Apple CEO Tim Cook visits Washington, D.C., meets with Sen. Mark Warner

Posted:
in General Discussion edited March 13
Apple CEO Tim Cook was on Tuesday spotted in Capitol Hill where he reportedly lunched with Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee who has taken an interest in digital encryption and privacy.


From left: Sen. Richard Burr, Sen. Mark Warner and Apple CEO Tim Cook on Capitol Hill. | Source: Frank Thorp via Twitter


As seen in the photo above, captured by NBC News producer and reporter Frank Thorp, Cook was seen at the Capitol with Warner and Sen. Richard Burr, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Details of Cook's visit have so far gone undisclosed, but CNBC reports the tech CEO had lunch with Warner at the congressional office buildings. Topics of discussion are at this point unknown, but the senator has in the past expressed interest in safeguarding digital encryption technologies like those championed by Apple.

Warner has keen insight into the tech industry having cofounded venture capital firm Columbia Capital, which invested in a number of companies including MetroPCS, Nextel, MetroPCS and XM Satellite Radio. The

In 2016, Warner, then a member of the Intelligence Committee, and House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) announced plans to propose a bill that would create a special congressional commission to address complex digital privacy issues.

At the time, Apple and the Federal Bureau of Investigation were tangled in a legal battle over the unlocking of an iPhone used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook. Apple vehemently opposed requests to assist in a data extraction operation, saying the creation of a bypass to one iPhone's hardware and software security protocols inherently puts millions of other devices at risk.

The FBI ultimately gained access to the device through a third-party hack.

A draft version of the McCaul-Warner bill envisioned a bipartisan commission that would represent both sides of the encryption debate by instituting a panel of members from the tech community, law enforcement and government intelligence agencies and privacy advocates, among others. The panel would review the repercussions of denying law enforcement access to encrypted communications, then make recommendations on how best to tackle the critical issue.

Cook in a memo to employees in 2016 seemed to agree with Warner's plan, saying the government should "form a commission or other panel of experts on intelligence, technology and civil liberties to discuss the implications for law enforcement, national security, privacy and personal freedoms."

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 5
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,188member
    Maybe someone in Washington has a clue about personal privacy. 
  • Reply 2 of 5
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,752member
    Maybe someone in Washington has a clue about personal privacy. 
    I wouldn't bet on it.
    racerhomie3tallest skil
  • Reply 3 of 5
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 2,726member
    We need to get away from ideology and partisanship and have an honest, adult discussion about this very important issue (and others like it) -- like this country used to have -- where opinions are debated rather than facts.
  • Reply 4 of 5
    And what about Stingrays and the companies that make and sell them? Every level of law enforcement is using them, but have signed NDAs that they even own one and are spying on innocent people by sweeping up all the cell phone usage in an area rather than a targeted method and usually without a warrant.

    We all realize that law enforcement has an important job to do, but they want to use cell phones and the internet to be a 24/7365 spy on all of us. Congress, under the control of both parties, has failed to protect the online and digital privacy rights of our citizens.

    I do not trust Corporate Democrat Warner to do anything in the public interest on these issues.
  • Reply 5 of 5
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    We need to get away from ideology and partisanship and have an honest, adult discussion about this very important issue (and others like it) -- like this country used to have -- where opinions are debated rather than facts.
    Well, we did that. 230 years ago.
    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    It doesn’t matter if the effect is “in my mind” or “in my drawer” or “on my computer.” The government does not have the right to know what is in my possession, or to discover new things in my possession, or to take things from my possession (if no crimes have been committed–and they also don’t have the power to arbitrarily decide what is and is not “crime” to bypass their restrictions). Nor do they have the right to know what I am thinking, feeling, or doing.
    edited March 14
Sign In or Register to comment.