Electronic Frontier Foundation#Secure Messaging Scorecard

{{further|Timeline of Electronic Frontier Foundation actions}}

File:EFF Logo.svg

{{multiple image

| align = right

| image1 = MitchKapor.jpg

| width1 = 100

| alt1 = Mitch Kapor

| caption1 =

| image2 = John Gilmore.jpg

| width2 = 93

| alt2 = John Gilmore

| caption2 =

| image3 = John Perry Barlow cropped.jpg

| width3 = 111

| alt3 = John Perry Barlow

| caption3 =

| footer = Electronic Frontier Foundation founders Kapor, Gilmore and Barlow

}}

{{more citations needed section|date=October 2017}}

The Electronic Frontier Foundation was formed in July 1990 by John Gilmore, John Perry Barlow and Mitch Kapor in response to a series of actions by law enforcement agencies that led them to conclude that the authorities were gravely uninformed about emerging forms of online communication,{{Unreliable source?|date=May 2024|reason=only has one citation}} and that there was a need for increased protection for Internet civil liberties.

In April 1990, Barlow had been visited by a U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation agent in relation to the theft and distribution of the source code for a series of Macintosh ROMs. Barlow described the visit as "complicated by [the agent's] fairly complete unfamiliarity with computer technology. I realized right away that before I could demonstrate my innocence, I would first have to explain to him what guilt might be." Barlow felt that his experience was symptomatic of a "great paroxysm of governmental confusion during which everyone's liberties would become at risk".{{Cite web|date=2014-07-15|title=A Not Terribly Brief History of the Electronic Frontier Foundation|url=https://www.eff.org/pages/not-terribly-brief-history-electronic-frontier-foundation|access-date=2020-10-24|website=Electronic Frontier Foundation|language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

Barlow posted an account of this experience to The WELL online community and was contacted by Mitch Kapor, who had had a similar experience. The pair agreed that there was a need to defend civil liberties on the Internet. Kapor agreed to fund any legal fees associated with such a defense and the pair contacted New York lawyers Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky and Lieberman about defending several computer hackers from a Harper's magazine forum on computers and freedom who had been the target of Secret Service raids.{{Harvnb|Jones|2003|p=172}}{{Unreliable source?|date=May 2024|reason=only has one citation}} This generated a large amount of publicity which led to offers of financial support from John Gilmore and Steve Wozniak. Barlow and Kapor continued to research conflicts between the government and technology and in June 1990, Barlow posted online the influential article titled "Crime & Puzzlement" in which Barlow announced his and Kapor's plans to create an organization to "raise and disburse funds for education, lobbying, and litigation in the areas relating to digital speech and the extension of the Constitution into Cyberspace."{{cite web |title=Crime & Puzzlement |last=Barlow |first=John Perry |author-link=John Perry Barlow |date=June 8, 1990 |url=https://w2.eff.org/Misc/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/HTML/crime_and_puzzlement_1.html |website=w2.EFF.org |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=August 10, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141024192834/http://w2.eff.org/Misc/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/HTML/crime_and_puzzlement_1.html |archive-date=2014-10-24 |url-status=dead}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

This generated further reaction and support for the ideas of Barlow and Kapor. In late June, Barlow held a series of dinners in San Francisco with major figures in the computer industry to develop a coherent response to these perceived threats. Barlow considered that: "The actions of the FBI and Secret Service were symptoms of a growing social crisis: Future Shock. America was entering the Information Age with neither laws nor metaphors for the appropriate protection and conveyance of information itself."{{cite web |url=https://w2.eff.org/Misc/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/HTML/not_too_brief_history.html |title=A Not Terribly Brief History of the Electronic Frontier Foundation |first=John |last=Barlow |date=November 8, 1990 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=December 12, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303220113/https://w2.eff.org/Misc/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/HTML/not_too_brief_history.html |archive-date=March 3, 2016 |url-status=dead}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} Barlow felt that to confront this a formal organization would be needed; he hired Cathy Cook as press coordinator, and began to set up what would become the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation was formally founded on July 10, 1990, by Kapor and Barlow, who very soon after elected Gilmore, Wozniak, and Stewart Brand to join them on the board of directors.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} Initial funding was provided by Kapor, Wozniak, and an anonymous benefactor.{{cite web |url=https://w2.eff.org/legal/cases/SJG/?f=eff_creation.html |title=Formation documents and mission statement for the EFF |date=July 10, 1990 |last1=Kapor |first1=Mitch |author1-link=Mitch Kapor |last2=Barlow |first2=John Perry |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=September 11, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151204082735/http://w2.eff.org/legal/cases/SJG/?f=eff_creation.html |archive-date=2015-12-04 |url-status=dead}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}{{cite web |url= http://weblogsky.com/technopolitics.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20061110200326/http://www.weblogsky.com/technopolitics.htm |archive-date=November 10, 2006 |title=TechnoPolitics |first=Jon |last=Lebkowsky |author-link=Jon Lebkowsky |date=January 11, 1997 |publisher=Weblogsky |access-date=September 11, 2012}}{{Unreliable source?|date=May 2024}}

