What Sens. Graham, Tom Cotton and Marsha Blackburn said to justify legislation that would end the use of “warrant-poof” encryption.
From The U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary:
Graham: Terrorists and criminals routinely use technology, whether smartphones, apps, or other means, to coordinate and communicate their daily activities. In recent history, we have experienced numerous terrorism cases and serious criminal activity where vital information could not be accessed, even after a court order was issued. Unfortunately, tech companies have refused to honor these court orders and assist law enforcement in their investigations. My position is clear: After law enforcement obtains the necessary court authorizations, they should be able to retrieve information to assist in their investigations. Our legislation respects and protects the privacy rights of law-abiding Americans. It also puts the terrorists and criminals on notice that they will no longer be able to hide behind technology to cover their tracks.
Cotton: Tech companies’ increasing reliance on encryption has turned their platforms into a new, lawless playground of criminal activity. Criminals from child predators to terrorists are taking full advantage. This bill will ensure law enforcement can access encrypted material with a warrant based on probable cause and help put an end to the Wild West of crime on the Internet.
Blackburn: User privacy and public safety can and should work in tandem. What we have learned is that in the absence of a lawful warrant application process, terrorists, drug traffickers and child predators will exploit encrypted communications to run their operations.
My take: Shameless political posturing built on a premise that is provably, mathematically false. To quote Tim Cook:
There is no such thing as a backdoor just for the good guys.
See also:
I can’t see this bill making it through the House.
Republicans are so shortsighted and, oblivious to the long term consequences of their asinine agendas, it’s scary.
(You know, just to check for criminal activity – or confirm criminal stupidity.)
1) Any serious terrorist or criminal can access the dark web and get encryption tools. Chapo’s tunnels required far more effort.
2) There’s no boundary. FBI but not CIA? Why not local law enforcement who likely don’t have tight security? Why not China, Russia, or other countries that murder dissenters, promiscuous or gay people, etc? Why not other devices like smart cameras, which may share OSes with industrial, power, and transit systems?
Maybe they’re not stupid. They’re demagogues who don’t care about the consequences.
Also I do not think it is an issue of ‘backdoor keys’. I am sorry, but politicians and law enforcement are not as dumb as we like to make out, although they do make easy targets. I believe Tim Cook has stated with much clarity, and rightly so, that “There is no such thing as a backdoor just for the good guys”. I believe what they are asking is that all tech companies not create hiding places beyond warrants. Personally I tend to see the phone as an extension of the mind, and off-limits since we cannot be made to testify against ourselves. But the phone is also a computer, with all the capabilities that come with it.
For example- let’s say Apple is a box making company in the 1920’s. And they make a box that no one can get into. So the mafia hides all their evidence in these boxes. Police ask why do you do that? Tim Cook’s grandfather says, “we believe privacy is a fundamental right”. I believe in privacy and in law and order. I wish there was an obvious and right answer.
I really have no problem with that statement. Apple can/should/has/does provide as much information as they have access to.
BUT.
Apple has created a device EVEN THEY can’t get into*. That’s what’s giving these folks fits.
And Apple’s right in doing so.
*(Well, essentially everything can be gotten into, if you’re willing to spend enough time and money….)