Slashdot Log In
Congress Proposes Data Breach Disclosure Bill
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri May 12, 2006 11:47 PM
from the so-you-know-we-know-you'll-know-you-know dept.
from the so-you-know-we-know-you'll-know-you-know dept.
segphault writes "A new data breach disclosure bill proposed by Senator Sensenbrenner (the same politician that sponsored the infamous Real ID Act) requires companies to inform federal law enforcement agencies if a database containing information on more than 10,000 citizens is infiltrated by hackers. The punishments for failing to disclose information about data breaches to federal law enforcement agents under this new bill include jail time and massive fines. Although this bill requires disclosure to the government, it does not require companies to inform the victims of data theft. Furthermore, it allows federal law enforcement agencies to prevent companies from voluntarily disclosing information about breaches to the public, even if the companies are required to do so by state laws. This law could potentially allow companies to circumvent and undermine state laws designed to protect consumers from identity theft."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Authoritarianism (Score:4)
Consider this Ambulance [bbc.co.uk] Driver [abd.org.uk].
Re:Authoritarianism (Score:3, Interesting)
whereby THEY can know when you've been screwed by a database break-in, but are may forbid the database holder from telling YOU that this happened, even if there are state laws that mandate the database holder tell their clients when such a data theft has occurred.
Government is as Government does (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Government is as Government does (Score:3, Insightful)
One begins to wonder just exactly who actually authored this bill...
Now look what you've done -- now I've got to get my tinfoil hat refitted!!
Student hacks (Score:4, Interesting)
Great...oh wait... (Score:3, Insightful)
When I read this part of the summary:
The punishments for failing to disclose information about data breaches to federal law enforcement agents under this new bill include jail time and massive fines.
My first thought was, it's about damn time.
Then I realized that they probably weren't talking about the sort of "data breaches to federal law enforcement agents" I was thinking they were.
--MarkusQ
P.S. If you missed my insightful post on the "poll says people want the NSA to spy on them" story [slashdot.org] there's still time to check it out.
Federal vs State (Score:3, Interesting)
Promoted to Senator for Spewing Silly Ideas? (Score:3, Informative)
Representative Sensenbrenner (Score:3, Informative)
Keeping quiet isn't always bad (Score:2, Interesting)
>This law could potentially allow companies to circumvent and undermine state laws designed to protect consumers
> from identity theft.
Yeah. It could also give the FBI time to track down the perps before general knowledge of the crime taints the witness pool. It's a pretty common practice at the local level for news organizations to keep quiet about evidence for the same reason.
Re:Keeping quiet isn't always bad (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, no.... (Score:5, Insightful)
This government is getting way to nosy, IMHO. I don't care what the reason is, I'm sick and fucking tired of being saved from myself. Let me smoke my cigarette in my bar, and masturbate the Islamic terrorist porno, leave me ALONE.
Hey old white bastards, how about a law that requires me to be informed when my companies data has been hacked? Or better yet, why don't you worry about things like maintaining roads. Why is it that the NSA knows what sort of hemorrhoid creme I prefer, and when my girlfriend's periods are, but I can't drive down I-20 for more than 3 hours without needing a new wheel alignment for my car?
How about a fucking law that says I get to be informed every single time my personal information is accessed by the government? Every time I turn on the news I seem to be reading about how the Department of Homeland Security is making sure I'm following the latest terror alerts and that I'm not cooperating with al-Qaida via Xbox Live. I mean, Jesus, what the hell.
Even better, the slashdot summary makes it sound like they can circumvent state legislation. Um, my constitutional skills may be a little rusty, but I'm pretty sure that's what the 10th Amendment was all about.
While we're on the subject, what about the 9th Amendment? I'm pretty sure that that one said that we have rights that may not be explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and thus, we reserve those rights. It seems like America is serving up it's rights like a Shoney's smorgasbord. It's like 8.99 all-you-can-give-away at the Patriot Act Red Lobster. Jesus.
Douglas Adams once said (forgive my horrible paraphrasing, as I don't have my copy of Salmon of Doubt with me) that Australians often say "We're the last place left mate," and it made him nervous because of the confidence with which he said it. Makes me wanna see if they're right, cuz quite frankly I'm sick of this place. It's not just the politicians, it's the people. How can my vote count if I realize for every vote I cast with some knowledge of the issues, there's fifty people are are being exploited by like-minded zealots whose sole purpose is to acquire power, and seek to retain that power.