In 1990, Mike Godwin joined the organization as its first staff counsel. Then in 1991, Esther Dyson and Jerry Berman joined the EFF board of directors. By 1992, Cliff Figallo became the director of the original office, and in December 1992, Jerry Berman became the acting executive director of the organization as a whole, based in a new second office.{{Citation needed|date=May 2024}}

{{Primary sources section

| date = May 2024

}}

The creation of the organization was motivated by the massive search and seizure on Steve Jackson Games executed by the United States Secret Service early in 1990. Similar but officially unconnected law-enforcement raids were being conducted across the United States at about that time as part of a state–federal task force called Operation Sundevil. GURPS Cyberpunk, one of the game company's projects, was mistakenly labeled as a handbook for computer crime,{{Cite web |url=http://www.sjgames.com/SS/|title=SJ Games vs. the Secret Service |publisher=Steve Jackson Games |access-date=2018-05-27}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} and the Secret Service raided the offices of Steve Jackson Games. The search warrant for the raid was deemed hastily issued, and the games company soon after claimed unauthorized access as well as tampering of their emails. While phone calls were protected by legislation, digital emails were an early concept and had not been considered to fall under the right to personal privacy. The Steve Jackson Games case was the EFF's first high-profile case, was the major rallying point around which the EFF began promoting computer- and Internet-related civil liberties.{{Citation|title=Steve Jackson Games, Inc. v. US Secret Service|date=October 31, 1994|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3765716184001998475|volume=36|pages=457|access-date=2018-05-27}}{{failed verification|date=February 2019|reason=This is the court decision itself and does not describe EFF's role.}}

The EFF's second big case was Bernstein v. United States led by Cindy Cohn, in which programmer and professor Daniel J. Bernstein sued the government for permission to publish his encryption software, Snuffle, and a paper describing it. More recently, the organization has been involved in defending Edward Felten, Jon Lech Johansen and Dmitry Sklyarov.{{Cite web|date=2011-07-01|title=Bernstein v. US Department of Justice|url=https://www.eff.org/cases/bernstein-v-us-dept-justice|access-date=2020-10-30|website=Electronic Frontier Foundation|language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

File:Electronic Frontier Foundation 20th anniversary mecha poster.jpg

The organization was originally located at Mitch Kapor's Kapor Enterprises offices in Boston.{{cite news |last=Harris |first=Scott |date=2002 |title=Freedom Fighters of the Digital World |url=http://www.latimes.com:80/features/printedition/magazine/la-000003207jan13.story |work=Los Angeles Times |access-date=10 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020117210844/http://www.latimes.com/features/printedition/magazine/la-000003207jan13.story |archive-date=17 January 2002 |url-status=dead}} By the fall of 1993, the main EFF offices were consolidated into a single office in Washington DC, headed by Executive Director Jerry Berman. During this time, some of the EFF's attention focused on influencing national policy, to the dislike of some of the members of the organization.{{cite news |last=Timberg |first=Craig |date=2013 |title=Try as it might, anti-surveillance group can't avoid Washington |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/try-as-it-might-anti-surveillance-group-cant-avoid-washington/2013/10/11/2e14c0a0-2142-11e3-b73c-aab60bf735d0_story.html |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=10 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131012034255/http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/try-as-it-might-anti-surveillance-group-cant-avoid-washington/2013/10/11/2e14c0a0-2142-11e3-b73c-aab60bf735d0_story.html |archive-date=2013-10-12 |url-status=live}} In 1994, Berman parted ways with the EFF and formed the Center for Democracy and Technology, while Drew Taubman briefly took the reins as executive director.

In 1995, under the auspices of Executive Director Lori Fena, after some downsizing and in an effort to regroup and refocus on their base of support,

the organization moved offices to San Francisco, California. There, it took up temporary residence at John Gilmore's Toad Hall, and soon afterward moved into the Hamm's Building at 1550 Bryant St. After Fena moved onto the EFF board of directors for a while, the organization was led briefly by Tara Lemmey, followed by Barry Steinhardt (who had come from the closely allied Technology and Liberty Program at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and eventually returned to the ACLU). Not long before EFF's move into new offices at 454 Shotwell St. in SF's Mission District, Mike Godwin departed, long-time Legal Director Shari Steele was appointed executive director, and staff attorney Cindy Cohn became the legal director.

