EFF's 20th Birthday Commemorative Poster

UPDATE: Downloadable wallpaper now available.

To celebrate 20 years of fighting for your digital rights, EFF staff designer Hugh D'Andrade came up with a commemorative poster! You can download your own hi-res copy from our Flickr page (on a Creative Commons Attribution License), and limited edition prints will be given to VIP Donors at our upcoming 20th Birthday celebration on February 10th at the DNA Lounge in San Francisco. The design will also be available on t-shirts on sale at the event.

Hope to see you there!

EFF's 20th Birthday with Adam Savage and Friends

February 10, 2010
Doors open at 8 pm, VIP event at 7 pm
$30 donation (no one turned away)
DNA Lounge
375 Eleventh Street
San Francisco, CA

[Permalink]

Help EFF Research Web Browser Tracking

What fingerprints does your browser leave behind as you surf the web?

Traditionally, people assume they can prevent a website from identifying them by disabling cookies on their web browser. Unfortunately, this is not the whole story.

When you visit a website, you are allowing that site to access a lot of information about your computer's configuration. Combined, this information can create a kind of fingerprint — a signature that could be used to identify you and your computer. But how effective would this kind of online tracking be?

EFF is running an experiment to find out. Our new website Panopticlick will anonymously log the configuration and version information from your operating system, your browser, and your plug-ins, and compare it to our database of five million other configurations. Then, it will give you a uniqueness score — letting you see how easily identifiable you might be as you surf the web.

Adding your information to our database will help EFF evaluate the capabilities of Internet tracking and advertising companies, who are already using techniques of this sort to record people's online activities. They develop these methods in secret, and don't always tell the world what they've found. But this experiment will give us more insight into the privacy risk posed by browser fingerprinting, and help web users to protect themselves.

To join the experiment:
http://panopticlick.eff.org/

To learn more about the theory behind it:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/primer-information-theory-and-priva...

[Permalink]

EFF Weighs in on Proposed FCC Net Neutrality Rules

Today marks the deadline for the first round of comments to the FCC regarding its proposed "net neutrality" regulations. Here's a quick summary of what EFF had to say in its comments to the Commission:

While the question of how to best protect the openness of the Internet is a timely and important one, EFF believes the FCC currently lacks the statutory authority to issue the broad regulations on ISPs that it has proposed. The "ancillary jurisdiction" that the FCC has asserted as a basis for the regulations is legally insufficient and would, if accepted, give the FCC potentially unbounded power to regulate the Internet however it likes. In other words, if the FCC wants to issue net neutrality regulations, it needs to wait until Congress passes a net neutrality bill.

If the Commission nevertheless chooses to forge ahead with the regulations proposed, EFF urges it to make the following revisions designed to protect the free speech and privacy interests of Internet users, and to foster competition and innovation.

First, in order to protect the free speech interests of Internet users, the Commission should reject copyright enforcement as "reasonable network management." Copyright enforcement has nothing to do with the technical business of network management. Moreover, the proposed regulations, by their terms, already exclude "unlawful content," making any exception for copyright enforcement unnecessary. Should ISPs want to deploy copyright enforcement technologies that inflict collateral damage on lawful content, those ISPs should be required to submit any such technologies to the Commission for pre-deployment review as part of a transparent public waiver process.

Second, in order to protect the privacy interests of Internet users, the Commission should clarify that the law enforcement exception applies only to an ISP’s legal obligations to address the needs of law enforcement. Because the six proposed neutrality principles do not, by their terms, apply to unlawful content or activities, a general exception for law enforcement is unnecessary. Should ISPs want to voluntarily deploy technologies that would block lawful activity in the course of addressing the needs of law enforcement, those ISPs should be required to submit any such technologies to the Commission for pre-deployment review as part of a transparent, public waiver process.

Third, in order to protect the privacy interests of Internet users, the Commission should make it clear that its proposed regulations do not reach noncommercial providers of broadband Internet access service, whether they are individuals who operate open Wi-Fi networks at home, or public-minded entities that provide free Internet access in their local communities. The Commission should avoid the specter of federal regulation looming over noncommercial, public-spirited network providers. Federal regulation of these initiatives is not necessary to vindicate the openness, competition, innovation, and free expression goals of this proceeding.

Fourth, in order to foster competition and innovation, EFF urges the Commission to make it clear that the proposed "transparency" principle is not subject to an exception for "reasonable network management." As exemplified by the Commission’s ruling against Comcast regarding its discriminatory treatment of BitTorrent traffic, it is precisely when ISPs invoke the need for "reasonable network management" that the principle of transparency becomes most vital. Only if ISPs are required to adequately disclose their network management practices will consumers, competitors, innovators, and the Commission be able to evaluate whether the practices are, in fact, "reasonable."

