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

[VulchR]

'My conclusion so far is that you cannot take an absolutist view on this. So if your argument is strong encryption no matter what, and we can and should, in fact, create black boxes, that I think does not strike the kind of balance that we have lived with for 200, 300 years and it is fetishizing our phones above every other value. That can't be the right answer.'
​

The arrogance of this statement truly astounds me. Well, Mr. Obama, my values include the Constitutional right to free speech and the right to freedom from search and seizure without due process. Every single time we have given intelligence services the latitude to snoop on people who have not committed a crime, which is the inevitable outcome of forcing Apple to break their own encryption, the intelligence services have abused their power.

I am still waiting to hear how the government makes sure the NSA doesn't snoop without a warrant on the 8 million+ Americans living overseas.

Privacy concerns are not a fetish. They're a core value.

 

[Mums]

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

Agreed. But obama is literally nothing. He is a pure marionette. He is a spokesperson for his owners.

 

[kds1]

Agreed. But obama is literally nothing. He is a pure marionette. He is a spokesperson for his owners.

You realize what you just wrote doesn't make a shred of sense, right?

 

[uknowimright]

Agreed. But obama is literally nothing. He is a pure marionette. He is a spokesperson for his owners.

whoa buddy, owners? careful with your word choice

 

[burgundyyears]

Encryption is a binary thing. Either we have it and it's secure or we don't have it at all.

 

[KPOM]

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]

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.

It's all for show. We know it is because for $85 you can get out of a huge part of the screening. And to advertise it they randomly let people into the pre-check line when the regular lines get too long.

 

[2010mini]

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

What is the solution then? A universal "key" is just asking for trouble. Should instead Silicon Valley work in conjunction with the gov to in someway create a process where an individual "key" is made for each case and then destroyed? Software that is one time use only (not even sure that's possible)

 

[duffman9000]

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!

I think most, if not all, of the leading candidates are complete idiots regarding encryption.

 

[TsMkLg068426]

**** 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.

Same with Bush and others and the upcoming Hitler trash Donald Drumpft. If you think politicians never lie and keep their promises made during debates than you are a fool to think Conservatives are any better but just another circus with a orangutan Donald Drumpft.

 

[duffman9000]

So Obama brought up key escrow yet again and the fools in the media at that event didn't ligtt him up on that.

It's time for the media to pick a side and make it public.

 

[Takeo]

What is the solution then? A universal "key" is just asking for trouble. Should instead Silicon Valley work in conjunction with the gov to in someway create a process where an individual "key" is made for each case and then destroyed? Software that is one time use only (not even sure that's possible)

There is no one time self-destruct solution. If a revised OS was built it would have to pass through many hands including the defence team's own experts to make sure the code was a valid forensic tool. This isn't about breaking into this one phone. The government could probably find a way using a baseband exploit or something if they just tried harder. But they'd rather make a federal case of it. It's 100% about setting a precedent. It has very little to do with this one case. They chose this case for their anti-encryption campaign because it involves terrorism. Terrorism scares people (hence the name) and makes people stupid. Authoritarians love a scared populous because you can get them to agree to anything in the name of "safety" and "security". It also allows them to accuse naysayers of being terrorist sympathizers... etc.

 

[jettredmont]

Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. For those times that they do not, if the government has provided a law fully executed warrant issued by a neutral judge, the government will open the safe through other means, such as a safe-smith or drilling. The problem with this situation with the iPhone is that the government does not have the resources to get into the phone. But, Apple does. That's why they need Apple's assistance. If the government could get into the terrorists phone on their own, they would do so.

They can, it is just riskier.

One method involves decapping and laser-etching the processor to get at the device identifier, at which point they could use brute force to guess as many password combinations as they want offline until they find the one that, when combined with the HID, decrypts the file system.

Another method is to just wait for a jailbreaker to find a way in (or employ your own crack team of engineers to look for jailbreak vulnerabilities), which might not happen but is statistically likely.

Another method involves cloning the existing memory onto multiple chips. If the ten-guess auto-destruct is on, when you hit it, pull the original chip out, put the first clone in, and try the next ten guesses, etc.

The FBI has ways to get into this device. But none of those ways establishes a precedent which can be used to expand what they can legally ask for next time under the All Writs Act (see their reply to Apple's Motion to Vacate for a great example of how they feel completely justified in asking for anything that has been accepted previously, plus one; their main argument is that what they are asking of Apple is not "much" more than what Apple had previously agreed to, so must be allowed).

 

[jblagden]

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.

Especially since you can always change the combination once you buy the safe.

 

[You are the One]

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??

Americans need to take back their country and end the foreign occupation that has had their country in its grip for over a century.

