Peer-to-peer protection bill introduced

[DaBees-Knees]

http://fcw.com/articles/2009/03/09/p2p-bill.aspx

A bill designed to protect people from the risks to security and privacy associated with computer-to-computer file-sharing programs has been introduced in the House.

The legislation, introduced March 5, would prohibit certain types of behavior on peer-to-peer (P2P) networks on computers and make them punishable as unfair or deceptive actions under consumer protection laws.

P2P programs let users easily share videos, music and other data, but have also been used to extract sensitive information from someone’s computer without the victim’s knowledge. P2P networks automatically search hard drives for files that are available for sharing, and the security risks associated with the programs have drawn concern from lawmakers.

The legislation would require the file-sharing programs to show users a “clear and conspicuous notice” that computer’s files could be made available to another computer if the program is used. It would require informed consent from the computer's owner immediately before the program is installed.

The measure would also require notice about which files will be made available and informed consent from the user before the initial activation of the file sharing program. The bill would also make it illegal to prevent the authorized user of a computer to block the installation of a P2P file-sharing program, disable or remove the program.

The bill was introduced by Reps. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.), John Barrow (D-Ga.) and Joe Barton (R-Texas) and has been referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee.

A statement on Bono Mack’s Web site that announced the legislation mentioned recent reports that indicated P2P software was involved in a security breach with Marine One, the presidential helicopter, and an incident involving a Supreme Court Justice. During a congressional hearing on inadvertent file-sharing over P2P networks held in July 2007, a House committee heard about the extent of government data that was readily available and easily obtained on P2P networks.

It's interesting how these things come about in the name of "state security". I can see no problem with anyone that doesn't want p2p being able to block it. Who forces p2p on anyone anyway? I have far greater concern about what else they will try to slip through with the bill. Let's hope Obamas watchdogs do their job in the interests of an open internet.

[GhostShip]

We need to be aware of bills such as these and I cant understate the importance of studying these proposals, this one maks it look all too likely that the WinMX client will be affected directly and if it comes down to imposing fines for those distributing such programs I think you can all see where the hammer will fall.

[DaBees-Knees]

It's fairly obvious that the proposers of this bill don't understand p2p. The military could easily block p2p on their own sites if they so wished. This looks like they are taking a sledgehammer to crack a supposed nut. I also wonder if they have a hidden agenda?

"P2P networks automatically search hard drives for files that are available for sharing, and the security risks associated with the programs have drawn concern from lawmakers." Someone correct me ...... There's a p2p system that can search all your hd's without you having allowed it to? I am unaware of any p2p system that does that, but I stand to be corrected.

[RReactor]

if the person does not know what they are doing and allows it to share every thing on their computer i could see a problem, if the person has sensitive stuff on their computer this just sounds like another ploy to try and brainwash people into thinking all p2p programs are bad wouldn't surprise me if the RIAA is not behind this

[DaBees-Knees]

This proposed bill probably says more about the state of sections of US military security than it does about p2p 

[Forested665]

The measure would also require notice about which files will be made available and informed consent from the user before the initial activation of the file sharing program

if you look up many cases against norton the court systems accept the user running the installer as informed consent and showing that you trust the program.