Update: Several people have asserted that Quayle's amendment actually made CISPA better, not worse. I've now posted my thoughts on that.
Up until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that's not even the worst part.
The vote followed the debate on amendments, several of which were passed. Among them was an absolutely terrible change (pdf and embedded below—scroll to amendment #6) to the definition of
what the government can do with shared information, put forth by Rep.
Quayle. Astonishingly, it was described as limiting the
government's power, even though it in fact expands it by adding more
items to the list of acceptable purposes for which shared information
can be used. Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous
vote. The CISPA that was just approved by the House is much worse than
the CISPA being discussed as recently as this morning.
Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for "cybersecurity" or "national security" purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and
prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and
protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime
involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.
Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity
bill at all. The government would be able to search information it
collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens
with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can
claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". Basically it says the
4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government
could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can
claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were
somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that
would normally limit the government's power.
Somehow, incredibly, this was described as limiting CISPA, but it accomplishes the exact opposite. This is very, very bad.