Eff org что это

18.04.202218.04.2022 admin 0 Comments

About EFF

About

About EFF

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world. Founded in 1990, EFF champions user privacy, free expression, and innovation through impact litigation, policy analysis, grassroots activism, and technology development. EFF’s mission is to ensure that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all people of the world.

EFF’s mission is to ensure that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all people of the world.

Even in the fledgling days of the Internet, EFF understood that protecting access to technology was central to advancing freedom for all. In the years that followed, EFF used our fiercely independent voice to clear the way for open source software, encryption, security research, file sharing tools, and a world of emerging technologies.

Today, EFF uses the unique expertise of leading technologists, activists, and attorneys in our efforts to defend free speech online, fight illegal surveillance, advocate for users and innovators, and support freedom-enhancing technologies.

Together, we forged a vast network of concerned members and partner organizations spanning the globe. EFF advises policymakers and educates the press and the public through comprehensive analysis, educational guides, activist workshops, and more. EFF empowers hundreds of thousands of individuals through our Action Center and has become a leading voice in online rights debates.

Источник

Фонд электронного фронтира [Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF]

Фонд электронного фронтира изначально был основан как некая разновидность фонда по защите гражданских прав хакеров. Спустя годы после своего основания организация сосредоточилась на трех целях: сохранении свободы слова в онлайновом мире, защите цифровой приватности и обеспечении того, что новые технологии создаются с учетом «уважения человеческих прав, таких как свобода слова, приватность и справедливое использование». EFF – членская организация, которая стремится как обучать общественность, так и влиять на общественную политику.

Electronic Frontier Foundation

1550 Bryant Street, Suite 725

San Francisco CA 94103

Contact EFF

About

Contact EFF

Can EFF represent me?

Maybe. Find out about EFF’s Legal Assistance Services here.

Can EFF address an event in my community?

Maybe. Submit a request for a speaker here and we’ll get back to you soon.

For all other inquiries, please contact us via the appropriate e-mail address below, or by mail, fax or phone.

General Information
For questions, requests, or miscellaneous queries:
info@eff.org
info@eff.org PGP public key
GPG Key Fingerprint: F2F2 1BB8 531E 9DC3 0D40 F68B 11A1 A9C8 4B18 732F
Signal Number (text only): 510-243-8020. To verify it’s us, you can check the safety numbers for the conversation. Either the first half or the second half of the safety numbers should read: 35593 90536 26981 58470 03363 72867

Press
For media inquiries (please put“Media Request”in the email subject line):
press@eff.org
415-436-9333 x177
Both email and voice messages forward to the entire media team

Legal Assistance
For legal questions (please see our Legal Assistance Guidelines before contacting us):
legal@eff.org

Membership
For membership, donations, shop orders, corporate giving, or matching gifts information, check out our FAQ page: https://www.eff.org/pages/membership-faq. If you can’t find the answer you’re looking for there, reach out to: membership@eff.org
membership@eff.org PGP public key
GPG Key Fingerprint: 392E 3160 B160 16B3 451D F3FC 57E7 C603 694A EE9B

Action
For issues or problems relating to Action Center or Action Alerts:
action@eff.org

Security Vulnerabilities
For reporting security vulnerabilities ONLY in EFF software or systems (for more information, see EFF’s Security Vulnerability Disclosure Program):
vulnerabilities@eff.org
GPG Key Fingerprint: 48A5 8A7D 6758 B523 9D4A F563 1B1E 85FA 96BC 4486

Browser Extensions
For contacting us about our browser add-ons, HTTPS Everywhere and Privacy Badger:
extension-devs@eff.org
GPG Key Fingerprint: 4F6C 8B44 9347 A3C2 665E FDC3 176B D05F 2A9B 47F4

Employment Verification
To verify employment please email hr@eff.org with the person’s full name, approximate dates of employment and title or department.

Accessibility
Thank you for visiting our website! We strive to design EFF tools and websites so they are accessible to all users, including those with disabilities. If you have feedback on how we could improve your user experience, please let us know by sending a message to info@eff.org with “Accessibility feedback” included in the subject line. The more specific the feedback, the better! Since our accessibility efforts are ongoing, we may not be able to respond to and/or implement all requests, but we welcome your comments and will take them into consideration as we iterate on our websites.

