Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton says Apple's Tim Cook 'omitted critical facts' in encryption stance

1356

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 103

    scotty321 said:
    Sorry, Senator Cockhead, but privacy is a fundamental human right, enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, along with the rights to life, liberty, security, and many other rights that terrorists would seek to deny us. There are many ways to confront terrorism, and we don’t accept that giving up our freedom is the only way.
    Cotton is a dangerous politician, however, there are no real "fundamental human rights" since there is no global government to protect these so-called "rights". People are killed all the time in wars (see any of the current countries which the US has invaded) and then where are their "rights"? The US does not report to the UN and it has no authority over US sovereignty. We have the US Constitution and far more importantly, our Bill of Rights, both of which are the acid test for all US law...but our laws, our Constitution, our Bill of Rights only apply to US citizens.

    Cotton is suggesting that the 4th Amendment is meaningless. If he ever tries to force the issue, I guarantee he'll be bounced out of office faster than a basketball.
    edited December 2015 jbdragonmuppetryhighacidity
  • Reply 42 of 103
    Still waiting for the "facts" Cook left out. Cotten offers only assertions and suppositions. By his logic, he should be the only Republican to oppose private ownership of guns because some use them for criminal for purposes. 
    nolamacguylostkiwihighacidity
  • Reply 43 of 103
    sdw2001 said:

    Treaties are ratified by the Senate, FYI. Obama's "grand deal" is null and void by default. 


    This isn't a formal treaty, which is another end run around the constitution by this constitutional law professor.  
    Not formal, but the Senate should (and will) treat it as one. The god king tries, but if the election turns out correctly most of his damage can be undone. 
    h2p
  • Reply 44 of 103
    Appdaven said:
    Here lies the fundamental problem. If Apple provides a backdoor, criminals will be able to exploit it and there is nothing to prevent criminals from writing their own encryption communications program with no backdoor. You then have a system where criminals have access to everyone's data but law enforcement still doesn't have access to the criminals' data.
    Apple won't provide a backdoor because, for one thing, all of their China business would disappear. The Chinese government would not allow their people to have a device that the US could easily hack and use to spy on their own people. 

    If no one can hack into Apple's encrypted data, including Apple, then everyone everywhere can be confident their information is protected.
    davenlostkiwi
  • Reply 45 of 103

    I would be afraid to post a contrary opinion on this site, about this topic, as it seems that everyone posting here is furious that anyone would even think something different. how about net neutrality, is that also a subject that there is no room for polite debate?
    "Net Neutrality" is just more intrusion by government. It's the opposite of what most people thought it was about.

    Any time ANYONE tells you they'll give you "free stuff" in exchange for giving them more power, immediately hold onto your wallet or purse and run in the other direction.
    edited December 2015 ewtheckman
  • Reply 46 of 103

    mac_128 said:
    this guys is dangerous. For those who have forgotten, he essentially committed treason by co-authoring the letter telling Iran that any deal they struck with President would be reversed by congress as soon Obama leaves office.
    Treaties are ratified by the Senate, FYI. Obama's "grand deal" is null and void by default. 


    You'd be right...if it was classified as a treaty. Most agreements with foreign governments these days are by Executive Agreement. According to a 2009 University of Michigan study, between 1839 and 1889, 52.9% of international agreements entered into by the U.S. were executive agreements.  Between 1939 and 1989, 94.3% were executive agreements. ( http://blosgs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/03/10/treaties-vs-executive-agreements-when-does-congress-get-a-vote/ ).  See also:

    Executive agreements and Senate disagreements March, 2015
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/10/executive-agreements-and-senate-disagreements

    International Law and Agreements: Their Effect upon U.S. Law - Congressional Research Service - February, 2015
    http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32528.pdf
    ronndavenroundaboutnowfrachighacidity
  • Reply 47 of 103
    sandorsandor Posts: 663member
    if the landlord doesn't have keys to the basement, isn't it the law enforcement officers that have to break in?
  • Reply 48 of 103
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    wizard69 said:
    I have not forgotten. Him and 46 other Republican senators subverting the President while in critical negotiations with a foreign power those senators consider "the enemy." This is what passes for patriotism in the GOP today.
    A president that engages in activities as stupid as negotiating with Iran should be subverted. This so called treaty (yet to be ratified) is dangerous to the entire middle east and frankly the USA. In this case there is good moral reasoning behind subverting Obama as ignoring Iran will lead to the death of hundreds of millions. Honestly people doesn't anybody here read their history books. Iran is a very dangerous country and the sooner the current government there is eliminated the better for mankind.
    Because trillion dollar invasions are SO much better than an international negotiation? Yeah, pull the other one.

