> I've been informed since I started reading and discussing CISPA that a primary purpose of this bill is actually the opposite of what people are worried about:

> I've been informed since I started reading and discussing CISPA that a primary purpose of this bill is actually the opposite of what people are worried about: that instead of getting private companies to share with the government, CISPA exists largely to provide a legal framework for the government to share information with private companies, so that when government systems are hit with new (say) Microsoft Office malware and "spear phishing" attacks, they can notify stakeholders in private industry. I honestly wouldn't have a problem with that (who would?), but I have to wonder exactly what sort of legal problems they were having in doing this and why they couldn't create private agreements allowing that?