San Francisco Headquarters
Electronic Frontier Foundation
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109 USA
Phone: +1-415-436-9333
Fax: +1-415-436-9993

Send a Donation
Give to EFF online or by postal mail. Make checks or money orders payable to «EFF» and send to the Electronic Frontier Foundation at 815 Eddy Street, San Francisco, CA 94109 USA.

Источник

Secure Messaging Scorecard

This is version 1.0 of our scorecard; it is out of date, and is preserved here for purely historical reasons. Please visit Surveillance Self-Defense if you’re looking for recommendations on specific tools to use to ensure your privacy and security while we work on writing an updated guide to secure messaging. Again, you should not use this scorecard to evaluate the security of any of the listed tools, as many of them have been changed since the scorecard was last updated (some for the better, some for the worse).

Which apps and tools actually keep your messages safe?

In the face of widespread Internet surveillance, we need a secure and practical means of talking to each other from our phones and computers. Many companies offer “secure messaging” products—but are these systems actually secure? We decided to find out, in the first phase of a new EFF Campaign for Secure & Usable Crypto.

This scorecard represents only the first phase of the campaign. In later phases, we are planning to offer closer examinations of the usability and security of the tools that score the highest here. As such, the results in the scorecard below should not be read as endorsements of individual tools or guarantees of their security ; they are merely indications that the projects are on the right track. For practical advice and tutorials on how to protect your online communication against surveillance, check out EFF’s Surveillance Self-Defense guide.

Источник

Eff org что это

Since its founding in 1990, EFF has consistently taken critical cases, challenged tough opponents, and achieved landmark victories. EFF has prevailed in lawsuits against the federal government, the FCC, the world’s largest entertainment companies, and major electronics companies, among others. EFF has also beaten bills in Congress and pressured companies to respect your rights.

Learn more about some of EFF’s key victories below. To support our continued success, consider becoming a member and donating to EFF.

Creativity & Innovation

The Supreme Court has upheld the power of the Patent Office to review and cancel issued patents.

A federal appeals court today ruled that industry groups cannot control publication of binding laws and standards. This decision protects the work of Public.Resource.org (PRO), a nonprofit organization that works to improve access to government documents.

The Library of Congress and the Copyright Office have expanded the exemptions to section 1201 of the DMCA. The expansions have added more circumstances where people can legally break digital access controls to do legal things with their own media and devices.

The new “Classics Protection and Access Act” section of MMA clears away most of the varied and uncertain state laws governing pre-1972 recordings.

A Federal court dismissed Playboy’s claim that Boing Boing had infringed copyright by reporting on a historical collection of Playboy centerfolds and linking to a third-party site.

The Federal Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) heeded EFF’s advice and rejected an attempt by Oracle to hold a company criminally liable for accessing Oracle’s website in a manner it didn’t like. The court ruled back in 2012 that merely violating a website’s terms of use is not a crime under the federal computer crime statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

In a victory for journalism and fair use, Playboy Entertainment has given up on its lawsuit against Happy Mutants, LLC, the company behind Boing Boing.

EFF, along with other nonprofit groups, filed an amicus brief urging the court to reject the plaintiffs’ effort to undermine the DMCA safe harbors.

EFF filed an amicus brief arguing that adding “on a computer” to an abstract idea does not make it patentable.

Online service providers do not have to police trademarks of others

EFF filed a brief and argued in Court to stop RIAA’s «making available» copyright infringement theory—if someone could have downloaded it from you, you’ve violated copyright, even if no one ever did.

EFF established that computer code is speech and shielded the developers of privacy-protecting software from government censorship.

A victory in EFF’s fight to end excessive secrecy in patent cases.

EFF defended the principle that trademark holders can’t use trademark law to punish free speech just because the speaker happens to use trademarks as a necessary part of activism.

EFF invalidated Personal Audio’s patents on podcasting, ensuring that everyone is free to create their own podcast on the Internet without the threat of a patent lawsuit.

EFF filed a brief upholding the right to engage in open discussion about words companies are trying to trademark, without the fear of being sued by the companies under trademark law.

EFF invalidated a patent on creating subdomains under a parent domain

EFF, along with allies, filed a brief explaining that allowing patent owners to write a wishlist of anti-competitive restrictions would be a disastrous expansion of patent law, hindering competition, innovation, and your freedom to tinker with and repair your own stuff.

The first sale doctrine applies to works made outside of the United States and doesn’t matter where something was manufacture—if you bought it, you own it.