In the spring of 2006, the EFF announced the opening of an office again in Washington, D.C., with two new staff attorneys.{{cite news |first=Declan |last=McCullagh |author-link=Declan McCullagh |title=EFF reaches out to D.C. with new office | date=2006-04-27 |publisher=CNET |url=http://news.cnet.com/2100-1028_3-6065860.html |access-date=September 11, 2012}} In 2012, the EFF began a fundraising campaign for the renovation of a building located at 815 Eddy Street in San Francisco, to serve as its new headquarters.{{cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/pages/eff-eddy | title=The New EFF HQ |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=December 2, 2014}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} The move was completed in April 2013.{{cite news |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/04/eddy-street-era-begins |title=The Eddy Street Era Begins |newspaper=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=2 December 2014|date=2013-04-15|last1=Maass |first1=Dave }}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} On April 1, 2015, Shari Steele stepped down as executive director.{{cite web |url= https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/shari-steele-legacy-digital-rights |title=Shari Steele: A Legacy of Digital Rights |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=10 April 2015 |date=2015-04-02}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} Cindy Cohn became the new executive director, Corynne McSherry became the legal director, and Kurt Opsahl became the general counsel.

{{main|EFF DES cracker}}

By the mid-1990s the EFF was becoming seriously concerned about the refusal of the US government to license any secure encryption product for export unless it used key recovery and claims that governments could not decrypt information when protected by Data Encryption Standard (DES), continuing even after the public breaking of the code in the first of the DES Challenges. They coordinated and supported the construction of the EFF DES cracker (nicknamed Deep Crack), using special purpose hardware and software and costing $210,000.{{cite web |url=https://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto/Crypto_misc/DESCracker/HTML/19980716_eff_descracker_pressrel.html |title=EFF DES Cracker Machine Brings Honesty to Crypto Debate |date=July 17, 1998 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=September 11, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120722025129/https://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto/Crypto_misc/DESCracker/HTML/19980716_eff_descracker_pressrel.html |archive-date=2012-07-22 |url-status=dead}}{{cite web |url=https://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto/Crypto_misc/DESCracker/HTML/19980716_eff_des_faq.html#sources |title=Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) About the Electronic Frontier Foundation's 'DES Cracker' Machine |date=July 16, 1998 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=September 11, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120918165854/http://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto/Crypto_misc/DESCracker/HTML/19980716_eff_des_faq.html#sources |archive-date=2012-09-18 |url-status=dead}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} This brought the record for breaking a message down to 56 hours on 17 July 1998 and to under 24 hours on 19 January 1999 (in conjunction with distributed.net).

The EFF published the plans and source code for the cracker.{{cite book |title=Cracking DES - Secrets of Encryption Research, Wiretap Politics & Chip Design |author=Electronic Frontier Foundation|isbn=978-1-56592-520-5 |publisher=O'Reilly Media |year=1998 |url=https://archive.org/details/crackingdes00elec}} Within four years the Advanced Encryption Standard was standardized as a replacement for DES.{{Cite journal |last=Burr |first=William E. |date=2003 |title=Selecting the Advanced Encryption Standard |url=http://users.tricity.wsu.edu/~tyson/stuff/Selecting_the_AES.pdf |journal=IEEE Security & Privacy |volume=99 |issue=2 |pages=43–52|doi=10.1109/MSECP.2003.1193210}}

The EFF is a leading supporter of the Email Privacy Act.Sophia Cope, [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/house-advances-email-privacy-act-setting-stage-vital-privacy-reform House Advances Email Privacy Act, Setting the Stage for Vital Privacy Reform], Electronic Frontier Foundation (April 27, 2016).{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

{{Main|List of litigation involving the Electronic Frontier Foundation}}

{{Primary sources section|date = May 2024}}

The EFF regularly brings and defends lawsuits at all levels of the US legal system in pursuit of its goals and objectives. The EFF has long taken a stance against strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) as attempts to stymie free speech and advocated for effective anti-SLAPP legislation.{{Cite web|title=SLAPP: the background of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation|date=31 July 2018 |url=https://www.ecpmf.eu/slapp-the-background-of-strategic-lawsuits-against-public-participation/}}{{Failed verification|date=May 2024}}{{Cite web|last=Ruiz|first=David|date=2018-09-14|title=EFF Helps Launch Anti-SLAPP Task Force 'Protect the Protest'|url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/eff-helps-launch-anti-slapp-task-force-protect-protest|access-date=2021-03-02|website=Electronic Frontier Foundation|language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} Many of the most significant technology law cases have involved the EFF, including MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., Apple v. Does, and others.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

