House Approves Another Anti-Spyware Bill
502244
While a bill passed by the House last month put stricter requirements on software to protect consumers from spyware, the body has passed another bill with even stricter policies.
680659
The House passed legislation Tuesday to combat the criminal use of Internet spyware and scams aimed at stealing personal information from computer users
668753
The House on Thursday passed the second bill in three days that would outlaw &quot;spyware,&quot; irritating software that quietly monitors the activities of Internet users.
495359
Anti-spyware legislation sails through the House of Representatives, with the bill's sponsor pressing to have both houses approve a law to reign in invasive computer programs by the end of the year. By Michael Grebb.
534901
The Senate votes 68-29 to give amnesty to telephone and internet companies being sued for helping the government spy on Americans without warrants. The bill also largely legalizes future NSA domestic spying. The House must agree before the bill becomes law.
203820
The Federal Trade Commission formally announced yesterday its first assault against spyware - bits of computer code that surreptitiously install themselves on the computers of Internet users
478818
The US House of Representatives on Tuesday approved a bill that would increase jail time for identity thieves and other fraudulent Web users who register sites under false identities.
204651
This is pretty interesting, seems as though Microsoft has acquired an anti-spyware company noone&#39;s ever heard of. I know spyware and adware removal software is big business now but I&#39;ve never heard of Giant Company Software Inc.
687945
The Golden State passes a law aimed at cracking down on what some feel is the internet's next scourge -- spyware. But critics say it's only a partial step toward protecting consumers.
603232
(InfoWorld) - CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- Two of the agencies most actively involved in bringing cyber-criminals to justice in the United States have expressed opposing opinions over pending anti-spyware legislation. Even as a trio of spyware bills is moving forward on Capitol Hill, officials from the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said their two organizations have differing views on the need for passage of the proposed laws. At a forum sponsored by the Anti-Spyware Coalition and held here at Harvard Law School on June 27, officials from the FTC and CDT -- a Washington-based nonprofit that has become a prominent Internet policy watchdog -- detailed areas where their organizations diverge regarding Congressional anti-spyware bills. The Anti-Spyware Coalition -- a security consortium backed by industry players including AOL, Dell, Google, McAfee, Microsoft, and Yahoo -- hosted the panel that brought legal experts from the two organizations together to air their differences. The discussion was hosted by John Palfrey, executive director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law, a well-known expert in the field of Internet security and privacy issues The three pieces of legislation being debated were the Internet Spyware Prevention Act of 2007 (I-SPY Act) and Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (SPY ACT) -- both of which passed vote in the U.S. House of Representatives in May and remain up for debate in the Senate -- and the Counter Spy Act of 2007, introduced before the Senate in mid-June. While both the FTC and CDT are actively involved in attempts to bring suspected purveyors of spyware to court and stop them from distributing illegal code to end-users, the agencies appear to be divided over whether the new laws will result in more prosecutions. The CDT supports passage of all three proposed bills, claiming that any additional laws that increase civil and criminal penalties against spyware brokers and better define illegal practices will prove helpful in bringing new cases -- despite the group's recognition of flaws in all three bills. For its part, the FTC contends that the new laws may only serve to muddle its ability to go after cyber-criminals when it finds them. In outlining each of the bills for the assembled audience, CDT Deputy Director Ari Schwartz highlighted the group's hopes for each of the measures. The I-SPY Act is the least controversial of the three bills in that it merely seeks to extend penalties established in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act -- originally passed in 1986 -- and make the legal punishments for criminal hacking more severe. The CDT is fully behind the bill and it passed through House hearings with almost no opposition, proving its overall appeal, Schwartz said. The SPY ACT -- originally written by California Republican Rep. Mary Bono and passed by the House in previous sessions -- has proven more divisive; some businesses are expressing serious concerns about the proposal's limitations on consumer information gathering and the fact that the bill would supersede existing state anti-spyware laws. Even though the CDT is against the idea of undercutting existing state laws, the group still supports the measure as it raises penalties on some criminal cyber-crimes and directly addresses troublesome spyware affiliate distribution issues, said Schwartz. The Counter Spy Act was only recently re-introduced by Arkansas Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor. Previous backers of the bill were voted out of Congress last year, making chances slim that the legislation will move forward quickly. However, the CDT favors the bill's effort to more clearly define the parameters of illegal adware programs, said Schwartz. Issues over the weighting of state and federal anti-spyware measures shouldn't stand in the way of the proposed bills, whose benefits outweigh their loopholes and could help lead to more cases against cyber-criminals, the CDT leader contends. He cited the relatively light punishment handed out in cases brought against proven spyware brokers such as DirectRevenue and Zango as proof that existing laws are insufficient. "Raising penalties is useful, DirectRevenue should have been fined more than $5 million, Zango should have been fined more than $3 million, and they would have been if we had more direct penalties," Schwartz said. "Most people are supportive of these bills, CDT would be happy with raising penalties without pre-empting the states, but most companies looking at these bills are pushing for pre-emption." On the flip side, the FTC feels that existing laws provide it with sufficient power to go after spyware providers, even though the agency has only filed a dozen such suits in recent years. Tracy Shapiro, an attorney for the FTC's Advertising Practices Division, said the federal watchdog would like to see legislation that increases civil penalties against cyber-criminals, but it feels that the new bills could eventually get in its way in bringing accused spyware companies to trial. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act remains broad enough to provide for continued prosecution of the most significant offenders, including spyware providers, she said. "In general there doesn't need to be a law specifically outlining spyware. There's a danger in saying 'no keystroke logging' because that's too specific and someone might look at the law and say another practice is OK," said Shapiro. "Sometimes it's hard to craft legislation to address specific types of technologies; it seems like a good argument against new laws if we can get judgments already." In addition to the potential to create loopholes by limiting their scope to existing threats, the specific nature of the bills could make them hard to apply to similar threats carried out in the future on mobile devices, as opposed to today's PC-based spyware schemes, she said. On the flip side, Schwartz said the CDT has been surprised and disappointed that the FTC hasn't brought any lawsuits based on the SafeWeb Act, passed by Congress in 2006 and aimed at helping the agency fight spam, spyware, and online fraud. The expert said it was particularly puzzling that the FTC hasn't taken advantage of elements of the SafeWab law aimed at aiding in the pursuit of cyber-criminals operating in other countries -- widely recognized as one of the biggest challenges in fighting malware and online fraud. "We've seen very little action under the SafeWeb Act; there have been some joint spyware cases with Canada where U.S.-based adware companies were working within Canada, which seemed like the perfect opportunities to use it," said Schwartz. "We thought [SafeWeb] was worth passing, and we want to see some action on it soon." Shapiro admitted that she didn't know of any cases brought by the FTC that have sought to apply the SafeWeb laws. In the area of international cyber-law enforcement, she said it remains a challenge to share information with some foreign governments. Other Anti-Spyware Coalition contributors remarked that they share the FTC's concerns over passing laws that may eventually serve to handcuff enforcers with outdated terms and conditions. "We're pretty much against the laws," said Alex Eckelberry, president of anti-spyware applications vendor Sunbelt Software. "We think they will do more harm than good."
