during his 2008 campaign, president obama vowed to assert greater oversight of the massive surveillance apparatus built in the wake of the sept. 11 attacks, arguing that the united states needed to strike a better balance between privacy and security and that all intelligence programs should be lawful. <u+201c>i will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our constitution and our freedom,<u+201d> mr. obama said in 2007 . once in office, however, the obama white house failed to meaningfully scale back surveillance practices established by mr. obama<u+2019>s predecessor, including the unlawful bulk collection of americans<u+2019> domestic phone call records. it was only after a national security agency whistle-blower, edward snowden, exposed how much data american intelligence agencies were collecting and hoarding that the administration began to disclose the capabilities, legal underpinnings and safeguards of government surveillance programs. the snowden revelations prompted important reforms. still, the debate over the proper balance between privacy and security remains far from settled. disappointingly, the two candidates vying to replace mr. obama have failed to outline clear and comprehensive visions for one of the most consequential sets of choices the next president will face. one big issue is what to do when a key provision of the law that gives the n.s.a. the authority to collect the electronic communications of foreigners <u+2014> which inevitably sucks in their correspondence with americans <u+2014> expires at the end of 2017. before reauthorizing that part of the law, section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act, the next president and congress should craft a more narrow authority that ensures that the data of americans cannot be searched without a warrant. how best to respond to encryption technology, which is evolving rapidly, will be another major challenge. earlier this year, the white house supported the justice department<u+2019>s heavy-handed order to compel apple to disable a security feature that would have allowed the government access to a locked iphone that belonged to a mass shooter. that request, withdrawn before the legal fight was settled, would have forced the company to develop a capability that it argued would have undermined the privacy of its customers. the next president should refrain from forcing technology companies to build encryption systems that can be breached, which would make everyone<u+2019>s private information more vulnerable to hackers. the next president should be more forthcoming in disclosing the legal rationale and effectiveness of the government<u+2019>s surveillance programs. <u+201c>just trust us,<u+201d> its default response to reasonable requests for more information, simply isn<u+2019>t enough. the latest instance involved reports earlier this week that yahoo was compelled last year to screen all messages for a specific type of correspondence the government was interested in spotting, as part of surveillance of a state-sponsored terrorist organization. left unsaid was whether it worked and whether other email providers have been issued similar secret orders. the republican nominee, donald trump, has not substantively addressed any of these issues. but he has proposed draconian, unconstitutional measures to keep the nation safe, including carrying out surveillance of mosques and creating a database of muslims. this is offensive and outrageous. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago,<u+201d> he said last november. hillary clinton has been more measured in discussing surveillance and encryption. her campaign has suggested creating a national commission to explore legal and practical questions surrounding encryption. mrs. clinton has also said she would like to foster a more constructive relationship with silicon valley leaders, who have often been reluctant to collaborate with intelligence agencies. but she has been troublingly vague on specifics. the next president needs to take the initiative early on to outline a responsible philosophy and approach toward surveillance and privacy issues. even if that happens, congress still needs to be more assertive than in the past in setting clear parameters to ensure that intelligence gathering programs are legally sound and effective. it would be a shame if it took a new whistle-blower to force what should be a continuing, vigorous debate. this is part of a series about issues that deserve more attention in the presidential campaign. follow the new york times opinion section on facebook and twitter (@nytopinion) , and sign up for the opinion today newsletter . a version of this editorial appears in print on october 9, 2016, on page sr10 of the new york edition with the headline: surveillance in the post-obama era. today's paper | subscribe
surveillance in the post-obama era
the editorial board