Twister Frost
Well-known member
Here's my opinion, and it may not be worth a lot since I have not read a single one of the 18 bills--with the leaps and bounds that we are experiencing in technology, it is no wonder that we have to question what should be protocol if something would happen. But, with the lack of trust involved, I think there will be hollering on both sides. I guess I have to question with all that is happening in the US right now from health reform to stimulus to banks to unemployment is this a "needs to be on the front burner" topic?
http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail6162.cfm?Id=90558
Congress is trying to decide how much control the federal government should have over the Internet in a crisis.
One proposed measure would have given the president the power to shut down Internet traffic to compromised Web sites during an emergency. Corporate leaders and privacy advocates quickly objected, and the idea was dropped. But the debate continues.
If hackers take over a nuclear plant's control system, should the president order the computer networks shut down? If there's a terrorist attack, should the government knock users off other networks to ensure that critical systems stay online?
So far, at least 18 bills have been introduced as Congress tries to give federal authorities the power to protect the country during a massive cyberattack -- while at the same time protect users' privacy.
All involved predict that finding a solution isn't going to be easy.
http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail6162.cfm?Id=90558