The Google-translation is pretty good for an machine translation, but follows a few fixes:
---
Representative to require Brazilians to give CPF to post in social networks
The House of Representatives will discuss a bill that seeks to end anonymity on the Brazilian Internet.
Authored by Congressman Silvio Costa, from the Social Christian Party from Pernambuco, PL 1879/2015 wants to change the Internet Civil Mark to include an obligation to store the full name and CPF number of Internet users who want to publish something on the network.
Any site that allows exposure of ideas would have to store this information of its users. The obligation would be set by adding a paragraph to the Civil Mark as it would read: "Internet application provider, as defined in the head, which allows posting of public information by third parties, as in blog comments, forum posts, status updates on social networks, or any other method to insert information in the Internet, shall keep, in addition, records of these users including at least their full name and their Natural Person Record number (CPF)."
For the deputy Silvio Costa, "this simple requirement will certainly curb the attitudes of those who cowardly hide behind anonymity to disseminate criminal messages in the network. Also," he continues, "individuals who insist in this type of conduct will be more easily identified and properly prosecuted."
The project is still in the House for analysis from commissions of Science and Technology, Communication and Informatics, and Constitution and Justice and Citizenship.
And also those who hide behind anonymity to disseminate legal, even helpful messages across the network. Having an online alias allows many shy, repressed, abused, and frightened individuals the opportunity to chat, interact, and discourse about their lives without fear this information will be used against them.
> ["]Also," he continues, "individuals who insist in this type of conduct will be more easily identified and properly prosecuted."
More of the "If you've got nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to worry about" attitude. This suspicion is so hostile to normal traffic that its chilling effect is undeniable. It's very sad to see.
It's worse -- these CPF numbers have nothing special but a simple checksum at the end. It is trivial to generate them and, if we get a used one, check the actual owner from our IRS website.
So we can assume everyone with bad intentions will simply use one from anyone else and the law will have no effect on criminals but will terrorize people who need/want to keep their PII private. Also, I suppose everyone will infringe that law at some level, opening the door to selective prosecution of "undesirables" or someone opposing the powers that be.
Aside from the reprehensible precedent and philosophy engendered by this proposal, it seems the implementation details are something akin to insane, i.e. "Any site that allows exposure of ideas would have to store this information of its members." That certainly seems far from a "simple requirement", nor does it seem very wise from a security and liability standpoint for site operators.
