The RESTRICT Act Is Exactly What It Sounds Like

[GURPS]

Ostensibly, the RESTRICT Act is designed to protect Americans from TikTok — you know, that nifty piece of Chinese spyware masquerading as a fun way to showcase dance videos, asinine behavior, and other things people can live without. And Congress is interested in protecting the country from bad international actors. That is because it can be done via the RESTRICT Act, which will do far more than keep TikTok off of your phone or tablet. How much more? More than you want or even thought possible, even under this administration.

The RESTRICT Act goes after anyone whom the powers that be deem a threat. That determination is made by the secretary of commerce. A threat can include people abroad and U.S. citizens:

In General.—The Secretary, in consultation with the relevant executive department and agency heads, is authorized to and shall take action to identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate, or otherwise mitigate, including by negotiating, entering into, or imposing, and enforcing any mitigation measure to address any risk arising from any covered transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States that the Secretary determines—
(1) poses an undue or unacceptable risk of—
(A) sabotage or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology products and services in the United States;
(B) catastrophic effects on the security or resilience of the critical infrastructure or digital economy of the United States;
(C) interfering in, or altering the result or reported result of a Federal election, as determined in coordination with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Treasury, and the Federal Election Commission; or
(D) coercive or criminal activities by a foreign adversary that are designed to undermine democratic processes and institutions or steer policy and regulatory decisions in favor of the strategic objectives of a foreign adversary to the detriment of the national security of the United States, as determined in coordination with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Treasury, and the Federal Election Commission; or

(2) otherwise poses an undue or unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the safety of United States persons.

The scope of technology that can be monitored, curtailed, or prohibited is lengthy. You should be concerned about all of it but specifically:

• wireless local area networks;
• mobile networks;

• any software, hardware, or any other product or service integral to data hosting or computing service that uses, processes, or retains, or is expected to use, process, or retain, sensitive personal data with respect to greater than 1,000,000 persons in the United States at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered transaction is referred to the Secretary for review or the Secretary initiates review of the covered transaction, including—
• internet hosting services
• cloud-based or distributed computing and data storage
• machine learning, predictive analytics, and data science products and services, including those involving the provision of services to assist a party utilize, manage, or maintain open-source software
• managed services
• content delivery services

• internet- or network-enabled sensors, webcams, end-point surveillance or monitoring devices, modems and home networking devices if greater than 1,000,000 units have been sold to persons in the United States at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered transaction is referred to the Secretary for review or the Secretary initiates review of the covered transaction
• software designed or used primarily for connecting with and communicating via the internet that is in use by greater than 1,000,000 persons in the United States at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered transaction is referred to the Secretary for review or the Secretary initiates review of the covered transaction, including desktop applications, mobile applications, gaming applications; payment applications; or web-based applications

Suppose you find yourself on the enemies list for something you posted, a thought you expressed, a transaction you made, or a site you visited, like oh, say, PJ Media. You will naturally want details. And you won’t get them. You can even try filing a FOIA request. Good luck with that. You’d better bring lunch.

(f) No Right Of Access.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—No provision of this Act shall be construed to create a right to obtain access to information in the possession of the Federal Government that was considered in making a determination under this Act that a transaction is a covered transaction or interest or to prohibit, mitigate, or take action against a covered transaction or interest, including any classified national security information or sensitive but unclassified information.

(2) INAPPLICABILITY OF FOIA.—Any information submitted to the Federal Government by a party to a covered transaction in accordance with this Act, as well as any information the Federal Government may create relating to review of the covered transaction, is exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the “Freedom of Information Act”).

Nervous yet? You should be. With a stroke of a pen, or more appropriately, a flick of a switch or click of a button, you can be declared a threat and shut down at the discretion of the bureaucracy.

BE VERY AFRAID: The RESTRICT Act Is Exactly What It Sounds Like

pjmedia.com

I've heard this called Patriot Act 2.0