6 ms·

Can someone describe to me the important work they are doing maybe in 5 bullet points? Im cool with donating, but I would love to see why... I don't want my c

Can someone describe to me the important work they are doing maybe in 5 bullet points? Im cool with donating, but I would love to see why... I don't want my cash going towards something that is just another political scheme to raise cash.

jlgaddis 13y ago
https://www.eff.org/work https://www.eff.org/work
chill1 13y ago
Well they do a lot of things [1], but they do outline the areas in which they are active. [1] https://www.eff.org/work https://www.eff.org/work
belorn 13y ago
#1 investigates breaches of Internet civil liberties. #2 Provide legal support to people who's civil liberties has been violated. Mostly related to free speech. #3 Protects security researchers from government harassment, particularly those who produce encryption software. #4 Develops software security tools, like https everywhere. #5 Uses legal tools to get government to admit and publicly release documents related to surveillance, incorrect search and seizures, anti-file sharing laws, patents and free speech. see more at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_the_Electronic_Frontier_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_t...
- tptacek 13y ago
  If you want to fund security tool development, consider contributing directly to that. For instance, the effort to audit Truecrypt is still raising funds: http://istruecryptauditedyet.com/ http://istruecryptauditedyet.com/ The security of Truecrypt is incredibly important to privacy efforts. If you're looking to provide legal support to people, consider donating to ACLU. By the numbers, ACLU appears to be a much more effective way of converting donations to legal support for civil liberties cases. I have some reservations about EFF but unreservedly support ACLU. As a security researcher working in encryption, I'm not sure what #3 is about. I'm more likely to have the government offer me money (I won't work for the government, haven't in the past, or even accept DARPA grants) than harass me.
  - belorn 13y ago
    EFF is indeed not alone in needing support. For development, The Truecrypt audit is a good example, as well is the tor project. Freedom box is a good third. ACLU and EFF has joined their forces on several issues. EFF legal support is about Internet civil liberties cases, while ACLU has the broader scope of "the Constitution and laws of the United States". For example, ACLU domain covers anti-war protesters. When one is considering where to send donation money, a larger or small scope has both benefits and drawbacks. tptacek, if you want to read more about EFF and their involvement around encryption and security researchers, I do want to point you to Wikipedia for more information. An example is the EFF DES cracker article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFF_DES_cracker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFF_DES_cracker. There is also https://www.eff.org/issues/coders https://www.eff.org/issues/coders as linked on their website. A lawsuit that might be interesting to read could be https://w2.eff.org/IP/DMCA/Felten_v_RIAA/20010813_eff_felten_pr.html https://w2.eff.org/IP/DMCA/Felten_v_RIAA/20010813_eff_felten... . EFF had also a role during the Export of cryptography events. There is numerous good books/articles on the subject, include a somewhat sparse Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_in_the_.... Eff has more details about their role on their own website at https://www.eff.org/issues/export-controls https://www.eff.org/issues/export-controls . One could argue that that was the past and do not reflect today. Hotz might disagree a bit on that subject, as well as each time someone has had "anti-drm circumvention laws" being thrown at them for doing security research. I personally have not forgotten ACTA as a recent example where today's government still want to create laws that hinders security researcher in their job.