{{Main article|Hachette v. Internet Archive}}

The EFF represented the Internet Archive in Hachette v. Internet Archive.{{Cite web |date=2020-10-09 |title=Hachette v. Internet Archive |url=https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive |access-date=2024-11-25 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |language=en}}{{Cite web |title=EFF & Heavyweight Legal Team Will Defend Internet Archive's Digital Library Against Publishers * TorrentFreak |url=https://torrentfreak.com/eff-heavyweight-legal-team-will-defend-internet-archives-digital-library-against-publishers-200626/ |access-date=2024-11-25 |language=en}} Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the Internet Archive introduced a digital book borrowing system which allows users to borrow digital copies of physical books the archive had in its physical location. The case was won by Hachette and the Internet Archive being forced to stop its digital book borrowing system.{{Cite web |title=Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Internet Archive, No. 23-1260 (2d Cir. 2024) |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/23-1260/23-1260-2024-09-04.html |access-date=2024-11-25 |website=Justia Law |language=en}}

The Patent Busting Project is an Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) initiative challenging patents that the organization describes as illegitimate and suppress innovation or limit online expression. The initiative launched on April 19, 2004, and involves two phases: documenting the damage caused by these patents, and submitting challenges to the United States Patent and Trademark Office.{{cite web|url=https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/02/effs-patent-busters-take-on-broad-multiplayer-gaming-patent/|title=EFF's patent busters take on broad multiplayer gaming patent|first=Eric|last=Bangeman|publisher=Ars Technica|date=2008-02-03|access-date=2019-11-21}}

The EFF has long been an advocate of paper audit trails for voting machines and testified in support of them after the 2004 United States presidential election.{{cite web|url=https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/congress-finally-considers-aggressive-e-voting-overhaul/|title=Congress finally considers aggressive e-voting overhaul|author=Timothy B. Lee|publisher=Ars Technica|date=2007-04-02|access-date=2019-11-21}} Later, it funded the research of Hariprasad Vemuru who exposed vulnerabilities in a particular model.{{cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/south/story/evms-can-easily-be-tampered-with-84552-2010-10-26|title=EVMs can easily be tampered with|author=A Srinivasa Rao|publisher=India Today|date=2010-10-26|access-date=2019-11-21}} Since 2008, the EFF has operated the Our Vote Live website and database. Staffed by hotline volunteers, it is designed to quickly document irregularities and instances of voter suppression as they occur on an election day.{{cite web|url=https://mashable.com/2012/10/02/voter-suppression-social-media/|title=How social media can safeguard your vote|first=Joshua|last=Catone|publisher=Mashable|date=2012-10-02|access-date=2019-11-21}}

The EFF was active in the 2016 United States presidential election because of online phishing related to the controversy over fabrication of election results. J. Alex Halderman, a computer security professor at the University of Michigan, wrote an article that was published in Medium in 2016 stating he thought it was advisable to have a recount on some of the election results from states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, exclusively states Hillary Clinton lost.{{Cite web|url=https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba|title=Want to Know if the Election was Hacked? Look at the Ballots|last=Halderman|first=J. Alex|date=November 23, 2016|website=Medium}} In retaliation against Halderman, a hacker sent anti-Semitic and racist emails to students at University of Michigan signed from Halderman. The EFF publicizes these controversies and promotes the reduction of online phishing.{{Cite web|url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/02/not-okay-professor-smeared-after-advocating-election-integrity|title=Not Okay: Professor Smeared After Advocating for Election Integrity|last=Williams|first=Jamie|date=February 13, 2017|website=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

In the spring of 2018, the EFF joined the Open Technology Institute (OTI), the Center for Democracy & Technology, the ACLU Foundation of Northern California and four academics in writing The Santa Clara Principles: On Transparency and Accountability in Content Moderation. The document sets out the following guidelines for social networks.{{cite web|url=https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/07/santa-clara-principles-eff-cdt-aclu-facebook-google-twitter/|title=Tech watchdogs call on Facebook and Google for transparency around censored content|first=Taylor|last=Hatmaker|publisher=Tech Crunch|date=2018-05-07|access-date=2019-11-22}}

• Statistics on removed posts should be publicly available.
• Banned users or users who have had posts deleted should be notified with clear reasons.
• Such users should have the opportunity to appeal and have that appeal read by a human.

