President Obama: 'You Cannot Take an Absolutist View' on Encryption Issue

[Quu]

Well, to correct you on this matter. Obama is actually far more digital literate than the previous presidents. In fact, he's owned a Blackberry for years due to, you guessed it, secure encryption. But he was told, after his election, that he wasn't allowed to use his personal BB and had to get a government-issued Blackberry designed in-house. In other words, he's not a total stranger to encryption technology and is tech savvy himself.

Traitor? Please. It's the Bush administration that did the most damage. You should THANK them for the Patriot Act, not him. Obama may not have done a perfect job, but at least, he's accomplished some things that good ol' Georgie didn't get around to.

No president in their right mind would advocate for a weakening of Americas weapons, encryption is a defensive weapon against hackers and state sponsored espionage. What he is calling for is a weakness to be created that gives Americas enemies an opening and that is definitely traitorous.

 

[KPOM]

Oh, really? It wouldn't have mattered since the Republicans would screw things up as well. Romney wouldn't have done a better job than Obama. This is NOT about Obama alone. This is about the FBI and Apple. You should be far more concerned who the next president will be because if Mr. Atlantic City gets elected, Tim Cook is f----d. And he's still f-----d regardless.

McCain was running in 2008.

I think Rand Paul would side with Apple. Ted Cruz has given ambiguous answers. We could appeal to his constitutional instincts. Hillary has waffled publicly, but she's the most hawkish candidate running on either side (more so even than Trump), so I think her authoritarian instincts would kick in.

 

[Mums]

**** Obama.

Treasonous scumbag.

Obama is technologically inept. I'd expect nothing less from a community organizer who still uses a Blackberry and merrily conducts extrajudicial assassinations of American citizens and routinely flies Pentagon drones all over the United States.

Obama is a totalitarian at heart. Worst president...ever.

Obama also wears an earpiece. Watch any video of him - he will pause and look left before every sentence that comes out of his mouth. He's literally a puppet repeating what some spin doctor is whispering in his ear.

 

[roadbloc]

**** Obama.

Treasonous scumbag.

Obama is technologically inept. I'd expect nothing less from a community organizer who still uses a Blackberry

I still use a BlackBerry. Does that make me technologically inept? Unless I'm mistaken, governments still use BBOS and BB10 because of security, so he probably doesn't get a choice anyway.

 

[Carlanga]

No president in their right mind would advocate for a weakening of Americas weapons, encryption is a defensive weapon against hackers and state sponsored espionage. What he is calling for is a weakness to be created that gives Americas enemies an opening and that is definitely traitorous.

I'm against giving legal backdoor access to phones. But,
IDK iPhones were 'muricans weapons of choice for defense. Lol

 

[laurim]

I love how he mentions the airport security thing, because there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that airport security has protected us from anything.

hmmm- how do you prove something rare that didn't happen because of the fact that the existence stronger security prevented someone trying it?
[doublepost=1457801165][/doublepost]

I still use a BlackBerry. Does that make me technologically inept? Unless I'm mistaken, governments still use BBOS and BB10 because of security, so he probably doesn't get a choice anyway.

Obama said a long time ago that he wished he could use an iPhone but he is required to use a Blackberry. Maybe with this they will change their mind
[doublepost=1457801355][/doublepost]

It's funny how most of the comments I've read have nothing to do with the article.
So many people are also violating Forum Rules of Trolling and Insulting other members.

It's called the "Trump Effect". The end of civil, reasoned discourse.

 

[MacGod]

I support Obama in most of what he has done in the past seven years. But he and the rest of the government are overreaching here and while yes, he states that "make sure the government cannot 'willy-nilly' get into everyone's iPhones without oversight and probable cause". My problem with this stupid statement is that it starts us down a very slippery slope and will allow the government to abuse our privacy on our devices - maybe not for this administration, but for a future administration.

I hate the Patriot Act or II - what would suck is if they set the bad precedent now and in another 3-6 years, some other administration creates a PA III that allows unfettered access to pro-actively snoop people's data without public declaration (silent warrants/indictments).