    Hey Iran is right there on the map so saddle up and head over there to do your bit for mankind!
    edited December 2015 nolamacguyronndavenmuppetrythepixeldocfrachighaciditypropod
  • Reply 49 of 103
    rayy said:
    Cotton doesn't seem to understand the issue. But give him a break, he's a Republican.
    So when The Hillary called for a "Manhattan Project 2.0" between government and tech companies, did that showcase an understanding of the issue, or does her political affiliation exempt her from criticism?
    Actually, to provide what the people running the NSA, CIA and FBI want while regaining even the amount of freedom we had before 9/11 would probably require exactly that - a "Manhattan Project 2.0".  Only this one might not be successful.

    The national security establishment is trying to convince everyone that it's more important to be safe than to be free.  Unfortunately, they can't keep us absolutely safe, but they CAN take away all of our freedom that matters.
    ewtheckmanSpamSandwichjb210lostkiwithepixeldocfrachighacidity
  • Reply 50 of 103
    sandorsandor Posts: 663member
    softeky said:

    Hand guns are specifically designed to kill people - some of the people killed are murdered.


    in light of "guns don't kill people, people kill people"

    "encryption doesn't cause crime, criminals cause crime"


    i like it :)
    jb210lostkiwihighacidity
  • Reply 51 of 103
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    N/M


    edited December 2015
  • Reply 52 of 103
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member
    Hey Cotton - go fk yourself! You want to do something meaningful, go fix the education system in your state so that you can raise well educated people who can think for themselves instead of listening to pinheads like you. And hey Comey, with the Billions of dollars we're pissing away on national security, do your job with the resources you have! And while you're at, please send us a back door to your email, health records and bank account, ok?
    edited December 2015 punkndrubliclostkiwihighaciditypropod
  • Reply 53 of 103
    mac_128 said:
    this guys is dangerous. For those who have forgotten, he essentially committed treason by co-authoring the letter telling Iran that any deal they struck with President would be reversed by congress as soon Obama leaves office.
    Um, you do realize that the Constitution requires Senate approval for treaties, don't you?

    He [the President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
     — U. S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 3

    That said, Cotton is simply wrong on this point. Even by his own statement, he showed that Tim Cook did not leave anything out. You can either leave a back door open, or you can't. There is no such thing as a "government only back door".
    lostkiwi
  • Reply 54 of 103
    mac_128 said:
    ... he essentially committed treason by co-authoring the letter telling Iran that any deal they struck with President would be reversed by congress as soon Obama leaves office.
    Treason does not quite mean what you apparently think it means, that is, of course, unless you were engaging in hyperbole merely for the sake of making some sort of point.

    "The betrayal of one's own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies."


  • Reply 55 of 103
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member

    Here we going again using children in the name of scaring the crap out of people. All in the name of children, typical politician saying thing for the effect.

    Ask the FBI and NSA why they did not know about the two in in Southern Calif, the answer will be they did not use technology to do any of their planning nor did they tell anyone what they were up to or their beliefs.

    So blame technology company that the FBI and NSA could not find those two ahead of time. Oh they are not the only ones, the Olympic Park Bomber did everything in secrete, then hid out for years before they found him why he was not using technology. Police if they do not have technology to catch the bad guys they obviously can not catch them at all. That fact alone should scare people, it is called hiding in plane sight.

    Yeah phone companies today have backdoors for the government to come in, but the phone companies were regulated and controlled by the government so they had to do what the government asked them today, They are just upset they do not have the same control over apple.


    edited December 2015
  • Reply 56 of 103
    Oh for crying out loud, President Obama didn't submit it as a treaty, it's an Executive Agreement. You may not like that, but you're not the president. When you are, you can submit it as a treaty.

    Cotton violated the Logan Act, and along with the other Republicans involved, should be tried and imprisoned for it. Only the Executive Branch is permitted to speak for the United States to foreign nations.