  - redthrowaway 13y ago
    > I have some reservations about EFF As a recurring donor, I'm interested to hear what you don't like about them. As for protecting security researchers, I suspect the gov't is more interested in (and likely to harass) Applebaum et al than you guys.
    - einhverfr 13y ago
      Likewise. I have some reservations about the ACLU (but nonetheless support many areas of their work) but wholeheartedly support the ACLU. Because I know folks will ask me, I think that antidiscrimination law and things like first amendment rights so frequently conflict that I think there is a real conflict of interest when an organization takes on both. The ACLU does take on both, or they claim to, but this usually means pushing antidiscrimination law over first amendment issues, which I think is a real problem.
- VonGuard 13y ago
  I'd also like to add that you can just call them up and ask about stuff. Try that at a regular law firm. A few years back I was threatened with a cease and desist because commenters on my site were talking about someone. I called the EFF and they put me right through to a lawyer who explained that the DMCA, of all things, protected me as a service provider, and that I could essentially tell the other party to go fuck themselves. I mean, they didn't say it like that.... But still, very valuable. Likely saved me thousands of dollars with a 5 minute phone call. And, my god, I never would have expected to have to hide behind the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act)! I used to protest against that thing like a maniac before it was passed!
  - flexermaniac 13y ago
    Come on, you didn't know what was in the bill but were against it because someone on the internet said "it's bad"? Seriously, 5 minutes on wikipedia is all it takes.
    - btilly 13y ago
      It was passed before Wikipedia existed.
    - freehunter 13y ago
      He didn't say he didn't know what was in the bill, just that he needed a lawyer's advice on the bill's interpretation. That's what lawyers are for. Wikipedia does not provide legal advice. There's plenty bad with the DMCA and how companies use and abuse it to be against it, but it can also be used for good.
      - VonGuard 13y ago
        >There's plenty bad with the DMCA and how companies use and abuse it to be against it, but it can also be used for good. yeah, we protested back in the day because the DMCA made it illegal to decrypt DVD's with DeCSS, which, to this day, is why you cannot watch DVD's legally in Linux without paying someone. For our protest, we actually printed out the code to DeCSS and handed it out to people saying "This piece of paper is illegal, you cannot read this piece of paper." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS The DMCA did a lot of stuff like this. It essentially laid the groundwork for future Internet and IP laws. It was the first law to address the content of the Internet, so it was a bit of a landmark. The clause that's in there that ended up protecting me was where the DMCA states that service providers cannot be held accountable for the things their users say. Huge, awesome bit, that. Definitely a serious 20/20 hindsight thing. I can play DVD's on my Linux machine now, too... Though not legally, really.
- waqf 13y ago
  Don't forget that when they provide legal support it doesn't just help that person: often cases they take are setting legal precedents that will help future cases. Because new technology is new, a lot of its interactions with the law haven't come to courts (or haven't come to federal appeal courts) before. In effect, they're contributing to making present and future US law. And they're on the side of civil liberties.

