02:46 PM

Copyright Bill Causes Stir On Foreign Website Blocking

Some lawmakers move to drop provisions in the controversial Protect IP Act, now being considered by Senate, that would require U.S. service providers to forcibly redirect customers away from foreign sites accused of piracy.

One of the more controversial parts of the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) bill currently being considered by the Senate may get dropped.

The provision in question would require service providers, after receiving a court order, to prevent people from accessing specified foreign websites, by blocking those sites' domain name system (DNS) entries. The Department of Justice would seek such blocks if it determined that a foreign website was violating U.S. copyrights. But many U.S. service providers, amongst others, haven't been happy with the proposal.

"This is, in fact, a highly technical issue, and I am prepared to recommend we give it more study before implementing it," said the bill's author, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Thursday, on Vermont Public Radio.

Later in the day, he released a statement with further details. "The Protect IP Act provides new tools for law enforcement to combat rogue websites that operate outside our borders but target American consumers with stolen American property and counterfeits," he said. "One of those tools enables law enforcement to secure a court order asking Internet service providers to use the [DNS] to prevent consumer access to foreign rogue websites." But he acknowledged that no service provider would likely support DNS blocking.

[ Malicious attacks accounted for 40% of disclosed breaches last year. Learn more: Hack Attacks Now Leading Cause Of Data Breaches. ]

Accordingly, he'll propose that "the positive and negative effects of this provision be studied before implemented." But he added that "I regret that law enforcement will not have this remedy available to it when websites operating overseas are stealing American property, threatening the safety and security of American consumers."

Leahy's hyperbole aside, could PIPA--or the House's Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which still proposes to block domains with a court order--actually do what he suggests? Critics of the bill have said that's unlikely. For starters, that's because the court-ordered takedowns in the proposed law would only apply to U.S. businesses. Hence if Google began forcibly altering DNS settings and redirecting users away from websites that the U.S. government had designated as being involved with inappropriately selling pirated software or prescription medicine, users could simply use foreign search engines. Meanwhile, while authorities might then tell service providers to block those foreign search engines, in reality there would be no way to create and affordably implement a rolling blacklist of all such sites.

Furthermore, Google has come out against PIPA. Eric Schmidt, Google's chairman, last year said the company would resist any attempts to force it to censor sites that its users could access, and name-dropped China as another country that might favor such an approach. "I would be very, very careful if I were a government about arbitrarily [implementing] simple solutions to complex problems," he told the Guardian.

Regardless of the proposed modifications to the bill or the underlying technological issues, PIPA also faces a significant legislative hurdle. True, more than 40 senators have said they'll support the bill, which Leahy co-authored with Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). Leahy has scheduled debates on PIPA to begin January 24. But Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has placed a hold on the bill, which at least temporarily prevents the bill from being voted on by the full Senate.

Furthermore, Wyden said Leahy's proposed PIPA refinements haven't changed his mind about what he calls the "censorship regime" that PIPA will create. "It is welcome news that proponents of PIPA are finally accepting that it contains major flaws," he said in a statement released Thursday. "Unfortunately, this announcement to study the DNS provision does not eliminate the clearly identified threat to Net security contained within this bill."

Heightened concern that users could inadvertently expose or leak--or purposely steal--an organization's sensitive data has spurred debate over the proper technology and training to protect the crown jewels. An Insider Threat Reality Check, a special retrospective of recent news coverage, takes a look at how organizations are handling the threat--and what users are really up to. (Free registration required.)

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
User Rank: Apprentice
1/13/2012 | 10:49:49 PM
re: Copyright Bill Causes Stir On Foreign Website Blocking
Here's an interesting story to show you how ignorant Senator Hatch (who co-authored PIPA and the original COICA (Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act))
Terabyte Net
Terabyte Net,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/15/2012 | 4:01:50 AM
re: Copyright Bill Causes Stir On Foreign Website Blocking
First, piracy stinks. It steals from legitimate companies and individuals and benefits no one in the long run; however, until a jury finds a site has violated US law there should be no court who can issue an order to block a site. Judges donG«÷t convict, juries do. WeG«÷re continually allowing our obviously ever-more clueless G«£representativesG«• in DC to erode our rights. I donG«÷t want some judge deciding what site I can and cannot visit because s/he has decided itG«÷s G«£illegalG«•. When you copyright something and you believe youG«÷ve been harmed you must then go to the legal system, file a complaint and have it heard by a trial. If the defendant fails to show up you get a judgment by default and then can have actions taken, but this is no worse than the MPAA going after everyone and literally their mom (who often were sued even the parent didnG«÷t download anything illegal and the minor child couldnG«÷t be held liable for the damages) without actually getting a trial to say anyone was guilty. ItG«÷s time for all Americans to stand up and tell Washington that this isnG«÷t Beijing. If they want to filter CongressG«÷ access to the Internet go ahead, but leave mine alone.

BTW, the simple way around this is to use your own DNS servers internally and not your ISPG«÷s. Install and use BIND locally and go to roots for initial resolution not your ISPG«÷s. ItG«÷s clear Washington has no clue how the Internet works.
User Rank: Ninja
1/15/2012 | 6:26:57 PM
re: Copyright Bill Causes Stir On Foreign Website Blocking
@ readers: what parts of these laws (SOPA and PIPA) do you think should be kept, and which parts discarded?
Brian Prince, InformationWeek/Dark Reading Comment Moderator
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
Dark Reading Tech Digest September 7, 2015
Some security flaws go beyond simple app vulnerabilities. Have you checked for these?
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
Published: 2015-10-05
system/session/drivers/cookie.php in Anchor CMS 0.9.x allows remote attackers to conduct PHP object injection attacks and execute arbitrary PHP code via a crafted serialized object in a cookie.

Published: 2015-10-05
The Secure Meeting (Pulse Collaboration) in Pulse Connect Secure (formerly Juniper Junos Pulse) before 7.1R22.1, 7.4, 8.0 before 8.0R11, and 8.1 before 8.1R3 provides different messages for attempts to join a meeting depending on the status of the meeting, which allows remote attackers to enumerate ...

Published: 2015-10-05
The Secure Meeting (Pulse Collaboration) in Pulse Connect Secure (formerly Juniper Junos Pulse) before 7.1R22.1, 7.4, 8.0 before 8.0R11, and 8.1 before 8.1R3 allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended access restrictions and log into arbitrary meetings by leveraging a meeting id and meetin...

Published: 2015-10-05
Heap-based buffer overflow in the parse_string function in libs/esl/src/esl_json.c in FreeSWITCH before 1.4.23 and 1.6.x before 1.6.2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a trailing \u in a json string to cJSON_Parse.

Published: 2015-10-05
Unrestricted file upload in GLPI before 0.85.3 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code by adding a file with an executable extension as an attachment to a new ticket, then accessing it via a direct request to the file in files/_tmp/.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
What can the information security industry do to solve the IoT security problem? Learn more and join the conversation on the next episode of Dark Reading Radio.