Information-Sharing Between the public and Private Sectors to Secure Cyberspace and Protecting Civil Liberties: The Story of Failed Legislation and a Modern Power Struggle

Abstract

This thesis looks at what the internet is, how it has developed, and why it ought to be protected given how central it is to everyone’s lives. The thesis examines the newfound internet-induced civil liberties, and need for privacy that is inherent in the open and interconnected cyber-world. This thesis discusses cyber security in terms of who the attackers are, who the defenders are, and what the methodologies are for the attacking and defending. The thesis then discusses what the existent cyber-governance infrastructure looks like, and attempts to show why it is insufficient. Information sharing is introduced as a crucial way to shore up the cyber-sphere. The thesis then addresses why there had been failure to appropriately share information, and why the continued attempts at legislation have failed. To do this effectively CISPA, H.R. 624, is taken as an example of failed legislation, and picked apart. There is a look into the amendments that were proposed, the debates that were had, the people that became angry and the reactions to eventual failure. CISPA is used to understand general problems with information sharing between the private and the Public sectors. Notes about how future legislation is addressed, and the whole framework of cybersecurity is assessed at the end. Certain themes are consistent throughout especially that of the ambiguity in language of legislation. There are many places through CISPA language that left gaping holes for transgression in law, privacy and business ethics. The importance of specificity in crafting cybersecurity legislation is central. There is consistently going to be an analysis of who wants to control power, what that power looks like, and how it might change hands with the adoption of CISPA. The acquisition of power by some, negate the holding of power for others. This translates into breaches in privacy, and civil liberties for the everyman. In the end it became clear that legislation is difficult to craft such that satisfies everyone. Ultimately it is of the utmost importance to keep the nature of the internet sacred. It was created as a free and open environment for collaboration and so long as legislators attempt to impose law that goes in contrast to that, it will fail. The internet is a place of commerce, and of national security secrecy, but at the end of the day the internet is also ruled by those that do not belong to a larger institution, and who have the power to disrupt the larger entities. There is a simultaneous need for internet safety, and internet freedom. These elements are not mutually exclusive and are attainable.