Also - the fact that he is only singling out iPhones - eventually they will come for Android phones also - so now is the time to support your phone manufacturer (iOS, Google). The government doesn't need some backdoor access into all our devices and once they have that ability, they will corruptly wield it with little thought to the consequences.

 

[laurim]

And how many weapons has the TSA allowed on planes, how many depressed pilots have been stopped? Or unauthorized employees in the cargo hold?

I really can't stand absolutists who say that we can't do anything about safety (TSA, guns, etc.) unless it stops bad things from happening 100% of the time. Totally defeatist. There's a middle ground here that balances inconvenience with prevention. According to you, the only appropriate security is flying naked with no luggage with pilots who come straight from the psychiatrist's office.

 

[MacNut]

I really can't stand absolutists who say that we can't do anything about safety (TSA, guns, etc.) unless it stops bad things from happening 100% of the time. Totally defeatist. There's a middle ground here that balances inconvenience with prevention. According to you, the only appropriate security is flying naked with no luggage with pilots who come straight from the psychiatrist's office.

The TSA is a joke, full prostate exams to be able to board a plane is a bit much don't you think? And yet they still don't catch the stuff they are supposed too.

 

[laurim]

Yes. It seems crazy because you're so used to it, but I use the train and bus as often as the plane, and there are no checks whatsoever there. I haven't had to show up two hours early, I can turn up minutes before, and walk straight on.

So far, none of the trains and busses I've been on have crashed, exploded, or been hijacked. And funnily enough, it's very rare for any of that to happen to planes - that's why it makes the news if it does happen. Cars kill thousands of people every year, hundreds crash every day. Everybody has been involved in a car crash, or knows somebody who has. So why not ensure ludicrous security for cars? Has everybody forgotten about the truck bomb in Oklahoma? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing
What is it about planes that makes everyone so paranoid?

What kind of damage/propaganda do intentionally crashing cars, buses and trains do compared to a plane? Sheesh, use your brain. BTW- there WAS a terrorist attack on a train a few months ago so you may be seeing more train security soon. The hard part is trying to retrofit security in train stations. It's probably in the works.
[doublepost=1457802337][/doublepost]

The TSA is a joke, full prostate exams to be able to board a plane is a bit much don't you think? And yet they still don't catch the stuff they are supposed too.

Oh, please. I fly almost every month and going through security is an insignificant hassle. As a matter of fact, I'm flying tonight. They found my little swiss army knife in my purse a couple flights ago. I thought the 3" blade rule was in effect but it never got approved. They walked me out of security, I put my knife in my car (I actually bought it in Switzerland so I didn't want to lose it to them) and went through security again. I check my computer bag and it always has an inspection flyer inside and my MBP protector sleeves are zipped differently (I don't know why they always tuck the handles in) so I assume they turned them on to check them.

 

[kds1]

**** Obama.

Treasonous scumbag.

Obama is technologically inept. I'd expect nothing less from a community organizer who still uses a Blackberry and merrily conducts extrajudicial assassinations of American citizens and routinely flies Pentagon drones all over the United States.

Obama is a totalitarian at heart. Worst president...ever.

No, the worst president ever was George W. Bush, followed by Reagan.

 

[Quu]

I'm against giving legal backdoor access to phones. But,
IDK iPhones were 'muricans weapons of choice for defense. Lol

This is about more than just the iPhone. He wants all encryption to have back doors. Personal computer encryption, server encryption, phones, tablets. He wants back doors into your communications. He doesn't want any applications that allow end to end encryption without shared keys being stored on the service providers servers for later retrieval.

And keep in mind that if we just do focus on the iPhone. People store lots of important information on their phones for things they can't remember like work related computer passwords.

No one ever thinks of Email as being a linchpin of American security either but that is often step one in how the hacks of big institutions begin. Getting an employee to open a link to a website that looks legitimate to get them to enter their credentials to view something.

