts Whether … - Rise of the Right

  • Pingback: On Civil Liberties: Broken Promises for All, By Both | thisthatSAID

  • Pingback: Pet Supplies

  • Pingback: Obama’s Police State: A List of Obama’s 55 Worst Assaults on Civil Liberties

  • Pingback: Wendy Cockcroft Web Design | Does Privacy Matter Any More?

Related

Industry Donated Heavily To Iowa Lawmakers Who Pushed For Bill To Criminalize Undercover Farm Investigations

Read article »

Tip Line

Help follow the money
tips@republicreport.org

Bad Behavior has blocked 1212 access attempts in the last 7 days.