National Information Infrastructure Protection Act of 1996
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 17, 1996
National Information Infrastructure Protection Act of 1996 - Revises Federal criminal code provisions regarding fraud and related activity in connection with computers. Sets penalties with respect to anyone who having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access, obtains specified restricted information or data, and, with reason to believe that such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, or transmits it to any person not entitled to receive it (or causes or attempts such communication) or willfully retains it and fails to deliver it to the U.S. officer or employee entitled to receive it. Sets penalties for: (1) intentionally accessing a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access and thereby obtaining information from any U.S. department or agency, or from any protected computer if the conduct involved an interstate or foreign communication; (2) intentionally accessing, without authorization, any computer of a U.S. department or agency that is exclusively for use by or for the U.S. Government or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, that is used by or for the U.S. Government if such conduct affects the use of the Government's operation of such computer; (3) knowingly and with intent to defraud, accessing a protected computer without authorization, or exceeding authorized access, and furthering the intended fraud and obtaining anything of value, unless the object of the fraud and the thing obtained consists only of the use of the computer and the value of such use is not more than $5,000 in any one-year period; (4) knowingly causing the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and, as a result, intentionally causing damage without authorization to a protected computer, intentionally accessing a protected computer without authorization and recklessly causing damage, or intentionally accessing a protected computer without authorization and causing damage; and (5) with intent to extort from any person or legal entity any thing of value, transmitting in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing a threat to cause damage to a protected computer. Increases penalties for fraud and related activity in connection with computers.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4095 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4095 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4095 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4095 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.