640164
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee on Wednesday approved bills intended to fight computer spyware and to protect wireless phone customers from potential privacy problems associated with a wireless phone number directory.
240857
WASHINGTON - Spyware legislation that would allow fines of up to $3 million for makers of software that steals personal information from a user's computer or highjacks its browser will get a second look after the U.S. Congress failed to pass the legislation in 2004.
89129
The House approved legislation yesterday that would bar the CIA from using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics, drawing an immediate veto threat from the White House and setting up another political showdown over what constitutes torture.
303619
Some experts doubt whether the California law will have much impact on illegal spyware activity. By George V. Hulme. A new California law aimed at curbing spyware, software applications that surreptitiously
209300
The House of Representatives on  Saturday passed a $32 billion bill funding homeland security  programs this year after days of political fighting over the  measure.
356226
The US House of Representatives yesterday unanimously passed a bill that would make using spyware to snoop of the online activities of consumers a criminal offence.
603413
(InfoWorld) - An antispyware bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives this week faces opposition from several groups with one side saying it's too strong and the other saying it's too weak. The Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (SPY ACT), which passed the House Wednesday by a vote of 368 to 48, would prohibit taking control of computers to send unsolicited material to others, diverting the Web browser, modifying a computer's settings and keystroke logging. The bill would make it illegal to collect personal information without permission and it allows fines of up to $3 million for some violations. But several business groups, led by the DMA (Direct Marketing Association), sent a letter to House leaders this week raising objections that the bill too broadly defines "computer software" and "information collection programs," and it could make it illegal for e-commerce sites to recommend products based on browsing or buying history, engage in targeted advertising, or to place cookies on a Web site user's computer "The scope and impact of [the bill] on legitimate businesses goes far beyond regulating spyware and cuts to the heart of the information economy," said the letter, signed by 31 trade groups and companies. The bill could "limit the seamless Internet experience that is responsible for the widespread adoption of the Internet by consumers," the letter said. Representatives of the SPY ACT's two main sponsors, Representative Ed Towns, a New York Democrat, and Representative Mary Bono, a California Republican, weren't immediately available for comment. The SPY ACT is the second piece of antispyware legislation passed by the House this year. The Internet Spyware Prevention Act (I-SPY),Â which passed the House in May, hasn't prompted major objections. I-SPY would create penalties of up to five years in prison for some spyware-like behavior. Versions of both bills passed the House in May 2005, but failed to make it through the Senate. By requiring Web sites to get permission every time they track a users' history, the SPY ACT could make Web surfing an unwieldy series of pop-ups asking for permission, said Steve Berry, the DMA's executive vice president for government affairs. By trying to define bad uses of technology, the bill becomes overly broad, he said. "Our thought is maybe you should look at the intent rather than trying to regulate the technology," Berry said. Among the groups signing the letter in opposition to the SPY ACT were the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Information Technology Association of America, NetCoalition, Charles Schwab & Co, and the Internet Alliance. Meanwhile, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has raised different objections to the SPY ACT. The bill would preempt about 10 state laws that have been passed, many of them stronger than the SPY ACT, said Fred von Lohmann, senior intellectual property lawyer for the EFF. In addition, the bill would take away the ability of private citizens to sue spyware creators, von Lohmann said. The bill "would actually make things worse, insulating adware vendors from more stringent state laws and private lawsuits," von Lohmann wrote on the EFF blog in April. The bill concentrates spyware enforcement in the hands of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and state attorney generals, instead of allowing private lawsuits as well, he said. "This is a terrible move," von Lohmann wrote. "If Congress is serious about enacting tough anti-spyware laws, it should create incentives that would encourage private citizens to pursue the bad guys." Bono, one of the bill's sponsors, said in a statement this week that the preemption of state laws is the right approach. "Because of the Internet's role in interstate commerce, the need for federal spyware legislation is clear, depending on a patchwork of state laws is simply unworkable," she said. "The passage of the SPY ACT moves the American people one step closer to reclaiming control of their computers in their home and at their business."