The US so-called "foreign policy" is not really American. It's the foreign policy of a psychopathic criminal mob enacted by either bought and corrupted greedy politicians or downright neocon zionists (some dual nationals even) pretending to serve US interests.

The wars you fight are not your wars.

Focus on fixing America, do that and the terrorists will vanish. Terrorism is created by the criminal mobsters because they need it to screw America and the rest of the world.

 

[jonnysods]

I have to say that his comments are very unconstitutional, in regards to personal privacy and individual rights.

 

[mdridwan47]

Ok... 17,000 people die a year by gunshots in the U.S. That is like 45 a day. Deaths by Muslims are 16 this time.

I mean... in the U.S. you will die by a gunshot from a jewish, catholic, christian, baptist or any other religion before being murdered by a muslim. I am not scared of muslims but some how is where the spotlight is on, if you move the light you will see greater dangers... and iPhones has nothing to do with them.

It's unfathomable just unbelievably stupid and moronic the dumb liberals are. No wonder Trump is winning.

 

[tdar]

These are interesting questions. The question is if those locks can be opened somehow if there is a lawful court order specifying what they're after (US Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment IV). The pinnacle of lock technology in 1776 was a padlock with a key. Anything could be torn or pried open, and that's exactly what the Founding Fathers wanted if there were legal authority to do so, even if the owner of the thing didn't want it to be done.

As much as we now may want it, it doesn't seem that our national framework provides for complete, absolute, unbreakable privacy in every possible circumstance. In this way, President Obama (you know, the Constitutional schola ... I mean "idiot") seems correct.

U.S. citizens who want to eliminate guns from society are stuck with the Second Amendment, and people who want to create utterly inaccessible informational repositories may be stuck with the Fourth. We'll have to wait and see what the SCOTUS says on the matter.

My God...Please stop making sense!

 

[2984839]

Strong encryption is a surprisingly binary thing. You either have it or you don't. Regardless of how much governments and different agencies dream of such a thing, there's no encryption with a backdoor that's available only for the good guys. I want to keep the bad guys from accessing my data, and as the only way to truly achieve that involves keeping also the good guys from accessing my data, it's a price worth paying even though it makes the job harder for many (at least allegedly) good guys.

Yep. It's actually one of the few issues that is quite literally all or nothing with zero room for compromise. Obama could not be more wrong.
[doublepost=1457813585][/doublepost]

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.

Partisan bickering is neither correct nor useful. Bush did a lot of things wrong, but it did not start with him by any means. The Clinton admin merely ignored every cryptographic expert in the civilian world with the Clipper Chip, but at least they dropped it after it was a proven disaster and one could give them a small pass for not having the benefit of hindsight. Obama's admin is also ignoring every single expert in the field as well as the catastrophic failure of the Clipper Chip and 20+ years of hindsight.

It's utterly inexplicable and inexcusable that we're suddenly having to again fight against encryption backdoors in 2016.

 

[tdar]

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.

That's because you start off as seeing everyone who uses your software as good. If you were the POTUS you'd have to start off by seeing everyone as bad and a threat, because it only takes one bad person to cause unimaginable damage and you do not know who they are. So if you have reason to think that someone is that one bad person you NEED some way to check and see if they are.

We do not have doors on our houses or our cars that have no locks. Locks allow controlled entry. If people will just chill and put down the hatred for a moment, they would see that in our country, this constitution everyone seems so quick to talk about REQUIRES that the locks be opened for the right reasons even if the owner does not want them to be. That is all the President is saying and all he is asking you to do is to think.

This is just the 21st century version of that. So those here arguing for their constitutional right to total complete privacy, You have never had that right and you are not going to be getting it in the future. The Repubs and the Dems don't agree on much anymore but everyone in the Washington government agrees about that.

 

[djgamble]

The issue's old... move on!

It's purely about what US law says. Nothing more, nothing less. Once all avenues of appeal have been exhausted we'll know whether the application to demand that Apple decrypt it is successful or not.

In regards to the technical details, Bill Gates has summed it up and Apple have essentially agreed. It would be quite easy for a HUUUUUGE company (the same one that made the encryption) to decrypt it. I think they are right to challenge the application through the courts (rather than just blindly complying with a request that may or may not be lawful).

End of issue. I really don't care what every cat and dog thinks.

 

[CrashX]

I guess I'm lost here?

So everyone actually believes that their iPhone is actually secure and that the government doesn't already have access to it any time they like?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist - I'm just not a COMPLETE moron. I can remember the "Too Big to Fail" bailout just prior to the 2008 election, where McCain and Obama and the rest of the corporate-owned dbags who have run this country into the ground made it QUITE "transparent" that both parties are just flip sides of the same corporate coin.

But yeah, sure... I'll go with the "news" stories - totally different corporate owners there? - about Apple having extra special super security for us super-smart owners of Apple products who so value our privacy above everyone else and are awesome beyond compare!!!?

