Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise to speak against cloture on the substitute. This substitute would not have stopped the Target hack, the Anthem hack, the Home Depot hack, or the OPM hack. When it comes to real privacy protection for millions of Americans with this substitute, there is simply no ``there'' there.

We see that by looking at page 17 of the substitute. Companies have to remove only personal, unrelated information if they know that it is personal and unrelated. How would they know under this amendment? Under this amendment, they are required to virtually do no looking. It is the most cursory review. That is why the Nation's leading technology companies have come out overwhelmingly against this legislation. They are not satisfied by this substitute.

The sponsors of the bill have been pretty vociferous about attacking these companies for coming out against the legislation. These companies know a lot about the importance of protecting both cyber security and individual privacy. These tech companies that are being attacked now have to manage that challenge every single day. The challenge gets harder all the time with things such as the EU ruling that I opposed. These companies know that customer confidence is their lifeblood, and the only way to ensure customer confidence is to convince people that if they use their product, their information is going to be protected both from malicious hackers and from unnecessary collection by the government.

The fact is, we have a serious problem with hacking and cyber security threats. The fact is, information sharing can be good, but a cyber security information sharing bill without real and robust privacy protections that this amendment lacks--I would submit millions of Americans are going to look at that, and they are going to say this isn't a cyber security bill, this is yet another surveillance bill.

With this amendment, colleagues, the Senate is again missing another opportunity to do this right and promote both security and liberty. Just because a proposal has the words ``cyber security'' in its title doesn't make it good. But that is, of course, why the leading technology companies in this country--companies that make a living every single day by being sensitive to cyber threats and privacy--have come out overwhelmingly against this bill.

I know my colleagues have tried to improve this issue, and I appreciate that. But the core privacy protections that America deserves in a bill like this are still lacking, and that is why I oppose cloture.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source