Rightsholders must consider fair use before sending DMCA takedowns. Additionally, fair use is a affirmative public rights and not simply a narrow defense to copyright infringement

EFF helped block “negligence” theory of copyright infringement for open wireless hosts

EFF filed a brief protecting patent first sale—once you buy a product, you own it and the patent owner generally can’t interfere with your subsequent use.

EFF, alongside other organization, joined with Verizon to argue that every Internet user’s privacy was at risk if anyone claiming to be a copyright owner could, without ever appearing before a judge, force an ISP to hand over the names and addresses of its customers.

EFF argued that trademark holders can’t use their trademark as a tool to censor unwanted online criticism

EFF filed an amicus brief arguing that trademark infringement requires specific knowledge.

A part of EFF’s fight to end excessive secrecy in patent cases.

A copyright owner can’t take away a consumer’s first sale rights just by putting a labels on a CD

EFF filed several amicus brief arguing for the invalidation of the patent on showing ads before Internet content

EFF defended the right of innovators to build new technologies without begging Hollywood’s permission first.

Fighting the abuse of copyright law to stifle competition, EFF helped Skylink score an important victory in the Federal Circuit that puts much-needed limits on the controversial «anti-circumvention» provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

EFF helped defend a printer cartridge company against a competitor’s overreaching copyright claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

The FBI arrested Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov while he was attending a security conference in Las Vegas to discuss the Advanced eBook Processor, a program to decrypt Adobe eBook files. This made Sklyarov the first person to be criminally charged under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Adobe initially pressed the case, but, after meeting with EFF, called for all charges against Sklyarov to be dropped.

Major motion picture studies filed a copyright infringement suit against two companies that made and distributed copies of movies with sexual and violent content removed. EFF protected innovation and fair use by defending «intermediate» copying.

Fighting the over-reach of trademark law, EFF signed on as co-counsel to a small travel services company, JSL, after credit card giant Visa convinced a federal court in Las Vegas to prevent the company from using the domain name «evisa.com».

EFF helped Replay TV owners stand up to Hollywood to defend digital VCRs

EFF helped preserve the legal protections for actually private websites while protecting your right to read public websites.

In September of 2011, an astrology software company called Astrolabe filed suit against Arthur David Olson and Paul Eggert, researchers who coordinated the development of a time zone database.

Ditto.com (formerly known as Arriba Soft) was an early image search engine similar to Google’s Image Search. So for example by entering «sailboat» into the Ditto website the searcher would be shown a selection of images of sailboats from around the Web.

EFF protected website owners free speech rights against overreaching trademark claims.

In a legal battle over Internet music storage that could impact innovation and free expression on the Internet EFF Public Knowledge and other public interest groups asked a federal judge in an amicus brief to protect the «safe harbor» rules for online content in EMI v. MP3Tunes.

EFF, together with Durie Tangri LLP, defended a photo hobbyist against an outrageous patent suit from a company that claims to hold the rights to online competitions on social networks where users vote for the winner.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) limits the circumvention of software that’s designed to restrict access to copyrighted works. Unfortunately, such a blanket restriction can chill competition, free speech, and fair use. In an attempt to mitigate those harms, every three years the U.S.

EFF and others filed a brief arguing that copyright law was not the proper avenue for Ms. Garcia to disassociate herself with the controversial video, and that the initial order was a prior restraint of speech.

EFF backed Internet service providers (ISPs) in an effort to quash subpoenas to more than a thousand unnamed Internet users issued in a predatory lawsuit over alleged copyright infringement resulting from illegal downloading of adult material.

EFF joined the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, and the Association of Research Libraries in an amicus brief urging a federal court to find that the fair use doctrine permitted the creation of a valuable digital library, the HathiTrust Digital Library (HDL).

Book Scanning is fair use

In recent years, we’ve experienced an explosion of litigation surrounding § 101 of the Patent Act. That section is intended to preclude patent protection for laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas. This is fundamental to the patent bargain.

Newspaper excerpts are protected fair use.

Blue Spike v. Audible Magic is a patent case in which EFF intervened in order to achieve greater public access to the proceedings.

EFF defended a criminal justice blog that provides resources for difficult-to-prosecute murder cases in fighting bogus infringement claims from copyright troll Righthaven LLC.

Free Speech

Online free speech protects criticism by the Oatmeal

CDA 230 protects Wikipedia

Stopping libel tourism

EFF filed an amicus brief in D.C. Court of Appeals arguing that the First Amendment does not allow gag orders that’d prevent Facebook from informing its users that the government had obtained their data, given that the government was seeking the data in connection with users’ political speech.