It's this kind of lax security that makes Apple build a secure phone. They do not want people to have their phone stolen and all of a sudden someone has passwords to a sensitive thing or work information, they don't want images and videos to be used as blackmail against that person. Imagine a state sponsored spy agency gets their hands on a Generals phone and uses the personal information on that device to blackmail that person to do their bidding while in his position. Strong encryption that is unbreakable stops this scenario from ever occurring.

Just look at the hacks at the IRS that allowed for hackers to siphon away millions of peoples personal information as an example of what lax security has done. Apple is leading with their iPhone encryption and instead of the government saying we want backdoors they should be saying, why aren't we being as stringent as a consumer electronics company with our own systems? Why are our nuclear power plants connected to the Internet? Why wasn't the IRS data held in cold storage? Even Bitcoin site brokers know you need to keep a high percentage of your crypto-currency offline in cold storage to thwart hackers.

Honestly as a software engineer that deals all the time with building secure systems it's crazy to me that we're even having a debate with the president of the country about encryption. He fundamentally doesn't see the problem with weakening secure systems and that to me is terrifying.

 

[kds1]

United States President Barack Obama today spoke with Texas Tribune editor Evan Smith at South by Southwest (SXSW), where he indirectly addressed Apple's dispute with the FBI. While Obama said he could not comment specifically on the ongoing encryption battle between the two, he spoke on larger issues of privacy and security.

Obama cautioned against taking an "absolutist" view on encryption and said American citizens already make concessions to balance privacy with security in other aspects of their lives. He used warrants to search homes and possessions, something the public agrees is necessary, as a parallel to accessing data on a smartphone.

He also pointed towards airport security as an example of a compromise made between security and privacy. "It's not fun going through security," he said, "but we recognize it as important." He went on to say that the notion that data can be "walled off" from those "other tradeoffs we make" is incorrect.Obama said that while he wants to make sure the government cannot "willy-nilly" get into everyone's iPhones without oversight and probable cause, there are "constraints we impose" to make sure we live in a safe and civilized society. He advocated for finding a balance between encryption and privacy and the government's need to investigate crimes.Obama went on to call on software engineers and technology companies to help the government solve the problem, and he said a thorough, well-formed encryption solution should be established before it's desperately needed. He cautioned against the tech community disengaging or taking a position that "is not sustainable for the general public as a whole over time," as it could lead to a stalemate that will ultimately lead to "sloppy" legislation should the political climate change after something "really bad happens." Apple, too, has urged for the issue to be solved in Congress instead of the courts.

The president's comments come as Apple is facing off against the U.S. government in a fierce public battle over the order that would require Apple to help the FBI break into the iPhone used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook by creating new software to circumvent passcode restrictions on the device. Apple believes complying with the demand would set a dangerous precedent that could lead to the overall weakening of encryption on smartphones and other electronic devices.

The Department of Justice has dismissed Apple's concerns, calling its fears overblown and insisting the request will not result in a universal "master key." Just yesterday, a government filing accused Apple of "deliberately" raising technological barriers preventing law enforcement from accessing data on Apple devices, something Apple lawyer Bruce Sewell went on to call an "unsupported, unsubstantiated effort to vilify Apple."

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: President Obama: 'You Cannot Take an Absolutist View' on Encryption Issue

I was wondering when someone would pull out the "But think of the Children! argument"

 

[Ted Witcher]

**** Obama.

Treasonous scumbag.

Obama is technologically inept. I'd expect nothing less from a community organizer who still uses a Blackberry and merrily conducts extrajudicial assassinations of American citizens and routinely flies Pentagon drones all over the United States.

Obama is a totalitarian at heart. Worst president...ever.

How about my answer: **** Aaronvan.

You may disagree with him on this issue, as I do, but "treasonous" and "scumbag"? In an environment where the leading Republican candidate says the things he says, Obama is a scumbag? Yeah, okay, you sound like a moron now.