Six months later, the same organizations sought the support of roughly 80 others, including Article 19, in calling for Facebook to adopt the Santa Clara Principles.{{cite web|url=https://www.vice.com/en/article/86-organizations-demand-zuckerberg-to-improve-takedown-appeals/|title=86 organizations demand Zuckerberg to improve takedown appeals|first=Caroline|last=Haskins|publisher=Vice|date=2018-11-15|access-date=2019-11-22}} This was later updated with a request for Facebook to warn users who have interacted with sock puppet law enforcement accounts.{{cite web|url=https://boingboing.net/2019/04/15/nice-for-some.html|first=Cory|last=Doctorow|title=EFF to Facebook: enforce your rules banning cops from creating sockpuppet accounts and be transparent when you catch cops doing it|publisher=BoingBoing|date=2019-04-15|access-date=2019-11-22}}

In 2019, the EFF and OTI delivered testimony about the Online Harms White Paper in the United Kingdom. They commented that several proposals to increase the amount of regulation on social media were open to abuse.{{cite web|url=https://www.multichannel.com/news/digital-freedom-groups-caution-uk-on-content-regulation|title=Digital freedom groups caution UK on content regulation|first=John|last=Eggerton|publisher=Multichannel News|date=2019-07-03|access-date=2019-11-22}} Also in 2019, the EFF launched the website "TOSsed out" to document cases of moderation rules being applied inconsistently.{{cite web |last1=Nelson |first1=Sharon |last2=Simek |first2=John |date=2019-07-30 |title=Electronic Frontier Foundation takes on online speech moderation with TOSsed Out |url=http://www.slaw.ca/2019/07/30/electronic-frontier-foundation-takes-on-online-speech-moderation-with-tossed-out/ |access-date=2019-11-22 |publisher=Slaw Magazine}}{{Unreliable source?|date=May 2024}} Cindy Cohn underscored their commitment to upholding free speech online, writing that "once you've turned it on, whether through pressure or threats of lawsuits, the power to silence people doesn't just go in one direction."{{cite magazine|url=https://www.wired.com/story/when-limiting-online-speech-to-curb-violence-we-should-be-careful/|title=When Limiting Online Speech to Curb Violence, We Should Be Careful|first=Cindy|last=Cohn|magazine=Wired|date=2019-08-09|access-date=2019-11-22}}

{{Primary sources section

| date = May 2024

}}

In December 2022, the EFF and 56 other digital advocacy organizations called for internet infrastructure providers to stop policing the content of the websites they service.{{Cite web |last=Release |first=Press |date=2022-12-01 |title=International Coalition of Rights Groups Call on Internet Infrastructure Providers to Avoid Content Policing |url=https://www.eff.org/press/releases/international-coalition-rights-groups-call-internet-infrastructure-providers-avoid |access-date=2022-12-24 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} The organizations argued that many providers can only moderate content by revoking access to an entire website, leaving end-users with little transparency or recourse. They expressed concern that governments may pressure infrastructure providers to deny service to opponents and marginalized groups, and that monopolistic infrastructure providers may take banned users offline altogether. The coalition believes that platforms and user-facing websites are better-positioned as moderators, because they can remove specific content, sanction accounts granularly, and offer reasoning and appeals for moderation decisions.{{Cite web |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |title=Protect the Stack |url=https://protectthestack.org/ |access-date=2022-12-24 |website=Protect the Stack |language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}{{Cite web |last=Gastbeitrag |date=2022-12-06 |title=Schutz des Technologie-Stacks: Infrastrukturunternehmen sollten Inhalte nicht zensieren |url=https://netzpolitik.org/2022/schutz-des-technologie-stacks-infrastrukturunternehmen-sollten-inhalte-nicht-zensieren/ |access-date=2022-12-24 |website=netzpolitik.org |language=de-DE}}

The initiative was launched in the wake of Drop Kiwi Farms, a campaign that convinced several internet service providers and DDoS protection firms to revoke service to Kiwi Farms, a controversial forum.{{Cite web |last=York |first=Corynne McSherry and Jillian C. |date=2022-10-13 |title=The Internet Is Not Facebook: Why Infrastructure Providers Should Stay Out of Content Policing |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/10/internet-not-facebook-why-infrastructure-providers-should-stay-out-content |access-date=2022-12-24 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} After the forum returned behind an open-source bot detection tool, the EFF stopped classifying DDoS protection services as infrastructure because they cannot determine whether a website stays online or not.{{Cite web |last=Foundation |first=Electronic Frontier |date=2022-12-20 |title=We Need to Talk About Infrastructure |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/12/we-need-talk-about-infrastructure |access-date=2022-12-24 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |language=en}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

The EFF organizes two sets of awards to promote work in accordance with its goals and objectives.