Defended the right of anonymous critics to express their views online without fear of arbitrary disclosure of their identity

The Internet is a place of free speech

EFF set one of the first precedents protecting computer communications from unwarranted government invasion.

EFF extended free speech protections online, successfully challenging the constitutionality of Internet censorship laws.

EFF defended the free speech rights of a website publisher who had repeatedly received baseless threats from the corporate owners of Barney the Dinosaur. The Lyons Partnership wrongly claimed that Dr. Stuart Frankel’s online parody of Barney violated copyright and trademark laws.

EFF successfully blocked a brazen attempt to unmask the identities of anonymous members of an online discussion group for embroidery fans.

EFF helped protect free speech rights of users who provide online forums for the views of others. In this case, a breast implant awareness activist was sued for defamation in part for re-posting an article written by someone else.

EFF protected anonymous speech and fought off a controversial self-help group’s abuse of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

EFF protected online speakers by bringing the first successful suit against abusive copyright claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

EFF defended the free speech and fair use rights of an online newsletter publisher after the world’s third largest pharmaceutical company that accused him of trademark infringement and cybersquatting.

The DVD Copy Control Association (DVD-CCA), a mouthpiece of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), sued dozens of people in venues across the country and around the world for publishing DeCSS, software code that decrypts the data on commercial DVDs. EFF represented Andrew Bunner and Mathew Pavlovich to defend First Amendment rights in technically oriented speech, to fight the misuse of trade secret law, and to clarify the rules on jurisdiction.

When former Intel employee Ken Hamidi sent email messages to Intel employees complaining about the company’s allegedly unfair labor practices, Intel brought suit. EFF stepped in to protect Hamidi’s First Amendment rights, arguing in a friend-of-the-court brief that there was no evidence to suggest that his email had threatened the integrity of Intel’s systems.

EFF fought for open, transparent governance of the domain name system.

EFF helped convince the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate a dangerous patent law precedent that threatened free speech and consumers’ rights.

EFF fought for bloggers’ rights, defending the anonymity of an online speaker. In two messages from September of 2004, someone writing under the alias Proud Citizen criticized Patrick Cahill, a member of the Smyrna Town Council in Delaware.

EFF defended anonymous online speakers from frivolous subpoenas.

After EFF intervened in the case, an Oklahoma school superintendent dropped his attempt to unmask the identities of a website operator and all registered users of an Internet message board devoted to discussion of local public schools.

John Doe is an anonymous poster to two Internet message boards who made two statements critical of a publicly-traded company run by Plaintiff Cullens. In an effort to prevent Doe from further posting his opinions about the company on the Internet Cullens filed a libel suit against Doe in Illinois and asked a California court to force disclosure of Doe’s identity.

EFF and the ACLU of Northern California filed suit in federal court on January 14, 2009 to protect the privacy and free speech rights of two San Francisco Bay Area community organizations after the groups’ computers were seized and the data copied by federal and local law enforcement.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found a Florida man’s constitutional rights were violated when he was imprisoned for refusing to decrypt data on several devices. This was the first time an appellate court has ruled the 5th Amendment protects forced decryption – a major victory for constitutional rights in the digital age. EFF filed an amicus brief in this case.

In 2012, EFF used CDA 230 to end a legal threat to a lawyer ratings web site (LawyerRatingz.com) for postings by third parties.

In March 2010, EFF filed an amicus brief urging the Illinois Court of Appeals to protect the identity of an anonymous critic who upset a local politician.

EFF filed an amicus brief in this case in support of a man who was indicted under the a federal anti-stalking statute for repeatedly tweeting caustic criticisms of a public figure, a Buddhist sect leader who herself made extensive use of social media.

In February 2008, Swiss bank Julius Baer filed suit in federal district court against Wikileaks for hosting 14 allegedly leaked documents regarding personal banking transactions of Julius Baer customers. EFF, the ACLU and the ACLU of Northern California moved to intervene in the lawsuit.

EFF defended online journalists and their rights to protect the confidentiality of sources as offline reporters do.

EFF filed an amicus in support of a John Doe who was denied attorneys fees under the California SLAPP law. The case was handled by the Stanford cyberlaw clinic. The appeals court agreed with Stanford and EFF and reversed the lower court ruling.