I don't know jack about encryption algorithms or whatnot - but if Apple has a backdoor they are supposedly REFUSING to "release" to the FBI, then the backdoor exists, ergo the government already has it.

Seriously? People are buying this story? I haven't read all of the comments - guessing this has already been discussed. If so, my bad.

 

[Quu]

That's because you start off as seeing everyone who uses your software as good. If you were the POTUS you'd have to start off by seeing everyone as bad and a threat, because it only takes one bad person to cause unimaginable damage and you do not know who they are. So if you have reason to think that someone is that one bad person you NEED some way to check and see if they are.

We do not have doors on our houses or our cars that have no locks. Locks allow controlled entry. If people will just chill and put down the hatred for a moment, they would see that in our country, this constitution everyone seems so quick to talk about REQUIRES that the locks be opened for the right reasons even if the owner does not want them to be. That is all the President is saying and all he is asking you to do is to think.

This is just the 21st century version of that. So those here arguing for their constitutional right to total complete privacy, You have never had that right and you are not going to be getting it in the future. The Repubs and the Dems don't agree on much anymore but everyone in the Washington government agrees about that.

We have a lock for encrypted devices. It's a code held in the minds of the owners. If a person refuses to give up their code they are held in contempt of court until they provide the code. They can rot in jail.

There is absolutely no need to weaken the encryption of every citizen to get access to potential evidence of a crime.

What happens when in 100+ years from now we can access peoples memories using technology. Will you still be advocating for this kind of access then? For when a warrant is produced it will be okay for the FBI to literally view your memories in your brain? After-all if they have a warrant they can do whatever they want?

There needs to be a line drawn and in my opinion this is that line. And don't forget this doesn't hurt criminals. This hurts normal citizens. The criminals can get encryption tools from anywhere. Things like TrueCrypt already exist and aren't going anywhere.

It's just like the gun situation. People say, well normal people shouldn't have guns. But that won't stop criminals having them will it? It's not that easy. You take strong encryption away from the "every man" and it does nothing to stop the criminals from having it.

Even in this specific case FBI vs Apple the criminals destroyed their personal phones. This iPhone of this terrorist was a work phone that he more than likely did nothing on otherwise he would have destroyed it too, the FBI is just using it to set a precedent and it's a bad example at that, not to mention one the head of the NSA disagrees with, it has come out recently that the NSA does not support the FBI in this matter and doesn't believe Apple should weaken encryption, they know what's out there, they know what other governments are doing and they don't want people walking around with insecure devices.

 

[CrashX]

If you're super paranoid, then you can use the "burn" encryption method. Unless someone else can enlighten me, it's the only secure encryption available.
Here's how it works. You take your iPhone and you throw it into a fire.
To remove the fire and restore your information, you pray to God, "God, I just threw my iPhone into the fire. Please return it undamaged to me."
God will return your iPhone to you, completely restored, before any corporation working with any government provides you a MORE secure method of protecting your data.
Can I get an Amen? No, don't do that. That's your "secret code" - shhhhhh.... don't tell the GOVERNMENT here in the USA - which might still have possibly been you (naaaahhh...) before Corporations obtained "Person" status and began serially sodomizing ALL of us (well 1% aside) each and every night, right before we go to bed.
I HATE IT when they wake me up in the middle of the night... That's just... wrong.
"Hail Caesar", "Heil Hitler", "Sup Obama? You my Bro!", all that.
That's why I always have my Capital One card - because they're honest to ask me "What's in YOUR wallet?" And now it's Samuel L. Jackson.
"What's in YOUR MF wallet?"
And now we shall have a reading from Ezekiel...

 

[macduke]

Obama knows exactly how encryption works. How could he not? He's the freaking president. He's intentionally playing dumb because the American people are—generally—pretty dumb. Saying things like "just make a secure key" sounds great if you have no idea what you're talking about. But it's scary because he does know what he's talking about and knows if he says it simply (deceptively) that the average moron will be on his side. Also, he went there and brought out the perennial bogey man: the child pornographer. How did they find them in the past? They had no way to know where people stashed it, and there was nothing stopping those guys from burning the evidence. It would still find a way to happen because it did before the Internet was a thing! Why not stop selling cameras because they're the real culprit in child porn. Or as Gruber put it, ban matches so evidence can't be burned and require that all safes be easily cracked? Just put a key on that safe. It will be fine. Nobody can figure out how to crack that! I mean seriously. They think we're idiots and unfortunately many people are today. Our education system is failing us and reality tv is rotting our brain and has turned into a presidential campaign. Welcome to Idiocracy!

 

[jwp1964]

Yes we can and many of us do. thanks for your input though.