{{Main article|EFF Pioneer Award}}

The EFF Awards, until 2022 called the EFF Pioneer Awards, are awarded annually to recognize individuals who in its opinion are "leaders who are extending freedom and innovation on the electronic frontier."{{cite web |url= https://www.eff.org/awards/pioneer |title=EFF Pioneer Awards |website=EFF.org |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=September 11, 2012}} In 2017, the honorees were Chelsea Manning, Mike Masnick and Annie Game.{{cite web|title=Whistleblower Chelsea Manning, Techdirt Founder Mike Masnick, and Free Expression Defender Annie Game Named Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award Winners|url=https://www.eff.org/press/releases/whistleblower-chelsea-manning-techdirt-founder-mike-masnick-and-free-expression|publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation|access-date=31 August 2017|date=16 August 2017}}

{{Primary sources section

| date = May 2024

}}

The EFF Cooperative Computing Awards are a series of four awards meant "to encourage ordinary Internet users to contribute to solving huge scientific problems", to be awarded to the first individual or group who discovers a prime number with a significant record number of decimal digits. The awards are funded by an anonymous donor.{{cite web |url= https://www.eff.org/awards/coop |title=EFF Cooperative Computing Awards |date=February 29, 2008 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=September 11, 2012}}{{cite magazine |last1=Kahney |first1=Leander |title=Big Bucks for Big Numbers |url=https://www.wired.com/1999/03/big-bucks-for-big-numbers/ |access-date=11 December 2024 |magazine=Wired |date=March 31, 1999}}

The awards are:

• $50,000 to the first individual or group who discovers a prime number with at least 1,000,000 decimal digits – Awarded April 6, 2000{{cite news |first=Katina |last=Bishop |title=Big Prime Nets Big Prize: EFF Gives $50,000 to Finder of Largest Known Prime Number |date=April 6, 2000 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |url=https://w2.eff.org/awards/20000406_coopaward_pr.html |access-date=September 11, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160916130149/https://w2.eff.org/awards/20000406_coopaward_pr.html |archive-date=September 16, 2016 |url-status=dead}}
• $100,000 to the first individual or group who discovers a prime number with at least 10,000,000 decimal digits – Awarded October 14, 2009{{cite news |first=Landon |last=Knoll |title=Record 12-million-digit Prime Number Nets $100,000 Prize |date=October 14, 2009 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |url= https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/10/14-0 |access-date=September 11, 2012}}{{cite news |last1=Strickland |first1=Eliza |title=Mathematicians May Win $100,000 Prize for Prime Number Discovery |url=https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/mathematicians-may-win-100-000-prize-for-prime-number-discovery |access-date=11 December 2024 |work=Discover Magazine |date=September 28, 2008 |language=en}}
• $150,000 to the first individual or group who discovers a prime number with at least 100,000,000 decimal digits
• $250,000 to the first individual or group who discovers a prime number with at least 1,000,000,000 decimal digits.

{{Primary sources section

| date = May 2024

}}

EFF publishes through several outlets such as the online periodical EFFector,{{cite web |url= https://www.eff.org/effector/ |title=EFFector : A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |issn=1062-9424 |access-date=October 9, 2013}} as well as its websites, blogs, and on social networking services.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

EFF's first book was published in 1993 as The Big Dummy's Guide to the Internet, a beginners' how-to manual by contracted technical writer Adam Gaffin, and made available for free download in many formats. MIT Press published it in paperback form in 1994 as Everybody's Guide to the Internet ({{ISBN|9780262571050}}). The online edition was updated regularly throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, and translated into dozens of languages.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

The organization's second book, Protecting Yourself Online ({{ISBN|9780062515124}}), an overview of digital civil liberties, was written in 1998 by technical writer Robert B. Gelman and EFF Communications Director Stanton McCandlish, and published by HarperCollins.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

A third book, Cracking DES: Secrets of Encryption Research, Wiretap Politics & Chip Design ({{ISBN|9781565925205}}), focusing on EFF's DES Cracker project, was published the same year by O'Reilly Media.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

