Return-Path: <sentto-279987-4145-1009518356-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com> Delivered-To: fc@all.net Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:47:09 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 10711 invoked by uid 510); 28 Dec 2001 05:46:18 -0000 Received: from n34.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.84) by all.net with SMTP; 28 Dec 2001 05:46:18 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-4145-1009518356-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [216.115.97.188] by n34.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 28 Dec 2001 05:45:56 -0000 X-Sender: fc@red.all.net X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 28 Dec 2001 05:45:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 80312 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 05:45:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Dec 2001 05:45:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (12.232.125.69) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Dec 2001 05:45:56 -0000 Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id fBS5kUw04258 for iwar@onelist.com; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:46:30 -0800 Message-Id: <200112280546.fBS5kUw04258@red.all.net> To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List) Organization: I'm not allowed to say X-Mailer: don't even ask X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net> X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:46:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [iwar] [fc:Security.data-sharing.bill.fails.to.pass.in.'01] Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Security data-sharing bill fails to pass in '01 By Patrick Thibodeau, Computerworld, 12/27/2001 <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/12/27/011227hnsecurebill.xml">http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/12/27/011227hnsecurebill.xml> DESPITE A STRONG post-Sept. 11 push for passage, legislation intended to encourage companies to share security data with the government -- and one another -- without fear of it becoming public failed to be adopted this year. The legislation, sponsored in the Senate by. Robert Bennett (R-Utah) and John Kyle (R-Ariz.) and in the House by Tom Davis (R-Va.) and Jim Moran (D-Va.), seeks to amend the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to protect security data shared with the government from disclosure. The legislation also includes antitrust protections for companies that collaborate on security issues. The White House-backed measures, however, have come under attack from environmental groups, which say the FOIA exemptions are too broad and may protect companies involved in toxic spills, for instance. Opponents argue that companies will be able to use the law to shield documents from the public and civil litigation by "voluntarily" turning them over to the government. "For those companies who want to operate in secrecy ... more likely their counsel is going to recommend giving a boatload of information" to the government to protect it from disclosure, argues Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, a Washington-based nonprofit research and advocacy organization that monitors the White House Office of Management and Budget. Bass is also head of a coalition of groups with concerns about this legislation. The bill's sponsors are disputing the group's claims. In a letter sent to House members Dec. 17, Davis and Moran said the legislation wouldn't give companies a vehicle to hide information now made public. "If you are legally able to obtain a specific piece of information now, you will continue to be able obtain that information after the Act's passage," Davis and Moran wrote. Renewed efforts to win passage of these bills will be made when Congress resumes work in February, said spokesmen Davis and Bennett. "We simply can't imagine that critical infrastructure protection will not be part of congressional response to September 11th in the long run," said David Marin, the legislative director and spokesman for Davis. Another post-Sept. 11 private sector-focused security bill sponsored by Rep. Jerry Weller (R-Ill.) that failed to pass this year called for expanded tax write-offs of equipment used to improved security -- anything from new deadbolts to firewalls. But John Pescatore, an analyst at Stamford, Conn.-based Gartner Inc., said the legislation offered the wrong kind of incentive. "Nobody would get a tax break if they built more secure Web sites; they would only get a tax break if they added stuff to make it more secure," he said, adding that the measure would encourage vendors to sell more tools instead of producing better products. "There's an artery gushing blood, let's give tax breaks for Band-Aids." For more enterprise computing news, go to www.computerworld.com . Copyright (c) 2000 Computerworld. All rights reserved. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Send FREE Holiday eCards from Yahoo! Greetings. http://us.click.yahoo.com/IgTaHA/ZQdDAA/ySSFAA/kgFolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 21:00:00 PST