EFF helped online public records platform MuckRock successfully defend three lawsuits filed against it and one of its users over public records that allegedly contained trade secrets. This included vindicating MuckRock’s First Amendment rights when a court repealed a previous order that required the platform to de-publish public records the user had lawfully obtained.

Privacy

EFF filed an amicus brief arguing that the government’s collection of smart meter data is a search, and thus subject to Fourth Amendment protections. The Seventh Circuit agreed, recognizing that because smart meters record thousands of usage readings per month, they implicate the Fourth Amendment in ways that traditional meters do not.

After years of pressure, Facebook has updated its policy regarding law enforcement using fake profiles on the platform. They outwardly warned agencies that such profiles are contrary to the rules on misrepresentation and will be removed.

Police may not use a GPS device to track the movements of your vehicle without first getting a warrant

EFF fought the government’s attempts to track the location of a mobile phone user without sufficient evidence.

Judges can require warrants for cell-site location information

Service providers violate the Wiretap Act when they monitor users’ content without their consent

EFF handled this leading case with the ACLU of Washington State. In it a federal district court in the Eastern District of Washington held that the identities of 23 participants in an Infospace chatroom were protected from disclosure.

In January 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously confirmed that Americans have constitutional protections against GPS surveillance by law enforcement, holding that GPS tracking is a «search» under the Fourth Amendment.

On June 13, 2007, the New Jersey Township of Manalapan filed a malpractice suit against its former attorney Stuart Moskovitz, alleging misconduct regarding the Township’s purchase of polluted land in 2005. The decision to file suit was met by a lively debate in the regional press and among local bloggers.

A federal magistrate judge in San Jose, California denied a government request for historical cell site records, ordering the government to seek a search warrant for the information. The government appealed this order to U.S.

Defendant Aaron Graham was suspected in a series of armed robberies around Baltimore. Without a warrant, police obtained 221 days of historical cell site location information about Graham from Sprint. On appeal before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, EFF joined the ACLU, the Center for Democracy and Technology and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in an amicus brief, arguing police need a search warrant to obtain historical cell site records from a cell phone provider.

In this criminal case, the government installed a pole camera overlooking a defendant’s front yard and secretly recorded for more than a month.

EFF and the Center for Democracy and Technology («CDT») have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to crack down on warrantless searches of cell phones, arguing in two cases before the court that changing technology demands new guidelines for when the data on someone’s phone can be accessed and reviewed by investigators.

Along with EFF-Austin, the Texas Civil Rights Project and the ACLU of Texas, EFF urged the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to rule that a person has an expectation of privacy in the contents of their cell phone even when the phone is out of their control or custody.

EFF filed an amicus brief with the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, asking it to rule police must get a search warrant in order to access historical cell site information. We argued that as cell phones and especially smartphones become prevalent, and the number of cell towers and cell sites increases, the location information revealed by cell sites becomes more precise.

EFF urged the Washington State Supreme Court to recognize that text messages are “the 21st Century phone call” and require that law enforcement obtain a warrant before reading texts on someone’s phone.

EFF urged the high court of Massachusetts to protect the rights of passengers in cars that law enforcement are tracking with GPS surveillance technology, arguing that both the driver and the passenger of a car have legal standing to challenge the collection of sensitive location data gathered by the GPS devices.

In May 2011, EFF partnered with the ACLU and the ACLU of Vermont to urge the Vermont Supreme Court to authorize courts to impose limitations on the police’s ability to search computers and other forms of electronic evidence.

The California Electronic Communications Privacy Act (CalECPA), S.B. 178, requires state law enforcement to get a warrant before they can access electronic information about who we are, where we go, who we know, and what we do.

EFF and other civil liberties groups filed an amicus brief in Warshak v. United States urging the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hold that the government’s seizure of email without a warrant violated the Fourth Amendment and federal privacy statutes as well as the Justice Department’s own surveillance manual.

For almost 10 years, federal and local law enforcement agencies across the country have engaged in a massive and secretive telephone surveillance program known as “Hemisphere.” In July 2015, EFF had enough with the secrecy. We filed two separate lawsuits to force law enforcement agencies to release important information that would contribute to the public debate about the efficacy and legitimacy of the program.

EFF, along with Earth Rights International, represented activists, attorneys, journalists and others in fighting back against subpoenas issued by Chevron to email providers demanding information that would have provided a broad window into the movements as well as personal and political associations of our clients.

