Kudos to CNET  for obtaining a copy of the bill Senators Rockefeller and Snowe are proposing for enhanced cyber security, entitled the Cyber Security Act of 2009. Much of the bill is non-controversial, pushing federal agencies to bulk up their electronic defenses against hacking and similar threats.  One provision of the legislation gives the president broad powers to direct Internet traffic and examine electronic data when he or she declares a “cyber emergency.”

The problem is that the circumstances warranting a cyber emergency remain undefined in the bill. The strongest argument I can think of off-hand for keeping the conditions justifying such an emergency declaration vague is that threats to cyber security evolve rapidly, probably more rapidly than threats to other types of security.  We therefore don’t want to hamstring our government from taking intelligent and swift action in response to the legitimate threats of tomorrow because we have overdefined the problems in the terms of what we understand today. (In fact, in this space and in the media more broadly, we have made the point that highly defined Internet legislation from the mid-1990s, particularly the Communications Decency Act, has yielded perverse and unintended outcomes in the field of Internet libel law, for example.)

However, there is something about the scope of the powers given to the president under the bill as written that makes the current formulation disquieting.  It would be better, I think, to limit the powers of the president in one of a few ways.  First, the bill could limit the president’s power to declare an emergency by saying that such an emergency could last only five or ten days before requiring congressional approval.  Second, the president could be required to seek congressional approval in the first instance: in the past, in times of grave national threat, Congress has acted to nationalize or take control of vital industries and assets.  Third, the bill could offer further and reasonably future-scalable definition as to what constitutes an emergency.  This bill doesn’t offer limitations of this kind.  As a country, we’re smart enough to do better.

Reputation.com CEO Michael Fertik will be on air with Fox Radio affiliates across the country tomorrow (Wednesday) morning.  Grab your thermos of coffee and tune into your local station for a good review of proposed legislation supporting Internet Privacy.

Nobody likes to pay taxes, that’s just a given. Of course, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t pay your taxes. Why? Well, for one thing, if you’re caught dodging taxes, the penalties can be severe. Besides, even if you think you could get away with it, remember, this is the IRS we’re talking about. They put away Al Capone and he practically ran the city of Chicago in the early 20th century. Plus, the IRS is much smarter now. Don’t believe me? Just check out this article from Laura Saunders at the Wall Street Journal.

Tax deadbeats are finding someone actually reads their MySpace and Facebook postings: the taxman.

State revenue agents have begun nabbing scofflaws by mining information posted on social-networking Web sites, from relocation announcements to professional profiles to financial boasts.

In Minnesota, authorities were able to levy back taxes on the wages of a long-sought tax evader after he announced on MySpace that he would be returning to his home town to work as a real-estate broker and gave his employer’s name. The state collected several thousand dollars, the full amount due.

Meanwhile, agents in Nebraska collected $2,000 from a deejay after he advertised on his MySpace page that he would be working at a big public party.

In California, which has recently been so strapped for revenue it has had to pay some bills with IOUs, agents are also using social Web sites. When one delinquent was identified as a rigger of sails, a curious collection agent searched his name and the term online and found a discussion board used by local riggers. In one thread someone asked where the rigger was because his store had closed, and a reply was posted, “Oh, he moved across the bay.” The agent found the man and collected a four-figure sum.

The article goes on to cite a number of other instances where tax evaders have been wrangled by the IRS through social networking sites, forums, or simple Google searches.

Naturally, there are limitations to IRS data mining. For instance, the IRS can only search information you’ve shared publicly on a social networking site, as well as standard information such as bank records, employment records, motor-vehicle records, and tax returns. In other words, if your Facebook page is set to private, it would be illegal for an IRS agent to connect with you as a friend under a false identity and then use your information.

So far, only a few states use data mining techniques to find delinquent tax payers, however it would be reasonable to expect that number to increase as government agencies become more facile with web technology. The fact that we’re still in a serious recession doesn’t hurt either. With a deficit expected to increase to $1.58 trillion, you can bet that the government will be looking for ways to increase revenues.