Is EFF a scam?

>want some facts
How about you mention some of the things you've heard first? Otherwise I can list off facts, but they won't be about what you are asking since I don't know where you're getting your information

>>62304861
OP here. Okay, I've heard that they are being funded massivelly by Google and that some of their extensions were excluded from official repositories due to malicious code included in them, Tor was funded by Open Society (don't know why it's a bad thing but some coworkers said that this foundations was created by George Soros, a hungarian magnate), and also, that both (EFF and Tor) are honeypots.

>>62304994
>hey guys I heard some unsourced unjustifiable bullshit

Kindest interpretation here is you're a shill trying to sow despair by attacking pro-privacy groups. Most likely interpretation is you're a shitposter, and a poor one at that.

Assuming you're talking about the electronic frontier foundation, don't they do a bunch of open source work? If that's the case their code would have already been looked into, or it's currently being looked into. I'm not one to really fall for conspiracy theories, but just because Google gives them a good chunk of funds doesn't mean they're doing googles bidding. Honestly, a quick Google search on what you say was created by whoever might lead you to answers or clear up basic misconceptions you might be having.
I have no opinion on George, so unless there is direct evidence on him messing with, or funding to mess with, the software and processes the EFF does, it's really irrelevant to bring him up at all

>>62305118
I agree, but why would that company donate to this foundation? What are the chances of a company that makes huge money with advertising be sympathetic of a pro-privacy foundation?

>>62305175
Maybe they agree with the foundation, about some other things. Where did his donations go to within it? As nice as it is to speculate, jumping to conclusions without actual evidence is bad practice. Look into where within the foundation his donations went, if they had any stipulations, etc and then make your conclusions from that.
>inb4 can't find anything therefore evil intent, abandon the EFF

>>62304653
The only thing remotely close I've heard about any of that is this, which is strictly related to HTTPS Everywhere, not EFF as a whole:
https://www.reddit.com/r/privacytoolsIO/comments/5qnq6j/time_to_stop_recommending_https_everywhere/
The "tor is a honeypot" thing is a /g/ meme but it could be real, we don't know, no one ever saw factual evidence.

Weak bait overall.

>>62305175
>EFF makes HTTPS Everywhere
>Google pushes HTTPS hardcore (first major browser to bitch about HTTP login pages, IIRC)
>Google gives money to EFF for HTTPSE./etc
I mean, that's probably not why but it's a pretty good educated guess.