Madison, in Federalist 9 & 10, argued that mutual self-intrest will keep the 'factions' in line, draw them towards a central, middle ground, and thus make decisions that are best for everyone. The problem seems to be that no all 'factions' are allowed into the game. At this point, I've got to request that I be allowed to collect my chips and move to another table, cuz I think I'm getting screwed, and all I see is more Dick coming. ~a
The last place left (Score:3, Interesting)
Australia is nice, but it's far from being the "last place left." To pick just one example a tad closer to home, three of the last presidents of Costa Rica are in prison at this very moment.
"Why?" you might ask. "Do they have particularly crooked politicians down there?"
No, not really. Their politicians aren't much different that politicians anywhere. The difference is, they have a rather odd custom regarding the laws. When their politicians break the law they investigate, arrest, try, and eventua
Some things to be aware of... (Score:3, Interesting)
Before you go, you should know a few things about the place:
Re:Feels great to know the history you're already (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Feels great to know the history you're already (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only that, but I was a cog in the machine for a few years, so I know how it works. It really doesn't matter how I try to explain it, nor is it really a big deal of course, but I do have intimate knowledge of the laws and policies that some of these issues are governed by, or at least were governed by at some point in history.
I've said for many years that I do not vote for the simple reason that the voters have been
Hooray for unfunded mandates! (Score:4, Insightful)
If they want to secure this information, either make it all illegal to use and hold in insecure ways (like on a networked computer), or fund a method of secure use of this information. Punishing the innevitable breach of security in the marketplace after the fact won't change the fact that such breaches are innevitable, and I very much doubt such punishments will improve this particular marketplace.
Ryan Fenton
change the requirements... (Score:4, Insightful)
That way breached don;t affect me.
Any concern that stores even a single record about anyone who is not an employee should be forced to disclose the details to the Feds and to the people whose records were compromised.
The company should then be prevented to store any such records for the next decade. In addition the maximum of 250K should be automatically payable within 15 days to such people.
Failure to pay the amount would result in jail time for the CEO and CTO.
What am i talking? Laws are not made for logical reasons... laws are made in smoke filled backrooms where my senator can compromise my state's water rights for a few more air bases or National Guard bases....
Ok, but could you be a little more vague? (Score:4, Insightful)
requires companies to inform federal law enforcement agencies if a database containing information on more than 10,000 citizens is infiltrated by hackers.
If you have enough users, does "cat /etc/passwd" count?
Another law.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Inform the gov't....why? It's the citizens put at risk when this happens. I want to know about it dammit. That's my information they lost.
Furthermore, it allows federal law enforcement agencies to prevent companies from voluntarily disclosing information about breaches to the public, even if the companies are required to do so by state laws. What? Backwards I tell you.
Don't mind my ranting demeanor. I've been on an ant-gov't rant since I listened to Michael Savage earlier.
I wonder if ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Face it; it doesn't matter what laws are in place, the federal government can do whatever it wants. I'm actually to the point now where anytime I hear anyone associated with the government supporting A, or insisting that A is true, that I take it to mean that the government intends to do Not A or that Not A is true.
I don't have a college degree, but I'm going to encourage my children strongly to get their own. Not so that they can get better jobs in the US - so that they can take up legal residence in Canada.
We need some open state rebellion (Score:5, Interesting)
The states need to start knocking the feds down a few notches on the totem poll through things like not taking mandates, arresting DEA agents on capital murder charges for killing people in no-knock raids and things like that.
Time to get a new job (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously though, it's a shame they'd override the states rights. The only reason most data thefts see the light of day nationally is a California law that makes them do it. If you live in California, the company is required to notify the effected people that their data was mishandled.
If they want to encourage tighter security, seems like bad PR for a whole company is at least as effective as sending some dork to Federal PMITA prison.
I haven't looked up the numbers but I'd bet the penalty for having a stolen database would be worse than actually stealing one.
Why not? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well fuck that. If Americans are willing to cede so much control to the gubmint and don't give a damn enough to see to it that the people who say "trust us" can actually be trustes then they deserve every single damn thing that happens to them, and I count myself among them, unfortunately. Democracy and freedom. Government of the people, for the people and BY the people. It was nice while it lasted. Now, back to a century or 2 of tyrrany I guess.
Punishing the "right" wrongs: ID theft for a start (Score:4, Insightful)
If this means jail time for the "top" several hundred spammers and scammers on counts of identity theft alone, this is only welcome [spamhaus.org] - and actually at least a decade late!
Crime is best fought by apprehending the criminals, not by gag orders on the organisations who happen to have held enabling information in an insecure manner - which would make it even harder for the individuals affected to show they are completely innocent victims rather than crooks.