Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Obama Says He's 'A Strong Believer In Strong Encryption'

Posted by Soulskill on from the except-when-it-helps-the-terrists dept.

An anonymous reader writes: U.S. President Barack Obama spoke with Re/code recently on a variety of topics relating to technology. The talk included the president's thoughts on encryption, which has been a controversial subject in tech circles lately after government officials (including Obama himself) have publicly complained about default encryption in modern communication tools. In the interview, he says he's a "strong believer in strong encryption," adding, "I lean probably further on side of strong encryption than some in law enforcement." Obama puts it another way, more bluntly: "There's no scenario in which we don't want really strong encryption." However, the president says the public itself is driving concern for leaving law enforcement a way in: "The first time that an attack takes place in which it turns out that we had a lead and we couldn't follow up on it, the public's going to demand answers."

10 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. Huh? by bagboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The first time that an attack takes place in which it turns out that we had a lead and we couldn't follow up on it, the public's going to demand answers." - Welcome to leadership Obama. Where sometimes you have to make unpopular/hard choices and live with the consequences.

    1. Re:Huh? by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Obama Says He's 'A Strong Believer In Strong Encryption'...

      As long as he has a way to defeat it

    2. Re:Huh? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      he's had enough chances to prove that he's a champion of The People.

      he failed. every.single.time.

      I refuse to trust him anymore. his lips are moving, so he's lying.

      not saying I trust republicans, either. I trust them even less. but my faith in democrats is at zero and so I'd prefer we scrub the whole R and D party system, redesign the WHOLE thing and start all over again.

      until then, you can present all the talking heads you want. no one with any sense believes a word they say, anymore.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Huh? by unrtst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Obama said,"The first time that an attack takes place in which it turns out that we had a lead and we couldn't follow up on it, the public's going to demand answers."

      That's utter BS.
      * If it's some local law enforcement types, they've already been unable to do this in a timely manor for ages. The public doesn't demand answers because the answer is clear - the data was thoroughly encrypted.
      * On the other end of the spectrum, if it's something we're not allowed to know about (NSA level terrorist stuff), then the public won't know about it to ask any of those questions.

      Some edge cases in between those:
      * it's still high level, but the public does know the NSA knows... then they can clearly get a warrant and trace the source. They also have the most massive amounts of cpu power and maths to throw at the problem, so if anyone will get to the root, they will (assuming it's something they have full authority to rampage after full force).
      * If it's still local law level, but pretty important, they can also escalate and get warrants and get the FBI/etc involved as needed.

      In either case, a backdoor doesn't solve the problem if said person is using something that doesn't have a backdoor (or has one unknown to the agency working the case). Backdoors have been identified (and originated in the NSA) before, and none of those helped all the normal cases (state/local). We have no idea if that helped any other cases that were top secret (and/or questionably legal), or to what extent... but that doesn't matter with regards to Obama's statement because we, the public, won't be demanding answers if we don't know about it.

      Besides, if he's only worried about saving face, that's an awful reason for anything.

    4. Re:Huh? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Being President is a hard job - you're constantly faced with choosing who to pander to next.

      "Choosing who to pander to next" doesn't make your hair go grey in six years.

      The man is younger than I am, and looks like he's aged 20 years since he got in office.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  2. He said lots of things by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What he has done is something completely different..

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  3. Transparency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember when he was a strong believer in transparency too.

    1. Re:Transparency by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, who cares about the murders he is directly responsible for

      No one said to ignore that.

      Let's regret missing transparency.

      Yes, because in the long run transparency would prevent a lot more murders.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. Obama is a strong believer in strong encryption... by cyba · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... of HIS data.

  5. so by zlives · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "leaving law enforcement a way in"
    like a warrant?