A digital book, Pwning Tomorrow, an anthology of speculative fiction, was produced in 2015 as part of EFF's 25th anniversary activities, and includes contributions from 22 writers, including Charlie Jane Anders, Paolo Bacigalupi, Lauren Beukes, David Brin, Pat Cadigan, Cory Doctorow, Neil Gaiman, Eileen Gunn, Kameron Hurley, James Patrick Kelly, Ramez Naam, Annalee Newitz, Hannu Rajaniemi, Rudy Rucker, Lewis Shiner, Bruce Sterling, and Charles Yu.{{cite web |url= https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/12/eff-publishes-pwning-tomorrow-speculative-fiction-anthology |title=EFF Publishes "Pwning Tomorrow," a Speculative Fiction Anthology |first=Dave |last=Maass |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |date=December 16, 2015 |access-date=August 10, 2016}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

The Electronic Frontier Foundation's blog, DeepLinks, is a major section of its main website at EFF.org.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

The EFF sent a video message of support to global grassroots movement CryptoParty.{{cite web |url= https://www.youtube.com/cryptopartymelb |url-status=dead |title=Message from EFF San Francisco to Cryptoparty Melbourne |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |via=YouTube |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130719171319/https://www.youtube.com/cryptopartymelb |archive-date=July 19, 2013 |access-date=July 17, 2013}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

EFF's How to Fix the Internet podcast won a 2024 Anthem Award.{{Cite web |title=3rd Annual Anthem Awards Winners Announced |url=https://www.anthemawards.com/press/press-releases/3rd-annual-anthem-awards-winners-announced/ |access-date=2024-05-07 |website=Anthem Awards |language=en}}

{{Primary sources section

| date = May 2024

}}

The EFF has developed some software and browser add-ons, including Switzerland, HTTPS Everywhere, and Privacy Badger.{{Citation needed|date=May 2024}}

The EFF conducted a project named Secure Messaging Scorecard which "evaluated apps and tools based on a set of seven specific criteria ranging from whether messages were encrypted in transit to whether or not the code had been recently audited."{{cite web|title=Secure Messaging Scorecard|url=https://www.eff.org/secure-messaging-scorecard|publisher=EFF|access-date=21 April 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161115054343/https://www.eff.org/secure-messaging-scorecard|archive-date=15 November 2016|url-status=dead}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}} {{as of|2017|April|21|df=US}}, a revised version is under development.{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2024}}

As of 2021, Charity Navigator has given the EFF an overall rating of four out of four stars, including four stars for its financial efficiency and capacity.{{cite web|title=Electronic Frontier Foundation: Overall Score and Rating|url=https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/043091431|url-status=live|access-date=2021-09-02|work=Charity Navigator|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210811025515/https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/043091431 |archive-date=2021-08-11 }}

In 2011, the EFF received $1 million from Google as part of a settlement of a class action related to privacy issues involving Google Buzz.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center and seven other privacy-focused nonprofits protested that the plaintiffs' lawyers and Google had, in effect, arranged to give the majority of those funds "to organizations that are currently paid by Google to lobby for or to consult for the company". An additional $1 million was obtained from Facebook in a similar settlement.{{cite news |url=http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/30/google-and-facebooks-new-tactic-in-the-tech-wars/ |title=Google and Facebook's new tactic in the tech wars |last=Parloff |first=Roger |date=July 30, 2012 |work=Fortune |publisher=Time, Inc. |access-date=December 3, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140226201712/http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/30/google-and-facebooks-new-tactic-in-the-tech-wars/ |archive-date=February 26, 2014 |url-status=dead}}

The agitprop art group Psychological Industries has independently issued buttons with pop culture tropes such as the logo of the Laughing Man from the anime series Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex (with the original The Catcher in the Rye quotation replaced with the slogan of Anonymous), a bleeding roller derby jammer, and the "We Can Do It!" woman (often misidentified as Rosie the Riveter) on a series of buttons on behalf of the EFF.{{cite web |url=http://www.onemillionbuttonsfordigitalfreedom.com/ |title=Greetings Internet Citizen |website=OneMillionButtonsForDigitalFreedom.com |publisher=Discordia Merchandising |access-date=September 11, 2012 |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121004130434/http://www.onemillionbuttonsfordigitalfreedom.com/ |archive-date=October 4, 2012}}

In late June 2014 the EFF flew a GEFA-FLUG AS 105 GD/4{{cite web|url=http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/06/27/1927213/protesters-launch-a-135-foot-blimp-over-the-nsas-utah-data-center|title=Protesters Launch a 135-Foot Blimp Over the NSA's Utah Data Center - Slashdot|date=27 June 2014 |publisher=Yro.slashdot.org|access-date=2 December 2014}} blimp owned by, and in conjunction with, Greenpeace over the NSA's Bluffdale-based Utah Data Center in protest against its purported illegal spying.{{cite journal |url= https://www.wired.com/2014/06/protestors-launch-a-135-foot-blimp-over-the-nsas-utah-data-center/ |title=Protestors Launch a 135-Foot Blimp Over the NSA's Utah Data Center |first=Andy |last=Greenberg |date=June 27, 2014 |journal=Wired.com |publisher=Condé Nast Publications |access-date=December 2, 2014}}