    I'm so sick of the rhetoric from Comey, Cotton, and Hillary. If you're all so damned smart, how about YOU explain your method for breaking AES-256? Oh wait, you aren't a cryptographer are you? You're just a stupid politician who doesn't seem to understand: you can have no encryption, or you can have encryption. It's boolean, there's no middle ground. And as we've already seen how various governmental agencies are either hacked or lose our personal information every month or two, you aren't exactly to be trusted holding the master decryption key for everyone's communications. You're not even smart enough to encrypt the sensitive data you already have! OPM lost scans of security clearance holders' fingerprints, for Christ's sake! What are they supposed to do, get new fingers?

    And what happens when the master key falls into Russian hands? Or Chinese hands? Is there a government employee alive who wouldn't hand over that key for $10M? How about $1B? Because that's what it would be worth to read all individual and corporate communications going on in America.

    For hundreds of years, if the government wanted access to your personal information, they presented you with a warrant, and then you were free to try to stop the government by presenting your case in court. Why do Comey and Cotton want ALL surveillance to be conducted in secret now? Exactly what violations of the Constitution are they trying to hide?

    If they want the information so badly, then get the encrypted data from Apple, Google, or Facebook, and then try to compel the individual involved to hand over his or her key. They'll probably challenge it in court as violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, but that's the way the justice system is SUPPOSED to work. Not everything need be conducted in secret.

    These morons have gotten so used to getting everything they've wanted since 9/11 that they've gotten addicted to secrecy and forgotten about the rules. They want to continue to shift constitutional decisions from the Judicial Branch to the Executive Branch, and that's not the way our government is set up.

    A few corrections: all branches are coequal, none of them is more powerful than the other. But if you wanted to make an argument, it would be fair to say that ever since Congress decided to let presidents do whatever they wanted under a never-ending AUMF, they effectively abandoned the requirement for a declaration of war, and ceded much of the Legislative Branch's power to the Executive.

    And Comey is a Republican, appointed by President George W. Bush as Assistant Attorney General; he had a job before he was FBI Director under President Obama.
    nolamacguydsdronnargonautpunkndrublicbobschlobdavenmuppetryhighacidity
  • Reply 57 of 103
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    mac_128 said:
    this guys is dangerous. For those who have forgotten, he essentially committed treason by co-authoring the letter telling Iran that any deal they struck with President would be reversed by congress as soon Obama leaves office.
    Um, you do realize that the Constitution requires Senate approval for treaties, don't you?


    That said, Cotton is simply wrong on this point. Even by his own statement, he showed that Tim Cook did not leave anything out. You can either leave a back door open, or you can't. There is no such thing as a "government only back door".
    And the Iran arrangement isn't a treaty so there's that (hence some including Cotton, stating their opinion that iths won't be binding on future Presidents specifically because it ISN'T a treaty, which would be binding). Unlike, say, the TPP that IS getting Congressional advice and consent on that trade pact. "fast track" adjusted the terms somewhat but didn't change there will be a Congressional vote.
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 58 of 103
    Appdaven said:
    Here lies the fundamental problem. If Apple provides a backdoor, criminals will be able to exploit it and there is nothing to prevent criminals from writing their own encryption communications program with no backdoor. You then have a system where criminals have access to everyone's data but law enforcement still doesn't have access to the criminals' data.
    Apple won't provide a backdoor because, for one thing, all of their China business would disappear. The Chinese government would not allow their people to have a device that the US could easily hack and use to spy on their own people. 

    If no one can hack into Apple's encrypted data, including Apple, then everyone everywhere can be confident their information is protected.
    Did anyone ever hack into Apple's data prior to encryption? Just because a backdoor is created it doesn't automatically mean it's hackable. Apple can make that backdoor harder to crack than the current encryption. Just because you're able to open a door doesn’t mean anyone else can. 
  • Reply 59 of 103
    Appdaven said: Apple won't provide a backdoor because, for one thing, all of their China business would disappear. The Chinese government would not allow their people to have a device that the US could easily hack and use to spy on their own people. 

    If no one can hack into Apple's encrypted data, including Apple, then everyone everywhere can be confident their information is protected.
    Did anyone ever hack into Apple's data prior to encryption? Just because a backdoor is created it doesn't automatically mean it's hackable. Apple can make that backdoor harder to crack than the current encryption. Just because you're able to open a door doesn’t mean anyone else can. 
    Apple's iCloud was hacked, as you well know. I know of no hacks of iPhones that occurred without giving root access to the hacker via social engineering.
  • Reply 60 of 103
    What are they going to do, outlaw math?
    SpamSandwichlostkiwihighacidity
Sign In or Register to comment.