Articles by Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
![The logo of the Facebook, Messenger, Whatsapp and Twitter applications are displayed on the screen of an Apple iPhone in Paris, France, 6 April 2018, Photo Illustration by Chesnot/Getty Images](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/international-who-has-your-back-platforms-getty.jpg)
Who has your back? How companies respond to government censorship
A handful of social media and app store platforms have emerged as leaders in transparency, publicly disclosing how often and why they comply with takedown requests.
![Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) addresses protesters outside the Federal Communication Commission building to rally against the end of net neutrality rules in Washington, D.C., 14 December 2017, Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/usa-net-neutrality-house-representatives-getty.jpg)
The path to victory on net neutrality in the House of Representatives
After the historic vote in the Senate, it’s time to win in the House of Representatives. While many think the uphill battle there makes it a lost cause, EFF argues that together we can keep the Internet free and open.
![Alexander ShcherbakTASS via Getty Images](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/iran-telegram-app-blocked-getty.jpg)
Iran: Block on Telegram is a blow to freedom of expression
Serving an estimated 40 million Iranians, Telegram is crucial to accessing information in the country and must be unblocked.
![Members of the Colorado River Tribes hold a banner to show their support for Native Americans of the Standing Rock reservation who oppose the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), at the protest camp near Cannon Ball, North Dakota, 3 September 2016, ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/international-standing-rock-online-censorship-getty.jpg)
Visuals: How real-life inequity is replicated online
Offline/Online is a series of visuals by Onlinecensorship.org that explores how marginalized communities –often faced with persecution and violence offline –also face censorship on social media.
![A woman brings flowers to a makeshift memorial on the one-year anniversary of the San Bernardino massacre in San Bernardino, California, 2 December 2016, David McNew/Getty Images](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/united-states-san-bernardino-shooter-iphone-getty.jpg)
FBI could have gotten into the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone, but leadership didn’t say that
The FBI’s legal fight with Apple in 2016 to create backdoor access to a San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone was more focused on creating legal precedent than it was on accessing the one specific device.
![Council of Europe Headquarters, Strasbourg, France, Creative Commons](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/coepalaisx641.jpg)
International Cybercrime Convention’s second protocol requires civil society’s input
Nearly 100 rights groups asked the Council of Europe to engage civil society in their negotiation of a second cybercrime convention protocol, which is aimed at setting the terms for data access by law enforcement to servers outside their geographic authority.
![Sample public key of the encryption software GnuPG, an Open-Source-version of PGP, 17 June 2015, Dünzlullstein bild via Getty Images](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/international-secure-messaging-pgp-getty.jpg)
Thinking about what you need in a secure messenger
The goal of this post is not to assess which messenger provides the best “security” features by certain technical standards, but to help you think about precisely the kind of security you need.
![The western front of the United States Capitol, 26 December 2011, By United_States_Capitol_-_west_front.jpg: Architect of the Capitolderivative work: O.J. - United_States_Capitol_-_west_front.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17800708](https://ifex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/united-states-capitol_west_front_wikimedia.jpg)
USA: How Congress censored the Internet
In passing SESTA/FOSTA, lawmakers failed to separate their good intentions from bad law.