PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 11, 2015
Cyber Threat Sharing Act of 2015
Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to permit private entities to: (1) disclose lawfully obtained cyber threat indicators to a private information sharing and analysis organization and the national cybersecurity and communications integration center (NCCIC); and (2) receive indicators disclosed by private entities, the federal government, or state or local governments.
Permits any entity to disclose lawfully obtained indicators to a federal entity for investigative purposes consistent with the lawful authorities of the federal entity.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Restricts private entities' use, retention, or further disclosure of cyber threat indicators to purposes relating to information system protection, cyber threat identification or mitigation, or crime reporting.
Directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to select through a competitive process a private entity to identify best practices for private information sharing and analysis organizations.
Provides liability protections to entities that voluntarily share lawfully obtained indicators with: (1) the NCCIC, or (2) a private information sharing and analysis organization if the organization self-certifies that it has adopted the best practices identified by the DHS-selected private entity.
Directs DHS to: (1) designate the NCCIC to receive and disclose threat indicators to federal and nonfederal entities in as close to real time as practicable, and (2) develop a program to support implementation of automated mechanisms for real time sharing.
Prohibits a federal entity from using a disclosed indicator as evidence in a regulatory enforcement action against the entity that disclosed the indicator, but allows a federal entity to use disclosed indicators for regulatory enforcement if the information is received by other lawful means.
Requires DHS to develop policies for federal entities to:
anonymize and destroy information in a timely manner to limit the acquisition, interception, retention, use, and disclosure of indicators that are likely to identify specific persons;
limit reception, use, and retention only to protect information systems or to investigate, prosecute, or otherwise respond to computer crimes, threats of death or serious bodily harm, serious threats to a minor, or attempts or conspiracies to commit such offenses;
preserve confidentiality of proprietary information; and
penalize federal employees who violate these policies.
Repeals threat indicator sharing procedures established by this Act five years after enactment of this Act.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the statement issued by the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission on April 10, 2014, entitled "Antitrust Policy Statement On Sharing Of Cybersecurity Information" provides protections against antitrust concerns for the legitimate sharing of cyber threat indicators.
People & committees
Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] · D–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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 S.456 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 S.456 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 S.456 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 S.456 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.