PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2015
Federal Information Security Management Reform Act of 2015
Requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in administering federal agencies' implementation of information system security policies, to: (1) operate consolidated intrusion detection, prevention, or protective capabilities and use of associated countermeasures to protect agency information and systems from security threats; (2) provide incident detection, analysis, mitigation, and response information and remote or onsite technical assistance; (3) develop and conduct impact assessments in consultation with other agencies and private entities; (4) foster development of technologies for use across multiple agencies in conjunction with other agencies and the private sector; and (5) coordinate such information security policies with standards for national security systems and policies issued by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Director of National Intelligence.
Authorizes the DHS Secretary to acquire, intercept, retain, use, and disclose communications and system traffic transiting to or from or stored on agency information systems and deploy countermeasures if the Secretary certifies that: (1) the measures are reasonably necessary to protect agency information systems from security threats; (2) content of communications will not be retained, and traffic will not be subject to countermeasures, unless associated with a known or reasonably suspected information security threat; (3) the information will be used for law enforcement purposes only with the Attorney General's approval when the information is evidence of a crime; (4) system users have been notified of the potential for such an acquisition or disclosure; and (5) the procedures have been approved by the Attorney General.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Allows agency heads to disclose such information to the Secretary notwithstanding any other law that would otherwise restrict or prevent such disclosures. Provides liability protections to private entities authorized to assist the Secretary for such purposes.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) issue a directive to an agency to take any lawful action with respect to the operation of a system that maintains agency information in response to a known or reasonably suspected information security threat, vulnerability, or incident that represents a substantial threat to an agency's information security; or (2) authorize, without prior consultation with the affected agency, the use of protective capabilities under the Secretary's control if there is an imminent threat and a directive is unlikely to be timely.
Exempts DOD and the intelligence community from such procedures.
People & committees
Rep. Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [D-MD-2] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 20, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3402 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3402 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3402 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3402 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.