Here are 6 reasons we hate the new cryptocurrency surveillance provision buried in Biden's infrastructure bill:
#1 It will require new surveillance of everyday users of cryptocurrency.
#2 It could force software creators and others who do not custody cryptocurrency for their users to implement cumbersome surveillance systems or stop offering services in the United States.
#3 It will create more honeypots of private information about cryptocurrency users that could attract malicious actors.
#4 It will create more legal complexity to developing blockchain projects or verifying transactions in the United States—likely leading to more innovation moving overseas.
#5 It is impossible for miners and developers to comply with these new reporting requirements.
#6 It creates uncertainty about the ability to conduct cryptocurrency transactions directly with others via open source code, for example through smart contracts and decentralized exchanges.
Any smart cryptocurrency regulation should safeguard privacy, innovation, and decentralization. This fast-moving provision fails those standards. eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Today at 5pm: you won't want to miss our final EFF30 Fireside Chat! We’ll be discussing EFF’s history and what’s needed now, with early leaders and founders of the digital rights movement Esther Dyson, Mitch Kapor, and John Gilmore: eff.org/event/eff30-fi…
If you’ve missed any of the Fireside chats we’ve held to commemorate our 30th anniversary, we’ve got recaps!
Author, security technologist, and EFF board member Bruce Schneier joined us to discuss the future of the "Crypto Wars." eff.org/deeplinks/2020…
Longtime supporter of digital rights and co-author of Section 230, Senator @RonWyden is a well-recognized champion of free speech.
This story—about a Substack publication outing a priest with location data from Grindr—shows how easy it is for anyone to take advantage of data brokers’ stores to cause real harm. washingtonpost.com/religion/2021/…
This is not the first time Grindr has been in the spotlight for sharing user information with third-party data brokers. The Norwegian Consumer Council singled it out in a 2020 report… forbrukerradet.no/undersokelse/n…
...before the Norwegian Data Protection Authority fined Grindr earlier this year, specifically warning that the app’s data-mining practices could put users at serious risk in places where homosexuality is illegal. nytimes.com/2021/01/25/bus…
One year ago, we launched the Atlas of Surveillance. It’s the largest public database of known police surveillance technologies that have been used across the country. Check it out: atlasofsurveillance.org
Have you used the Atlas of Surveillance to look up what surveillance tech police in your area are using?
Do local police have Real-Time Crime Centers? Face Recognition? Cell-site simulators? Find out at atlasofsurveillance.org!
In Nestlé v. Doe, the Supreme Court narrowed one of the few tools that can be used to bring justice to victims of human rights abuses enabled by surveillance and censorship tools sold by U.S. companies.
The Court held that making “operational decisions” in the U.S. is not a sufficient basis for jurisdiction against a company under the Alien Tort Statute, a law that specifically incorporates international law into U.S. law.
EFF filed an amicus brief warning that governments around the world have relied on U.S. technology companies like Cisco and Sandvine to build the tools of repression.
Victory! The Supreme Court ruled today that California can’t require organizations to hand donor names over to the state, saying doing so threatens groups’ First Amendment rights. We filed a brief with the court making that argument. eff.org/deeplinks/2021…
Groups that challenge or oppose state policies have legitimate fears that members and donors, or their businesses, could become targets of harassment or retaliation by the government itself, we said. @EFF
The court's ruling today was the right call. Everyone should be able to express and promote their viewpoints through associational affiliations without personally exposing themselves to a political firestorm or even governmental retaliation. @EFF