Fifth, in order to foster competition and innovation, the Commission should require wireless ISPs to allow "tethering" as a form of device interconnection. This requirement is a necessary corollary to the principle that consumers should be entitled to use any lawful device or application that does not harm the network. Tethering facilitates interoperability, competition, and openness. Furthermore, tethering blocks some troubling practices that are already emerging in the marketplace.

[Permalink]

Have You Been Subjected to Suspicionless Laptop Search or Seizure at the Border?

EFF has long fought for the privacy of your laptop and other digital devices at the border. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has implemented program that authorizes searches of the contents of travelers’ laptop computers and other electronic storage devices at border crossings, notwithstanding the absence of probable cause, reasonable suspicion or any indicia of wrongdoing.

In U.S. v. Arnold we fought for a requirement that customs agents have some reason before searching your computer and in our FOIA work on border searches, we have pushed the government to reveal its policies and practices in this area.

Now, another civil rights group, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers is seeking potential plaintiffs for a lawsuit challenging suspicionless laptop searches. As a first step in this effort, NACDL is seeking to identify defense lawyers who have had their laptops searched at the border and are willing to serve as individual plaintiffs. In order to demonstrate the effect of this policy on members of the criminal defense bar and to support the constitutional challenge, NACDL plans to assemble a group of individual plaintiffs who will develop affidavits describing the harm they suffer by having their electronic information exposed to government officials.

This lawsuit will not seek monetary damages for individuals who have been searched; instead, it will focus exclusively on fixing the unconstitutional policy. Participating members will be represented at no charge by NACDL and ACLU attorneys.

EFF supports the NACDL and ACLU's joint effort. To determine whether you may qualify as a plaintiff, please consider the following:

1. Have you ever had your laptop, cell phone or camera searched when entering or exiting the U.S.?
2. Have you ever had the contents of your laptop, cell phone or camera copied when entering or exiting the U.S.?
3. Have you ever had your laptop, cell phone or camera seized when entering or exiting the U.S.?
4. If you are employed by someone else, does your employer have a policy about traveling internationally with laptops, cell phones or cameras?
5. Do you avoid carrying confidential business or personal information on your laptop, cell phone or camera due to the suspicion-less search policy?

If you answered ‘yes’ to any of these questions, and might be interested in joining the NACDL suit, please contact Michael Price, NACDL's National Security Coordinator, at (202) 872-8600 x258 or michael@nacdl.org.

[Permalink]

Support EFF's International Work!

The Internet is global, and so are threats to digital freedom. Over the past year, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has fought Internet censorship, oppressive copyright laws and privacy violations wherever they've been under threat around the world.

With the help of our global partners and supporters like you, EFF has been able to achieve great things over the past year:

• Protecting Freedom of Expression. EFF helped establish the Global Network Initiative, garnering commitments from leading technology companies worldwide to resist pressure from government censors in repressive countries and to advance freedom of expression in their products and services.
• Making Information More Accessible. EFF helped make knowledge and information accessible to more people across the world by fighting for exceptions and limitations to copyright for the reading disabled, for libraries and archives, for educational purposes, and for innovative services.
• Assembling the World's Copyright Laws. EFF helped create Copyright-Watch.org, the most comprehensive publicly available database of international copyright laws ever assembled. Currently including the laws of 187 countries, Copyright-Watch.org was created to strengthen the global network of copyright experts, to facilitate comparative policy research, and to provide for national advocacy support.
• Creating Global Privacy Standards. EFF worked with public interest organizations from every continent to create international standards for privacy that ensure the priority of civil rights in the face of increasing surveillance and monitoring.
• Influencing European Internet Policy. EFF collaborated with digital rights and consumer protection advocates in Europe to preserve judicial oversight and due process in IP enforcement efforts and to fight Three Strikes proposals.
• Promoting Access to Knowledge in Developing Countries. EFF promoted access to knowledge in the developing world by encouraging government bodies to create interoperability standards that encouraged universal access.
• Exposing the Lack of Transparency in Trade Negotiations. EFF led the battle to shed sunlight on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a secret multi-national pact that could severely limit digital rights.
• Fighting Against Abuse of Cybercrime Legislation. EFF supported local activists in Brazil, Kazakhstan, and Thailand fighting against the abuse and misuse of cybercrime laws to suppress legitimate activity. EFF also fought to secure privacy rights and civil liberties protections in the legislative implementation of the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention.

This is but a sample of the things we've worked on in 2009. For more information about our international mission, see http://www.eff.org/issues/international.

Please donate to EFF today, and join us in the fight for a free and open Internet:

http://www.eff.org/give

Thanks in advance for your support!