The Supreme Court cited EFF’s amicus brief in this landmark ruling declaring that law enforcement needs to get a warrant before obtaining cell phone location information

Security

EFF defended security researchers’ right to publicly discuss security flaws

EFF held Sony BMG accountable for infecting its customers’ computers with software that created grave security vulnerabilities and let the company spy on listening behavior.

Andrew “Weev” Auernheimer was convicted of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act («CFAA») in New Jersey federal court and sentenced to 41 months in federal prison in March of 2013 for revealing to media outlets that AT&T had configured its servers to allow the harvesting of iPad owners’ unsecured email addresses.

Nascimento worked as a cashier at the deli counter of a convenience store which had a lottery terminal. The store allowed employees to sell and validate lottery tickets for paying customers but prohibited them from purchasing lottery tickets for themselves or validating their own tickets.

Transparency

The Federal Circuit has changed its policies to give the public immediate access to briefs.EFF wrote a letter asking the court to make briefs available as soon as they are filed. The court will now allow immediate access to submitted briefs.

Fairfax County (Virginia) Police will be required to purge its database of ALPR data that isn’t linked to a criminal investigation and stop using ALPRs to passively collect data on people who aren’t suspected of criminal activity.

Federal prosecutors and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington clerk’s office have agreed to begin tracking and docketing various forms of warrantless surveillance requests and next year will issue reports every six months detailing the cases.

This decision helps the public learn more about how law enforcement use privacy invasive biometric technology. Law enforcement agencies are required to provide records of how this technology is used and this decision confirmed that the agency cannot refuse to supply email records, even if they find it ‘burdensome’.

EFF fought for transparent elections, forcing e-voting companies to comply with North Carolina state law.

EFF sued the DoJ to release FISC rulings that said that some NSA surveillance was unconstitutional

EFF lawsuit shedding light on how government used Section 215 of the Patriot Act to collect phone records

EFF defended the use of voter-verifiable paper trails in Florida.

EFF and ACLU won a ruling that the government must turn over information from criminal prosecutions in which federal law enforcement agencies obtained cell-site location information without a warrant.

California Supreme Court ruled that the license plate data of millions of law-abiding drivers, collected indiscriminately by police across the state, are not “investigative records” that law enforcement can keep secret

EFF filed an amicus arguing for the release of geographic mapping data under the California Public Records Act

In EFF’s lawsuit, a judge ordered the government to release previously withheld documents about intelligence agency misconduct.

Court ordered the Department of Justice to hand over documents in our FOIA lawsuit to obtain information that the government may be using to justify an expansion of a law that aids federal wiretapping

International

EFF represented Human Rights Watch in bringing transparency and privacy in DEA collected telephone records

Источник

Для чего мы создаем…

Eff org что это

About EFF

About

About EFF

Фонд электронного фронтира [Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF]

Читайте также

Создание электронного почтового ящика

Приложение 3. Описание электронного архива

Создание электронного почтового ящика

Глава 6 Специфика электронного общения

Термины электронного делопроизводства

Пример 28-3. Создание электронного диска

Фонд подаст…

Документы без печатей — Шифрование электронного документа

Приложение 3 ФОНД ЭВРИСТИЧЕСКИХ ПРИЕМОВ ПРОЕКТИРОВАНИЯ ПРОГРАММ

Информационный центр электронной приватности [Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC]

Contact EFF

About

Contact EFF

Secure Messaging Scorecard

Which apps and tools actually keep your messages safe?

Eff org что это

Creativity & Innovation

Free Speech

Privacy

Security

Transparency

International

Добавить комментарий Отменить ответ

About EFF

About

About EFF

Фонд электронного фронтира [Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF]

Читайте также

Создание электронного почтового ящика

Приложение 3. Описание электронного архива

Создание электронного почтового ящика

Глава 6 Специфика электронного общения

Термины электронного делопроизводства

Пример 28-3. Создание электронного диска

Фонд подаст…

Документы без печатей — Шифрование электронного документа

Приложение 3 ФОНД ЭВРИСТИЧЕСКИХ ПРИЕМОВ ПРОЕКТИРОВАНИЯ ПРОГРАММ

Информационный центр электронной приватности [Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC]

Contact EFF

About

Contact EFF

Secure Messaging Scorecard

Which apps and tools actually keep your messages safe?

Eff org что это

Creativity & Innovation

Free Speech

Privacy

Security

Transparency

International

Вам также понравится

Для чего культивируют землю

Для чего добавляют соду в самогон при приготовлении домашнего коньяка

Дроп кофе что это

Добавить комментарий Отменить ответ