Technologically inept? Perhaps, except his remarks -- as usual -- are perfectly reasonable. He's wrong, of course, in my view, but that's it. People who still fling this charge of him being merely a "community organizer," as if that's some kind of slight, disqualify themselves from serious discussion. He's no longer a community organizer, he's no longer a state senator, he's no longer a lawyer or law professor, he's no longer a U.S. Senator... he's been the president for seven years now. Crack a newspaper. Obama is a totalitarian at heart? Peer into his heart, much, do you?

And then finally, the customary wing nut claim that Obama is the "worst president ever" is... well, it's so absurd and hyperbolic as to immediately prejudice everything you might have to say on any topic related to politics. Maybe any topic, period. It's as if you just said the sky is red or something -- I can't take anything you say after that seriously. But if you want to believe Obama is worse than W. or Nixon or Buchanan or Pierce or Harding or... well, it's America, have at it.

But he is wrong on this issue.

 

[kds1]

Obama also wears an earpiece. Watch any video of him - he will pause and look left before every sentence that comes out of his mouth. He's literally a puppet repeating what some spin doctor is whispering in his ear.

George W. Bush was a marionette with strings being pulled by Dick Cheney. Cheney was the real president.

 

[Jess13]

Wow man. Did you read the link in the story? At all? That's what it was about. That's why my statement is relevant.

I know it takes time to read the articles and posts and articles but it makes for better online discourse.

Sorry, I hadn’t noticed there was the link (somehow I had right over it). I just quick read through it. Were you being sarcastic in saying ‘horrifying,’ or being serious?

 

[ConnYoungy]

Not being funny but how did you find terrorists before satellites? How did you find pedophiles before the internet? You had to look harder. If the tech is getting smarter and smarter, then you have to make yourself smarter, not expect everyone else to slow down so you can catch up. You don't win a race by saying "but they're faster than me so it's not fair"

 

[2010mini]

Here you go. You are welcome.



Murder Is Washington’s Foreign Policy — Paul Craig Roberts

Here is a bonus link:

Welcome to the Empire of Chaos

We are in a quick sand with our foreign policy against terrorism. This was started decades ago and it's either boots on the ground, drone warfare, or total withdrawal. Tell me, which you think will stem the tide of US military death and terrorism since you seem smarter that I??

 

[nylon]

And a phone lets data through in a controlled manner, but the point wasn't to make a direct analog for a phone, it was to illustrate that choosing to make something that is tightly controlled, open and uncontrolled, is by its very nature an "absolutist" choice. There's your remedial reading comp lesson for the evening. Now on to this word "absolutist"...

It seemed pretty clear that you were equating an encrypted phone to the dam. The issue at hand is encryption. "Tightly controlled" is not the same as 'Encrypted'. Encrypted means closed to anyone except for the authorized party. You could have still gotten your point across without insulting me with your "reading comp" quip. I wasn't trying to insult you just pointing out that the analogy was not accurate.

 

[Blakjack]

Honestly.......some of you are just ridiculous.

If you truly can't understand both sides and their arguments, your opinion is worthless.

This argument has divided our country for a reason.....because it's an issue that is crazy complicated.

Many of you are blinded by your hate for Obama that you're unable to use your common sense.

This is a Facked up situation and for both sides and I can't blame them for defending their own interests.

I can appreciate most you and your understanding of why Apple shouldn't gov up the goods but......life isn't that simple

 

[Dranix]

How about back to the dark ages of the www? With the us version of each browser with ****** ssl and the international version much stronger...

Kinda like a **** the us iPhone and a useable iPhone.

 

[wigby]

Do manufacturers of safes have a way to unlock the safes they manufacture? This is an honest question if anyone happens to have the answer. It seems like a good analog for what's going on here.

You mean like a Backdoor? Good question. I can't speak for safe manufacturers but if I were one, I would never create any Backdoor because if the code or method was somehow revealed by anyone (hacker, disgruntled employee, government forcing me to, etc,) my product and business would be ruined.

Now if I wanted to offer a service that allowed safe owners who forgot their combinations to retrieve their goods for a price, I would create a Backdoor. That is a little like iCloud but safe customers would have to opt in to such a service in advance because I'm not in the business of hacking my own safes for anyone, even under threat of terrorists and my own government.
[doublepost=1457805078][/doublepost]

Honestly.......some of you are just ridiculous.

If you truly can't understand both sides and their arguments, your opinion is worthless.

This argument has divided our country for a reason.....because it's an issue that is crazy complicated.

Many of you are blinded by your hate for Obama that you're unable to use your common sense.

This is a Facked up situation and for both sides and I can't blame them for defending their own interests.

I can appreciate most you and your understanding of why Apple shouldn't gov up the goods but......life isn't that simple

Agreed but all Apple is doing is fighting a law they believe is unfair to them, their customers and other tech companies. Apple wants clarity so that they can comply with a real law. The government wants to use a 200+ year old law and add further burden to Aplle without any oversight from Congress or a constitutionality check. That's where the balance isn't equal on both sides. But it's the same as political parties...if you cannot see the sense or understand both sides of argument in 99% of all debates, you really shouldn't be voting because you're an extremist and a moron with no place in a democracy.

 

[AdonisSMU]

backdoor iPhone access + drone attacks = What could possibly go wrong?

I can see it now. Someone will make a joke or comment "attacking the government" and a drone will kill them without a court hearing or anything on the matter.

 

[stockcerts]

You know a country is doomed when even its president doesn't know what exactly is going on.

You're right, he doesn't know what is going on. He has these ideals that have turned out not to be healthy for the country. It may only get worse if Hilary is elected!

 

[AdonisSMU]

This is about more than just the iPhone. He wants all encryption to have back doors. Personal computer encryption, server encryption, phones, tablets. He wants back doors into your communications. He doesn't want any applications that allow end to end encryption without shared keys being stored on the service providers servers for later retrieval.

And keep in mind that if we just do focus on the iPhone. People store lots of important information on their phones for things they can't remember like work related computer passwords.

No one ever thinks of Email as being a linchpin of American security either but that is often step one in how the hacks of big institutions begin. Getting an employee to open a link to a website that looks legitimate to get them to enter their credentials to view something.

It's this kind of lax security that makes Apple build a secure phone. They do not want people to have their phone stolen and all of a sudden someone has passwords to a sensitive thing or work information, they don't want images and videos to be used as blackmail against that person. Imagine a state sponsored spy agency gets their hands on a Generals phone and uses the personal information on that device to blackmail that person to do their bidding while in his position. Strong encryption that is unbreakable stops this scenario from ever occurring.

Just look at the hacks at the IRS that allowed for hackers to siphon away millions of peoples personal information as an example of what lax security has done. Apple is leading with their iPhone encryption and instead of the government saying we want backdoors they should be saying, why aren't we being as stringent as a consumer electronics company with our own systems? Why are our nuclear power plants connected to the Internet? Why wasn't the IRS data held in cold storage? Even Bitcoin site brokers know you need to keep a high percentage of your crypto-currency offline in cold storage to thwart hackers.

Honestly as a software engineer that deals all the time with building secure systems it's crazy to me that we're even having a debate with the president of the country about encryption. He fundamentally doesn't see the problem with weakening secure systems and that to me is terrifying.

This.

I totally agree with you on this issue. It makes me angry at Obama for not being more educated on the subject. He's taking an authoritarian view. Apple has provided all of the information they can without compromising the security of iPhones. iCloud is just that people opting into being tracked should the government want access for security reasons with a court order.
[doublepost=1457806222][/doublepost]

You're right, he doesn't know what is going on. He has these ideals that have turned out not to be healthy for the country. It may only get worse if Hilary is elected!

That's why I am looking into candidates who agree with me on this issue to support. I don't care if Hillary or Trump gets into office. It just won't be with my help. If my congressman doesn't watch it, i'll run against him just to make a point.