CISPA Is the Data Mining Bill That Just Won't Die

It was confirmed today that Senators Dianne Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss are working on a resurrected Senate version of Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), which is designed to allow tech companies to share traffic information with the government. Massively controversial in 2012 and early 2013, the bill seemed assuredly dead by Edward Snowden's NSA revelations. That congressmen wish to revive it in this post-Snowden world, granting immunity to tech giants like Google and Facebook in the process, is astonishing.

Mother Jones reported today that the revived CISPA would have more privacy protections than its earlier incarnation. This hasn't stopped groups such as Fight for the Future and Demand Progress from coming out against Feinstein and Chambliss's plan.

"CISPA would give even more of our personal information directly to the NSA and hundreds of other government agencies," said Fight for the Future's Evan Greer. "And it would provide unprecedented legal immunity for corporations that would allow them to do all kinds of things with our data under the guise of 'security.'"

Greer likened the new CISPA bill to a mechanism by which the US government will be able to turn the internet into "its own privately-owned surveillance system." This may seem hyperbolic since CISPA is aimed at combating cyber attacks launched against technological infrastructure. The bill, however, is explicit about the sharing of data to prevent attacks, including user information; and the immunity would essentially legalize that data sharing.

"Many giant tech companies—like the ones named in the PRISM slides—are lobbying for CISPA," said Greer, alluding to Facebook, Google, Comcast, and Verizon's past support of the bill. "So, they're not going to be on our side like they were during SOPA. The fight for Internet privacy will need to come from grassroots internet users working together to demand that our rights are respected."

According to the Sunlight Foundation, pro-CISPA forces outspent their opponents 140 to 1. Those are monumental odds for activists, even though money doesn't always guarantee electoral or legislative success. Grassroots groups are certainly up for the fight.

"CISPA always gave corporations the green light to share our data with the federal government," said Charlie Furman of Demand Progress. "But, doing it now would be even worse because it wouldn't just legalize that sharing, it'd effectively shut down the debate around the issue and fortify the NSA's spying apparatus behind a wall of legality and even more toothless oversight."

The attraction for corporations seems to be that the data trade-off is worth it. They gave up information on their users, and in return they get to know what the government knows. Everybody wins in that arrangement, but internet users.

Furman said that no other current piece of legislation has taken such a proactive step in the wrong direction. "We didn't want CISPA last year, we didn't want it earlier this year, and it's the last thing we want to see passed as a result of the NSA leaks," added Furman.

Demand Progress's David Segal took particular aim at Sen. Feinstein. "It's not a surprise—Feinstein is Congress's most powerful shill for the NSA," said Segal. "And they're being very smart: they're refusing to go on the defensive, and are pushing their agenda forward even harder in light of the criticism they've received."

Segal believes that Feinstein, Chambliss, and other pro-CISPA legislators and corporations are attempting to overwhelm activists. "We'll keep pushing back," said Segal. "We've already had 40,000 people generate emails in opposition to her bill, and we have very strong allies in the Senate," including Mark Udall, Bernie Sanders, Al Franken, and Ron Wyden, who sat through Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's lies about the mass collection of internet user data.

Two real consolations exist. One is Senator Patrick Leahy's FISA Accountability and Privacy Protection Act of 2013 (S.1215), which aims to strengthen privacy protections, governmentt accountability, and oversight of surveillance under the Patriot Act and FISA. The other is Obama's threat earlier this year to veto CISPA if it arrived at his desk. In the best case scenario, Leahy's bill finds some traction, and Obama remains steadfastly against the bill, vetoing if it should pass the Senate. Then again, this is the very same president who allowed Bush's surveillance culture to grow to monumental proportions. By opposing CISPA, Obama may just be able to erase some of that unsightly legacy in the realm of internet freedom.