Happy Holidays from EFF's International Team

[Permalink]

Give to EFF This Holiday Season and Receive Free BookMooch Points

This holiday season, for every $10 you donate to EFF, you can receive one BookMooch point, worth one free book of your choice, from BookMooch founder and EFF board member John Buckman! Just join BookMooch and then email the receipt of your donation here to redeem your points. (You can find John Buckman's official announcement on the Bookmooch blog.)

BookMooch is a community built around exchanging used books -- it's completely non-commercial and costs nothing to join or use. Members list books that they are willing to exchange, list books that they want to receive, and earn points based on their participation. You get one BookMooch point when you send someone else a book; you spend one BookMooch point when you "mooch" (receive) a book from another member. Take advantage of this promotion to get some free books while supporting EFF and the ongoing fight for digital civil liberties!

[Permalink]

Intelligence Agencies Release Docs Describing Misconduct in Response to EFF Lawsuit

Today the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Agency released 162 pages of intelligence oversight reporting in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by EFF in July.

The reports, made to a presidential advisory committee called the Intelligence Oversight Board, detail intelligence activities that the agencies "have reason to believe may be unlawful."

EFF is reviewing the documents now and has posted them on our website. Some of our initial finds include reports that:

• The Department of Homeland Security improperly investigated the U.S.-based religious organization the Nation of Islam.
• High-level Pentagon officials gave false information to Congress about al-Qa'ida and the 9/11 attacks.
• The Department of Homeland Security improperly collected intelligence about a non-violent Muslim conference in Georgia, including details about conference speakers who were Americans.
• The National Security Agency admitted that, as of late 2007, it lacked processes and procedures for timely reporting of intelligence oversight violations.

The media has already started reporting on the discoveries in these documents. We'll continue to sift through these records for more important information, and hope reporters and others do the same. EFF filed this lawsuit because Americans deserve to know about incidents of intelligence misconduct -- how often they happen, and how effective oversight is for controversial programs. Now that we have some of the records we are seeking, it's time to bring that misconduct to light.

A federal judge indicated during a hearing yesterday that she intends to order other intelligence agencies to produce similar documents to EFF throughout January and February of next year. We expect those disclosures to include reports from the CIA, Department of Defense and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

[Permalink]

Be A Superhero - Give Today and Get an EFF xkcd Shirt

For twenty years, supporters of the Electronic Frontier Foundation have helped an elite team of technologists and activists create an unparalleled force in the digital rights world. Randall Munroe, creator of the online comic xkcd, tells it best:

To thank our year-end donors, we are offering special edition EFF 20th anniversary xkcd t-shirts and hooded sweatshirts! This exclusive xkcd apparel is available only for a limited time and will be shipped in January 2010. Donate today to join xkcd in celebrating this milestone in EFF history and online rights.

[Permalink]

Terms of (Ab)use: Are Terms of Service Enforceable?

In the first of a series of white papers on Terms of Service (TOS) issues, EFF today released The Clicks That Bind: Ways Users “Agree” to Online Terms of Service. The paper aims to answer a fundamental question: when do these ubiquitous TOS agreements actually become binding contracts? We discuss how courts have reacted to efforts by service providers to enforce TOS, and suggest best practices for service providers to follow in presenting terms to a user and for seeking his or her agreement to them.

The white paper examines both clickwrap agreements—whereby service providers require the user to click an “I Agree” button next to the terms—and browsewrap agreements—whereby service providers try to characterize one's continued use of the website as constituting “agreement” to a posted set of terms. While neither method automatically creates enforceable contracts, some presentations may still be upheld even if the user never actually reads and understands the terms. The key is whether the service provider allows the user reasonable notice and opportunity to review the terms before using the website or service.

Of course, just because a TOS creates an enforceable agreement, does not mean that every provision of the TOS will be enforced by a court. In our next white paper, we'll examine which particular provisions are most unfair to consumers, including provisions that have aroused the skepticism of courts and regulators.

[Permalink]

EFF Launches New "Terms of (Ab)Use" Page

One cannot go online today without eventually being asked to accept a set of so-called Terms of Service (or TOS). Such TOS agreements have become ubiquitous to websites and other online services in the same way End User License Agreements (EULAs) have become the mainstay of the software industry. Yet while we are often aware that such Terms of Service exist, very few of us know and understand what they actually say.

The time has come to shed light on what these Terms of Service agreements contain, and what it means for users. In conjunction with our TOSBack project, EFF is proud to announce Terms of (Ab)Use: a source for news and updates on TOS issues around the Web. We also will be periodically publishing a series of white papers that will provide the average Internet user a general background on many of the legal issues that surround Terms of Service agreements.

[Permalink]