EFF in the News
Eva Galperin, international activist with the San Francisco digital rights organization Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the situation shows what can happen if laws are enacted to "put the power to shut down a portion of the Internet in the hands of a single person, whether it's the president of Egypt or the president of the United States."
About two dozen groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Library Association, Electronic Frontier Foundation and Center for Democracy & Technology, were skeptical enough to file an open letter opposing the idea. They are concerned that the measure, if it became law, might be used to censor the internet.
"The cost of reading the New York Times for free is being tracked. The cost of being on Facebook is being data-mined," Peter Eckersley, a senior staff technologist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Friday at a panel discussion on the intersection of technology and privacy.
Twitter is working with Chilling Effects, a joint project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and numerous schools including Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics. The project deals with issues like Copyright, Domain Names and Trademarks, Anonymous Speech and Defamation. In an effort to be as transparent as possible, Twitter submits all copyright removal notices to @chillingeffects and they are now Tweeting them from @ChillFirehose.
Advocates for free speech argue "anonymity is crucial to the free flow of information on the Internet and preservation of civil rights," according to Mike Cronin in the October 16, 2010 Pittsburgh Tribune Review article "Internet Anonymity at Risk as Real Costs of Free Speech Weighed." And some experts say eliminating anonymity on the Internet is technically impossible (Cronin).
Rebecca Jeschke, a spokeswoman for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, states in Cronin's article, anonymity is about free speech and privacy. Many people do not want the things they say online to affect their offline identities. They have concerns about political or economic retribution, harassment and even threats to their lives. "'Whistle-blowers need anonymity. So do human rights workers who struggle against repressive governments, and victims of domestic violence who want to hide from their abusers'" (qtd. in Cronin). Jeschke also states that parents may want anonymity for children so they can safely surf the Internet.
Newly available documents shed light on such questions. Digital rights advocates at the Electronic Frontier Foundation have been suing federal agencies for months under the Freedom of Information Act with help from the Samuelson Clinic at UC Berkeley’s School of Law. The goal was to force open policies that explain when social networking sites can be used for government surveillance, data collection and investigations.
Results made public so far by EFF are available below for more than a dozen sites in a chart built by the Center for Investigative Reporting. Old and new policies alike are posted next to the document year, so you can compare possible changes over time. EFF argues that the variety among them shows how “social networking sites have struggled to develop consistent, straightforward policies.”
If you want HTTPS everywhere, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) aptly named HTTPS Everywhere is a Firefox extension to provide that functionality. They also recommend KB SSL Enforcer for Chrome users, but have found that it isn't implemented as securely (which could be a limitation of the Chrome extension framework).
The Justice Department hopes to force ISPs to archive personal user data usage for help facilitate future law enforcement investigations, which puts the fate of our Internet privacy up in the air. Kevin Pereira talks to EFF's Richard Esguerra about the upcoming hearing and the details.
One of those questioning is Kevin Bankston, the senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation—a group that was instrumental in persuading a New York court not to allow law enforcement to secretly trace cell phone user’s activities. Bankston is bleak about the future of American’s privacy rights.
“We don’t know what’s coming next,” he told us. “Because of the extensive secrecy surrounding law enforcement and intelligence investigation practices, every new revelation is just that: a revelation, and often a shocking one. ”
Not surprisingly, that doesn’t convince the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which says “A legal obligation to log users’ Internet use, paired with weak federal privacy laws that allow the government to easily obtain those records, would dangerously expand the government’s ability to surveil its citizens, damage privacy, and chill freedom of expression.”