PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 26, 2012
Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act - Amends the National Security Act of 1947 to add provisions concerning cyber threat intelligence and information sharing. Defines "cyber threat intelligence" as intelligence in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to: (1) a vulnerability of a system or network of a government or private entity; (2) a threat to the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of such a system or network or any information stored on, processed on, or transiting such a system or network; (3) efforts to deny access to or degrade, disrupt, or destroy such a system or network; or (4) efforts to gain unauthorized access to such a system or network, including for the purpose of exfiltrating information. Excludes intelligence pertaining to efforts to gain unauthorized access to such a system or network that solely involve violations of consumer terms of service or consumer licensing agreements and do not otherwise constitute unauthorized access.
Requires the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to: (1) establish procedures to allow intelligence community elements to share cyber threat intelligence with private-sector entities and utilities, and (2) encourage the sharing of such intelligence.
Requires the procedures established to ensure that such intelligence is only: (1) shared with certified entities or a person with an appropriate security clearance, (2) shared consistent with the need to protect U.S. national security, and (3) used in a manner that protects such intelligence from unauthorized disclosure. Provides for guidelines for the granting of security clearance approvals to certified entities or officers or employees of such entities. Prohibits a certified entity receiving such intelligence from further disclosing the information to any entity other than another certified entity or a federal department or agency authorized to receive such intelligence.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes a cybersecurity provider (a non-governmental entity that provides goods or services intended to be used for cybersecurity purposes), with the express consent of a protected entity (an entity that contracts with a cybersecurity provider) to: (1) use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information in order to protect the rights and property of the protected entity; and (2) share cyber threat information with any other entity designated by the protected entity, including the federal government. Provides similar cybersecurity system use and threat information sharing authority to self-protected entities (an entity that provides goods or services for cybersecurity purposes to itself).
Requires the head of a federal agency receiving cyber threat information to provide such information to the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and allows such agency head to request the Center to provide such information to another federal agency. Sets forth requirements with respect to the use and protection of shared information, including prohibiting the use of such information to gain a competitive advantage and, if shared with the federal government, exempts such information from public disclosure. Prohibits a civil or criminal cause of action against a protected entity, a self-protected entity, or a cybersecurity provider acting in good faith under the above circumstances.
Allows the federal government to use shared cyber threat information: (1) for cybersecurity purposes to ensure the integrity, confidentiality, availability, or safeguarding of a system or network; (2) for the investigation of cybersecurity crimes; (3) for the protection of individuals from the danger of death or serious bodily harm and the prosecution of crimes involving such dangers (including the protection of minors from child pornography, sexual exploitation, kidnapping, and trafficking); or (4) to protect U.S. national security. Prohibits the federal government from affirmatively searching such information for any other purpose.
Provides for the protection of sensitive personal documents such as library records, firearms sales records, educational records, tax returns, and medical records. Requires a federal agency receiving information that is not cyber threat information to so notify the entity or provider of such information. Prohibits federal agencies from retaining shared information for any unauthorized use. Allows the federal government to undertake efforts to limit the impact of the sharing of such information on privacy and civil liberties. Outlines federal government liability for violations of restrictions on the disclosure, use, and protection of voluntarily shared information.
Directs the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community to submit annually to the congressional intelligence committees a review of the use of such information shared with the federal government, as well as recommendations for improvements and modifications to address privacy and civil liberties concerns.
Preempts any state statute that restricts or otherwise regulates an activity authorized by the Act.
States that nothing in this Act shall be construed to: (1) provide additional authority to, or modify existing authority of, any element of the intelligence community to control or direct the cybersecurity efforts of a private-sector entity or a component of the federal government or a state, local, or tribal government; (2) limit or affect existing information sharing relationships of the federal government; or (3) provide additional authority to, or modify existing authority of, any entity to use a cybersecurity system owned or controlled by the federal government on a private-sector system or network to protect the latter system or network.
People & committees
Rep. Rogers, Mike J. [R-MI-8] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
UNANIMOUS CONSENT - Mr. Mike Rogers (MI) asked unanimous consent that in the engrossment of H.R. 3523, the Clerk be authorized to make the change placed at the desk as follows: Insert "deny access to or" before "degrade" in each place it appears. Agreed to without objection.
The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 3523. (consideration: CR H2186)
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 248 - 168 (Roll no. 192).
House roll call 192 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 248 - 168 (Roll no. 192).
House roll call 192 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 183 - 233 (Roll no. 191).
House roll call 191 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H2185)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Perlmutter motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to protect the privacy of Internet passwords by prohibiting employers and the Federal Government from requiring the disclosure of confidential passwords by an employee or job applicant. It would also protect freedom of expression on the Internet by prohibiting the Federal Government from establishing a national firewall similar to the "Great Internet Firewall of China."
Mr. Perlmutter moved to recommit with instructions to Intelligence (Permanent). (consideration: CR H2184-2186; text: CR H2184)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H2166-2167)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H2183)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 3523.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Richardson amendment No. 10.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment No. 5.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Mulvaney amendment No. 15, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Mulvaney demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Mulvaney amendment No. 15.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Turner (OH) amendment No. 14.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2175-2186)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 3523 as unfinished business.
ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Rogers of Michigan asked unanimous consent that, during further consideration of H.R. 3523 pursuant to H. Res. 631, amendments numbered 10 and 5 printed in House Report 112-454 may be considered out of sequence. Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Rogers (MI) moved that the committee rise.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Goodlatte amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Rogers (MI) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Goodlatte amendment No. 13.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Woodall amendment No. 12.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Pompeo amendment No. 11.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Flake amendment No. 9.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Mulvaney amendment No. 8, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Mulvaney demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Mulvaney amendment No. 8.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Amash amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Amash demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Amash amendment No. 7.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Quayle amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Ruppersberger demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Quayle amendment No. 6.
POSTPONED PROCEEDEINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Rogers (MI) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Ruppersberger demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rogers (MI) amendment No. 4.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Pompeo amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Langevin amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Langevin demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 631, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Langevin amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 3523.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Judy Biggert to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 631 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3523 with 1 hour of general debate. Motion to recommit with or without instructions allowed. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The rule makes in order as original text for purpose of amendment the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 112-20 and provides that it shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The rule further provides that it shall be in order at any time through the legislative day of April 27, 2012, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules. The rule provides further for a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 4628. The rule provides one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit. Finally, the rule provides that the Committee on Appropriations may, at any time before 6 p.m. on Wednesday, May 2, 2012 recommit. Finally, the rule provides that the Committee on Appropriations may, at any time before 6 p.m. on Wednesday, May 2, 2012 file, privileged reports to accompany measures making appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 631. (consideration: CR H2156-2176)
Rule H. Res. 631 passed House.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3523 with 1 hour of general debate. Motion to recommit with or without instructions allowed. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The rule makes in order as original text for purpose of amendment the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 112-20 and provides that it shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The rule further provides that it shall be in order at any time through the legislative day of April 27, 2012, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules. The rule provides further for a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 4628. The rule provides one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit. Finally, the rule provides that the Committee on Appropriations may, at any time before 6 p.m. on Wednesday, May 2, 2012 recommit. Finally, the rule provides that the Committee on Appropriations may, at any time before 6 p.m. on Wednesday, May 2, 2012 file, privileged reports to accompany measures making appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 311.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Intelligence. H. Rept. 112-445.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Intelligence. H. Rept. 112-445.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 1.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select).
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. 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.3523 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.3523 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.3523 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.3523 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.