{{div col|colwidth=15em}}

• Anna's Archive
• Citizen Lab (U of Toronto)
• Clipper chip
• Digital rights
• European Digital Rights (EDRi)
• Electronic Frontier Canada
• Electronic Frontiers Australia
• Freedom of the Press Foundation
• Information freedom
• Internet censorship
• League for Programming Freedom
• OpenMedia.ca
• Open Rights Group (UK-based)
• Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations Treaty
• Reporters Without Borders

{{div col end}}

{{reflist|1=30em}}

{{refbegin|30em}}

• {{cite book | last = Gelman | first = Robert B. |author2=Stanton McCandlish | title = Protecting Yourself Online: The Definitive Resource on Safety, Freedom & Privacy in Cyberspace | publisher = HarperEdge | location = New York | year = 1998 | isbn = 0-06-251512-8 }}
• {{cite book |author-link=Mike Godwin | last = Godwin | first = Mike | title = Cyber Rights: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age | publisher = MIT Press | location = Cambridge | year = 2003 | isbn = 0-262-57168-4 | title-link = Cyber Rights: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age }}
• {{cite book | last = Goldsmith | first = Jack | title = Who Controls the Internet? | publisher = Oxford University Press |author-link=Jack Goldsmith | location = Oxford Oxfordshire | year = 2006 | isbn = 0-19-515266-2 | title-link = Who Controls the Internet? }}
• {{cite book | last = Jones | first = Steve | title = Encyclopedia of New Media | url = https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofne00jone | url-access = registration | publisher = Sage Publications | location = Thousand Oaks | year = 2003 | isbn = 0-7619-2382-9 }}
• {{cite book | last = Sterling | first = Bruce |author-link=Bruce Sterling | title = The Hacker Crackdown: Law And Disorder On The Electronic Frontier | publisher = Bantam | location = London | year = 1993 | isbn = 0-553-56370-X | url = http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/101}}

{{refend}}

{{Wikinews category|Electronic Frontier Foundation}}

{{Commons category|Electronic Frontier Foundation}}

• {{official website}}
• {{Onion Official site|iykpqm7jiradoeezzkhj7c4b33g4hbgfwelht2evxxeicbpjy44c7ead}}
• {{YouTube|c=UCS66aeKQNvJSOOGPjVHDE3Q}}
• {{Mastodon user}} on the Fediverse
• {{ProPublicaNonprofitExplorer|43091431}}
• [https://www.eff.org/node/82654 EFF's Secure Messaging Scorecard (version 1.0)]
• {{Gutenberg author | id=76| name=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}
• {{cite book|url=https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/118|title=Big Dummy's Guide to the Internet by Electronic Frontier Foundation|publisher=Project Gutenberg}}
• {{Internet Archive author |sname=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}
• {{cite web|url=https://www.howtobypassinternetcensorship.org/|title=How To Bypass Internet Censorship|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141219160527/https://www.howtobypassinternetcensorship.org/|archive-date=2014-12-19}} also known by the titles: {{cite news|url=https://www.flossmanuals.net/bypassing-censorship/|title=Bypassing Internet Censorship or Circumvention Tools|publisher=flossmanuals.net|date=2011-03-10|page=240|access-date=2015-02-08|archive-date=2015-02-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150207041817/http://flossmanuals.net/bypassing-censorship/|url-status=dead}}

{{Privacy}}

{{Intellectual property activism}}

{{Patriot Act}}

{{Authority control}}

{{Portal bar|Freedom of speech|Internet|San Francisco Bay Area}}

Category:Access to Knowledge movement

Category:Articles containing video clips

Category:Charities based in California

Category:Civil liberties advocacy groups in the United States

Category:Computer law organizations

Category:Digital rights organizations

Category:Foundations based in the United States

Category:Freedom of expression organizations

Category:Humble Bundle

Category:Intellectual property activism

Category:Internet privacy organizations

Category:Internet-related activism

Category:Mission District, San Francisco

Category:Organizations based in San Francisco

Category:Organizations established in 1990

Category:Politics and technology

Category:Privacy in the United States

Category:Privacy organizations