EFF in the News
"Your car essentially knows where you sleep, where you work, where you eat, where your kids go to school, if you go to church, if you're having an affair -- you name it," said Nate Cardozo, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit devoted to civil liberties online. "But the OEMs are opaque. They don't tell us what they're collecting, they don't tell us with whom they're sharing it, and they don't tell us how often the government comes knocking."
While tech companies like Google usually release a “transparency report” to show how frequently the government asks for information on their users, automakers don’t and it isn’t clear how often law enforcement requests data from connected cars. “Your car essentially knows where you sleep, where you work, where you eat, where your kids go to school, if you go to church, if you’re having an affair — you name it,” according to Nate Cardozo, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit devoted to civil liberties online. “But the OEMs are opaque. They don’t tell us what they’re collecting, they don’t tell us with whom they’re sharing it, and they don’t tell us how often the government comes knocking.”
"The ISP is the only market player that has the ability to see all of a consumer's online traffic and behavior," said Ernesto Falcon, a legislative counsel at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Consumers can't hide from their ISP even if they tried."
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the leading nonprofit organization defending electronic civil liberties, has also taken on the case.
“The FBI needs to open up and tell Isis what it is they want before she can decide if she will meet with them,” EFF Senior Staff Attorney Nate Cardozo told Sputnik. “They've said she isn't under investigation, but there are still too many unanswered questions. Isis has a right to know what's going on instead of playing this strange guessing game as she's pursued by federal agents.”
District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis and her colleagues argue that a new bill requiring tech companies to weaken the security of their products would assist law enforcement, but they fail to mention the cost: the safety of all Americans’ data. - Opinion piece by Dave Maass is an investigative researcher at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that defends civil liberties at the crossroads of technology and the law.
Seth Schoen, a programmer who works for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), had followed the story when it unfolded originally. His own contribution was to write DeCSS out as a haiku poem. But he was particularly struck by Carmody’s conversion of the program into a prime number.
“You could find it in a number which feels more like this thing was occurring in nature,” he explains. “This thing that’s just out there. The industry was saying that one of these primes is illegal – and that was more conceptually striking maybe than some of the other contributions.”
China’s efforts are likely to be scrutinized for potential threats to privacy. Data collected by city officials for legitimate-sounding purposes could theoretically be shared with other agencies with more repressive intentions, said Sophia Cope, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group.
“The devil is in the details,” she said. Unless U.S. companies can assure themselves about how their technology should be used, “they should probably think twice.”
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has warned that while Google and Oracle are companies that can easily afford to fight expensive court battles, the reality is this pivotal case could have a chilling effect on the future of software development.
“Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for the overwhelming majority of developers in the computer industry, whether they’re hobbyist free software creators or even large companies,” said EFF’s Parker Higgins.
“Regardless of the outcome of this fair use case, the fact that it proceeded to this stage at all casts a long legal shadow over the entire world of software development.”
Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told SN&R in an email that, “while we haven’t reviewed the specific details of this smart meter program, we have concerns about the collect-it-all, ‘big data’ mentality, where entities are gathering, combining and analyzing large and small data sets.”
Tien continued: “Frequently users haven’t consented to what’s actually being done with their data, and often ‘big data’ means ‘data being used for something different than its original intended purpose.’”
The newest version of the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s (EFF) annual “Who Has Your Back?” report takes a look at how sharing economy services protect user information from government requests.