Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

The Senate Intelligence Committee approved the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) on Thursday, despite concerns from privacy advocates. (Photo:Free Press/flickr/cc)

'Patriot Act 2.0'? Senate Cybersecurity Bill Seen as Trojan Horse for More Spying

Framed as anti-hacking measure, opponents say CISA threatens both consumers and whistleblowers

Nadia Prupis

The U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee approved a cybersecurity bill during a secret session on Thursday, marking the next step in a process that critics warn will nefariously expand the government's already substantial surveillance powers.

The Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), which passed by 14-1 vote, would ostensibly protect against large-scale data thefts of private consumer information, exemplified by recent hacks of Target, Sony, and Home Depot. But critics—including the lone dissenting voice on the committee Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Or.)—say it would open the door for continued invasive and unlawful government spying operations.

Although Wyden denounced the measure as "a surveillance bill by another name," his opposition was unable to stop the proposal from being approved by the committee. The bill, which reportedly underwent a dozen changes during the meeting, will next go to the full Senate for debate. Its passage in committee, however, means it has already succeeded where other recent cybersecurity proposals have failed.

Committee chairman Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) told reporters after the vote that CISA would allow for private-to-private, private-to-government, and government-to-private information sharing, "in a voluntary capacity."

"This current bill is critically important both for our agencies that keep the country safe, and the institutions that hold millions of Americans' personal information," Burr continued.

However, as ACLU media strategist Rachel Nusbaum noted on Thursday, making information-sharing "voluntary" during criminal proceedings means that the government would be able to obtain private data without a warrant.

That includes any instance in which the government uses the Espionage Act to go after whistleblowers, who, according to Nusbaum, "already face, perhaps, the most hostile environment in U.S. history." The new measure, she continued, "fails to limit what the government can do with the vast amount of data to be shared with it" by the these companies." Nusbaum called the measure "one of those privacy-shredding bills in cybersecurity clothing."

"This bill is arguably much worse than CISPA [Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act] and, despite its name, shouldn't be seen as anything other than a surveillance bill—think Patriot Act 2.0," Nusbaum said.

Thursday's meeting was closed to the public, but Wyden emerged after the vote and warned the bill "lacks adequate protections for the privacy rights of American consumers, and that it will have a limited impact on U.S. cybersecurity."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the panel, said Thursday that the newest version of the bill would allow companies to defend themselves against cyberattacks but would prohibit them from taking "countermeasures" if a breach occurred.

The Wall Street Journal writes:

The bill would attempt to funnel corporate intelligence about cybersecurity threats and breaches through the Department of Homeland Security, an important distinction for many companies that don’t want the data to be housed in a military agency or an intelligence agency. DHS could share the information, if applicable, with other companies or other federal agencies, though it is supposed to be scrubbed to prevent the transfer of personal data about consumers.

Companies could also provide data to the NSA as long as it wasn't in "electronic form," according to Burr. If private customer data "finds its way to the federal government" following a hack, Burr added, "once we distribute it in real time and we realize there's personal information, any company that discovers it has to remove it or minimize it in a way that it can’t be shared anywhere else."

A draft (pdf) of the measure released last month was met with resistance from privacy advocates who said its vague language could give license to the government to increase unwarranted surveillance of U.S. citizens. Burr and Feinstein said Thursday the new version of the bill takes those concerns into account—but the privacy community was hesitant to follow such praise without seeing the final version of the measure.

"We are glad that the Senate Intelligence Committee heard the privacy community's concerns, and we're eager to see if the changes to the bill will adequately address the significant threats to privacy and internet security that CISA has raised," Robyn Greene, policy counsel with New America's Open Technology Institute, said in a statement Thursday. "Based on how dangerously broad and vague the last version of the bill was, it would be surprising if the bill agreed to in secret today will garner the support of the privacy community."

Greene called the earlier draft "as much a backdoor for surveillance as it is a cybersecurity information-sharing bill."

In an interview with Wired on Thursday, she criticized the secretive nature of the meeting, stating, "This bill has the potential to seriously harm Americans' privacy rights and it wasn't even debated in public."


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.

Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Simply Don't Exist.

Biden Decries 'Outrageous' Treatment of Haitians at Border—But Keeps Deporting Them

"I'm glad to see President Biden speak out about the mistreatment of Haitian asylum-seekers. But his administration's use of Title 42 to deny them the right to make an asylum claim is a much bigger issue."

Jessica Corbett ·


Global Peace Activists Warn of Dangers of US-Led Anti-China Pacts

"No to military alliances and preparation for catastrophic wars," anti-war campaigners from over a dozen nations write in a letter decrying the new AUKUS agreement. "Yes to peace, disarmament, justice, and the climate."

Brett Wilkins ·


PG&E Charged With 11 Felony Counts—Including Manslaughter—Over 2020 Zogg Fire

"PG&E has a history with a repeated pattern of causing wildfires that is not getting better," said Shasta County District Attorney Stephanie Bridgett. "It's only getting worse."

Brett Wilkins ·


'Hold My Pearls': Debbie Dingell Lets Marjorie Taylor Green Have It Over Abortion Rights

The Michigan Democrat engaged in a verbal altercation with the far-right Republican lawmaker from Georgia on the steps of the U.S. Capitol Building.

Jon Queally ·


Dems Who Opposed Pentagon Cuts Received Nearly 4x More Donations From Weapons Makers

The latest passage of the NDAA "is particularly strong evidence that Pentagon contractors' interests easily take precedence over national security and the public interest for too many members of Congress," said one critic.

Kenny Stancil ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.


Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo