Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

House Bill Targets use of Pentagon Networks for Child Pornography

posted by martyb on Monday July 08 2019, @11:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the Think-of-the-Children dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

Reps. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) and Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) introduced legislation on Tuesday meant to halt the use of Department of Defense (DOD) computer networks by users for sharing or procuring pornographic images of children.

The End National Defense Network Abuse (END Network Abuse) was introduced in the wake of in[sic] an investigation called "Project Flicker" carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This investigation identified over 5,000 individuals, including many affiliated with DOD, who were subscribed to child porn websites.

The Pentagon's Defense Criminal Investigative Service subsequently identified hundreds of DOD-affiliated individuals as suspects involved in accessing child pornography, several of whom used government devices to view and share the images.

https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/451383-house-bill-aims-to-stop-use-of-pentagon-networks-for-sharing-child

Why does this require a new law?

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
House Bill Targets use of Pentagon Networks for Child Pornography | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 41 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by ikanreed on Monday July 08 2019, @11:56PM (4 children)

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 08 2019, @11:56PM (#864768) Journal

    This is in the subset of "we must do something" venue of acting so you can be seen acting.

    There is technically change from the legal status quo in this particular law because it makes allows for audits, which you know, you can't go auditing regular citizens' computer. That's a violation of the 4th amendment. But government owned machines, whose rights could you possibly violate then?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   4  

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 08 2019, @11:57PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 08 2019, @11:57PM (#864769)

    Governments are people too.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by ikanreed on Tuesday July 09 2019, @12:02AM

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 09 2019, @12:02AM (#864772) Journal

      They're made of people, and if we intruded into the private and personal effects of government employees, we'd be crossing a line. But the tools by which governance happens? That's "our" property. Rei publica.

      Like, there's no reasonable expectation of privacy when doing government business. At all. I got fucking FOIA any federal government employee's emails if I could fill out a short document explaining the public interest.

      It's the whole thing Hillary(and Bush's people, and Trump's people) were avoiding with private email servers.
       

    • (Score: 2) by captain normal on Tuesday July 09 2019, @12:27AM (1 child)

      by captain normal (2205) on Tuesday July 09 2019, @12:27AM (#864782)

      Do you mean, just like corporations?

      --
      When life isn't going right, go left.