Choice between security and liberty a false one

[Commentary] The Paris attacks have resulted in some calling for new laws that would outlaw technology companies from using encryption that cannot be accessed by the government through "backdoor" means. Yet this is an extraordinarily complex issue with multiple privacy and national security implications, and these issues should be thoughtfully and carefully examined -- we do not yet know what methods the ISIS terrorists used to plan the Paris attack. The Obama Administration announced a few weeks ago that it would not seek legislation to compel tech companies to provide the government with keys to encrypted information, citing the complexity of the problem. Instead, it stated that it intends to work with the tech industry toward a voluntary solution. This is a wise strategy that should not be abandoned.

As chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, I greatly appreciate the important contribution surveillance programs make to identifying terrorists and preventing future attacks. But as the 9/11 Commission noted in recommending the creation of the board, the choice between security and liberty is a false one. The Paris attacks were tragic, but we should take a deep breath before making hasty policy decisions and changing our surveillance laws.

[David Medine is chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board]