Cyber roundup (4/17): Still no love for CISPA, DHS considers proactive cyber attacks, lawyers thinking like hackers, the threat of walled gardens, and a cyber Pearl Harbor

A quick survey of today's news . . .

***

Declan McCullagh reported for CNet on how CISPA is still a threat to privacy rights even after its recent rewrite.  That rewrite dropped language referring to intellectual property in an effort to distance CISPA from SOPA.  However, privacy groups like the ACLU are still taking exception to the bill's information-sharing provisions, arguing that they allow the NSA to acquire American's sensitive Internet use information.  The bill's drafters have repeatedly denied such assertions.

Matthew J. Schwartz wrote for InformationWeek on the 5 main privacy worries behind CISPA:

1. The potential for widespread employee monitoring
2. No information-sharing restrictions
3. Information may be shared with NSA
4. Bill may encourage broad surveillance
5. CISPA alternatives do exist

***

Steve Johnson reported for MercuryNews.com on how the DHS would consider allowing tech companies to "participate with the government in 'proactive' efforts to combat hackers based in foreign countries."  The remark called into question to the practice of private companies, under the watch of the U.S. government, proactively attacking foreign hackers.  DHS Secretary Napolitano emphasized that the DHS has only considered the practice, not planned for it, and that such a private-public arrangement has a number of legal hurdles.

***

Bianca Bosker wrote for the Huffington Post on how lawyers should do more to think like hackers.  The article explored how lawyers should live the "hacker way" by embracing technology, engaging in "risk-averse naysaying," and 'familiarizing themselves with the policy issues hackers have raised."

***

The Guardian continued with its Battle for the internet series by looking at Walled Gardens on the internet.  Notably, Charles Arthur wrote for The Guardian on how walled gardens benefit Facebook, Apple, and yes, even censors.  Walled gardens are non-compatible apps, devices, and websites that limit access to the broader internet.  Walled gardens are dangerous because they allow for people to cut themselves off from uncomfortable truths they would normally find on the broader internet.   The article noted that famed professor Jonathan Zittrain first sounded the warning on walled gardens when he argued that we might actually censor our own world through their use. 

***

PBS NewsHour aired a segment titled Preventing a 'Cyber-Pearl Harbor' on 4/16/2012.  You can find the video and a transcript on the PBS website.  I've also embedded the video below.

Watch Preventing a 'Cyber-Pearl Harbor' on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.