nline privacy at-risk with pending legislation
By Michael Clark
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
More
A controversial bill regarding retention of Internet records passed through committee and was approved for consideration by Congress in December.
The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 would require Internet providers to retain archives of every subscriber’s online activity for up to 18 months, including phone records, credit-card numbers, websites visited and bank-account data.
A commercial provider of an electronic communication service shall retain for a period of at least one year a log of the temporarily assigned network addresses the provider assigns to a subscriber to or customer of such service that enables the identification of the corresponding customer or subscriber information under subsection (c)(2) of this section.
Source: H.R. 1981, Section 4, Article a, subsection 1
Max Ayalla, a senior from Kansas City, Kan., who works at Information Technology, said he’s worried about the information’s security.
“If someone hacks into the data, it would be disastrous,” he said.
Another issue is the measure’s effectiveness and legality. Under U.S. Code Title 18 Chapter 121, to obtain the records from Internet providers, no probable cause is needed; the government would only have to request a warrant or find a judge who is willing to give them one. Subscribers with no criminal record are also subject to requests.
Supporters of the bill argue that law enforcement is unable to track child pornographers under current laws.
“Child pornography may be the fastest growing crime in America, increasing an average 150 percent per year,” stated Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) in a news release. “These disturbing images litter the Internet, and pedophiles can purchase, view or exchange this material with virtual anonymity. Investigators need the assistance of ISPs to identify users and distributors of online child pornography.”
Critics of the bill see ineffective legislation with high potential for abuse.
It is the sense of Congress to encourage electronic communication service providers to give prompt notice to their customers in the event of a breach of the data retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18 of the United States Code, in order that those effected can take the necessary steps to protect themselves from potential misuse of private information...
Source: H.R. 1981, Section 4, Article b, Subsection 1
“It poses numerous risks that well outweigh any benefits, and I’m not convinced it will contribute in a significant way to protecting children,” said Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) in a judiciary hearing.
Child pornographers often use proxies such as The Onion Router, which mask a person’s Internet protocol address, or submit illicit material through public Wi-Fis.
Professor of Law Stephen McAllister said the Jan. 23 ruling in Jones v. United, which declared the warrant-less attachment of a GPS device to a suspected cocaine dealer’s SUV unconstitutional, may call the bill’s legality into question.
“To the extent it may permit government effectively to engage in surveillance - without a warrant - of citizen’s use of the internet might concern several U.S. justices,” he said. “Justice Sotomayor in her separate opinion mused about whether the Court would have to consider new ways of looking at expectations of privacy in the digital age, and she gave examples of all sorts of activities that might be monitored, like Internet and cell phone usage, but in which people would expect privacy.”
The bill currently has 39 co-sponsors.
Lamar Smith needs removed
Reply With Quote
