March 17, 2015 By Douglas Bonderud 2 min read

In a secret, 14–1 vote on March 12, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee approved the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), which encourages companies to share cyberthreat data with one another and the federal government. Some call the cyberthreat sharing bill a step in the right direction for national security, while others are worried it doesn’t do enough to protect the privacy of American citizens. What does this share-and-share-alike measure really mean for U.S. companies?

The Aim

There are several cybersecurity bills trying to make inroads with Senate committees this year. Along with CISA, there is also the Cyber Threat Sharing Act, introduced by Sen. Tom Carper, and the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). The bills all focus on encouraging companies to share cyberthreat data with each other and the federal government. CISA would also protect companies from consumer lawsuits based on the disclosure or contents of this data. Ideally, information would be shared in as near to real time as possible to encourage prompt and effective security responses. While Carper’s bill hasn’t yet been acted on and CISPA may be stalling, CISA was quietly approved last week.

The Concern

When the first draft of CISA was released, 26 digital rights groups and 22 security experts signed a letter opposing its contents. The biggest bones of contention were that the original draft gave the National Security Agency (NSA) automatic access to personal data companies shared with government agencies and that companies were permitted to engage in “dangerous” countermeasures during cyberattacks.

After taking feedback, the Senate committee agreed to review the bill and make changes. However, these changes were not made public before the secret vote took place. Now, watchdog groups are concerned that any new privacy measures won’t be enough to protect the interests of citizens and companies in the United States.

In fact, the bill’s lone dissenting voter, Sen. Ron Wyden, called CISA “a surveillance bill by another name,” and believes the bill “lacks adequate protections for the privacy rights of American consumers, and that it will have a limited impact on U.S. cybersecurity,” according to The Hill.

The Future?

The Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act isn’t law yet, but the Senate vote puts it one step closer to becoming a reality. The bill holds some merit, since increased cyberthreat data sharing among companies could help slow the spread of malware. Rather than acting as technological islands, businesses could help sink malicious code by making new vulnerabilities common knowledge.

However, any bill that grants the NSA access to private information without oversight and isn’t clear on exactly how companies will be protected from information disclosures is bound to make citizens nervous. President Barack Obama has stated several times that he would veto any version of CISPA that reaches his desk; the same may extend to CISA.

U.S. cybersecurity remains a hot-button topic as new malware emerges and companies across markets and industries find themselves under threat. While information collaboration has the potential to empower the good guys, secret votes and broad federal powers may not be the best way to encourage sharing.

More from

NIST’s role in the global tech race against AI

4 min read - Last year, the United States Secretary of Commerce announced that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been put in charge of launching a new public working group on artificial intelligence (AI) that will build on the success of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework to address this rapidly advancing technology.However, recent budget cuts at NIST, along with a lack of strategy implementation, have called into question the agency’s ability to lead this critical effort. Ultimately, the success…

Researchers develop malicious AI ‘worm’ targeting generative AI systems

2 min read - Researchers have created a new, never-seen-before kind of malware they call the "Morris II" worm, which uses popular AI services to spread itself, infect new systems and steal data. The name references the original Morris computer worm that wreaked havoc on the internet in 1988.The worm demonstrates the potential dangers of AI security threats and creates a new urgency around securing AI models.New worm utilizes adversarial self-replicating promptThe researchers from Cornell Tech, the Israel Institute of Technology and Intuit, used what’s…

Passwords, passkeys and familiarity bias

5 min read - As passkey (passwordless authentication) adoption proceeds, misconceptions abound. There appears to be a widespread impression that passkeys may be more convenient and less secure than passwords. The reality is that they are both more secure and more convenient — possibly a first in cybersecurity.Most of us could be forgiven for not realizing passwordless authentication is more secure than passwords. Thinking back to the first couple of use cases I was exposed to — a phone operating system (OS) and a…

Topic updates

Get email updates and stay ahead of the latest threats to the security landscape, thought leadership and research.
Subscribe today