jlgaddis 13y ago

https://www.eff.org/work https://www.eff.org/work

chill1 13y ago

Well they do a lot of things [1], but they do outline the areas in which they are active. [1] https://www.eff.org/work https://www.eff.org/work

belorn 13y ago

#1 investigates breaches of Internet civil liberties. #2 Provide legal support to people who's civil liberties has been violated. Mostly related to free speech. #3 Protects security researchers from government harassment, particularly those who produce encryption software. #4 Develops software security tools, like https everywhere. #5 Uses legal tools to get government to admit and publicly release documents related to surveillance, incorrect search and seizures, anti-file sharing laws, patents and free speech. see more at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_the_Electronic_Frontier_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_t...

tptacek 13y ago
If you want to fund security tool development, consider contributing directly to that. For instance, the effort to audit Truecrypt is still raising funds: http://istruecryptauditedyet.com/ http://istruecryptauditedyet.com/ The security of Truecrypt is incredibly important to privacy efforts. If you're looking to provide legal support to people, consider donating to ACLU. By the numbers, ACLU appears to be a much more effective way of converting donations to legal support for civil liberties cases. I have some reservations about EFF but unreservedly support ACLU. As a security researcher working in encryption, I'm not sure what #3 is about. I'm more likely to have the government offer me money (I won't work for the government, haven't in the past, or even accept DARPA grants) than harass me.
- belorn 13y ago
  EFF is indeed not alone in needing support. For development, The Truecrypt audit is a good example, as well is the tor project. Freedom box is a good third. ACLU and EFF has joined their forces on several issues. EFF legal support is about Internet civil liberties cases, while ACLU has the broader scope of "the Constitution and laws of the United States". For example, ACLU domain covers anti-war protesters. When one is considering where to send donation money, a larger or small scope has both benefits and drawbacks. tptacek, if you want to read more about EFF and their involvement around encryption and security researchers, I do want to point you to Wikipedia for more information. An example is the EFF DES cracker article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFF_DES_cracker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFF_DES_cracker. There is also https://www.eff.org/issues/coders https://www.eff.org/issues/coders as linked on their website. A lawsuit that might be interesting to read could be https://w2.eff.org/IP/DMCA/Felten_v_RIAA/20010813_eff_felten_pr.html https://w2.eff.org/IP/DMCA/Felten_v_RIAA/20010813_eff_felten... . EFF had also a role during the Export of cryptography events. There is numerous good books/articles on the subject, include a somewhat sparse Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_in_the_.... Eff has more details about their role on their own website at https://www.eff.org/issues/export-controls https://www.eff.org/issues/export-controls . One could argue that that was the past and do not reflect today. Hotz might disagree a bit on that subject, as well as each time someone has had "anti-drm circumvention laws" being thrown at them for doing security research. I personally have not forgotten ACTA as a recent example where today's government still want to create laws that hinders security researcher in their job.
- redthrowaway 13y ago
  > I have some reservations about EFF As a recurring donor, I'm interested to hear what you don't like about them. As for protecting security researchers, I suspect the gov't is more interested in (and likely to harass) Applebaum et al than you guys.
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    Likewise. I have some reservations about the ACLU (but nonetheless support many areas of their work) but wholeheartedly support the ACLU. Because I know folks will ask me, I think that antidiscrimination law and things like first amendment rights so frequently conflict that I think there is a real conflict of interest when an organization takes on both. The ACLU does take on both, or they claim to, but this usually means pushing antidiscrimination law over first amendment issues, which I think is a real problem.
VonGuard 13y ago
I'd also like to add that you can just call them up and ask about stuff. Try that at a regular law firm. A few years back I was threatened with a cease and desist because commenters on my site were talking about someone. I called the EFF and they put me right through to a lawyer who explained that the DMCA, of all things, protected me as a service provider, and that I could essentially tell the other party to go fuck themselves. I mean, they didn't say it like that.... But still, very valuable. Likely saved me thousands of dollars with a 5 minute phone call. And, my god, I never would have expected to have to hide behind the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act)! I used to protest against that thing like a maniac before it was passed!
- flexermaniac 13y ago
  Come on, you didn't know what was in the bill but were against it because someone on the internet said "it's bad"? Seriously, 5 minutes on wikipedia is all it takes.
  - btilly 13y ago
    It was passed before Wikipedia existed.
  - freehunter 13y ago
    He didn't say he didn't know what was in the bill, just that he needed a lawyer's advice on the bill's interpretation. That's what lawyers are for. Wikipedia does not provide legal advice. There's plenty bad with the DMCA and how companies use and abuse it to be against it, but it can also be used for good.
    - VonGuard 13y ago
      >There's plenty bad with the DMCA and how companies use and abuse it to be against it, but it can also be used for good. yeah, we protested back in the day because the DMCA made it illegal to decrypt DVD's with DeCSS, which, to this day, is why you cannot watch DVD's legally in Linux without paying someone. For our protest, we actually printed out the code to DeCSS and handed it out to people saying "This piece of paper is illegal, you cannot read this piece of paper." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS The DMCA did a lot of stuff like this. It essentially laid the groundwork for future Internet and IP laws. It was the first law to address the content of the Internet, so it was a bit of a landmark. The clause that's in there that ended up protecting me was where the DMCA states that service providers cannot be held accountable for the things their users say. Huge, awesome bit, that. Definitely a serious 20/20 hindsight thing. I can play DVD's on my Linux machine now, too... Though not legally, really.
waqf 13y ago
Don't forget that when they provide legal support it doesn't just help that person: often cases they take are setting legal precedents that will help future cases. Because new technology is new, a lot of its interactions with the law haven't come to courts (or haven't come to federal appeal courts) before. In effect, they're contributing to making present and future US law. And they're on the side of civil liberties.