The EFF seems to be going the way of many advocacy groups, where as time goes by their positions on the things they advocate for become less nuanced and they stop taking into consideration how those things fit into the big picture.
An example of this is the National Rifle Association (NRA). They used to think that carrying guns around in public should be restricted and require licensing, and that dealers should need to be licensed, and that some kinds of guns should be restricted.
For the EFF the thing that made me think that they are going down that road was during the controversy over Apple's plans to scan for CSAM. Apple had actually announced two things: (1) scanning on-device for CSAM in material about to be uploaded to iCloud, and (2) scanning on-device of devices with parental controls enabled to block messages that contained content that might be harmful to children.
Most of the discussion was about #1, both from the EFF and from everybody else. #2 was much less discussed.
Here's how #2 worked in the case where you have a child who is 13 or older with a phone on your family plan and you have enabled scanning.
1. I send your kid pictures of my dick.
2. The software temporarily blocks that and gives your child a modal dialog telling them it blocked something because their parents think it might be harmful, and asking the child if they want to go ahead and view the material.
3. If the child says no the material remains blocked and nothing else happens.
4. If the child says yes my dick picture is unblocked and nothing else happens.
If your child is under 13, here is how it goes:
1-3: same as the 13 and above case.
4. If the child says yes they are given another modal asking of they are sure and reiterating that their parents think the material may be harmful, and telling them if they do elect to view it their parents will be notified. They are again asked if they want to proceed to view it or not.
5. If the child says no, the material remains blocked and nothing else happens.
6. If the child says yes my dick picture is unblocked, and the parents are notified.
The EFF objected to this, on the grounds that #6 violates my privacy since I sent my dick pictures to your kid, not you, and did not consent to you getting access.
WTF? It used to be that a big argument from privacy groups against server-side scanning to protect children is that children shouldn't be getting to the bad parts of the net in the first place, and keeping the kids away was something the parents should take care of with things like time restrictions and parental control software.