The Evolving Financial Landscape of The Tor Project: A Multi-faceted Analysis of Public and Private Funding
Introduction:
The Tor Project, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing human rights and freedoms by creating and deploying anonymity and privacy technologies.1 Its mission is to support the unrestricted availability and use of these tools and further their scientific and popular understanding.1 For years, a central point of public inquiry has been the dynamic and often paradoxical relationship between this mission and the organization's historical reliance on U.S. government funding. This has led to a common public perception of a potential conflict of interest—a government funding a tool designed, in part, to evade government surveillance.
This report provides a definitive, evidence-based account that synthesizes fragmented financial data, demystifies common misconceptions, and provides a nuanced analysis of the strategic rationale behind Tor’s funding model. By examining the project's genesis, charting its financial evolution, and detailing its contemporary funding ecosystem, this analysis aims to move beyond simple percentages to explore the core motivations of all parties involved and the technical and administrative safeguards that preserve the project's independence.
I. Genesis and Foundational Funding: From Military Lab to a Global Tool
The origins of the Tor Project are intrinsically linked to the U.S. government's own security needs. In the mid-1990s, three researchers at the U.S. Naval Research Lab (NRL)—David Goldschlag, Mike Reed, and Paul Syverson—developed the foundational concept of "onion routing".2 This was a direct response to a critical vulnerability: the internet's routing design, which exposed metadata that could compromise military and intelligence personnel communicating abroad.3 The technology was conceived to hide the origin and destination of internet traffic under multiple layers of encryption.3
The project's transition from a government research effort to a publicly available tool was a strategic necessity. The technical design of onion routing required a large number of diverse, everyday users to provide what is known as "cover traffic".3 A network used by only a small, identifiable group, such as military or intelligence agents, would be inherently insecure, as all traffic on the network could be assumed to belong to that group.4 This reality led to the core operational philosophy that "anonymity loves company".3 For the network to be effective for high-risk users, it needed to be used by a massive, global public. This strategic need for a broad user base led to a unique alliance between the U.S. Navy and the privacy-focused "cypherpunk" community, ultimately resulting in the public release of the code under a free license in 2004.3 The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) then began funding the work of Tor's creators, Roger Dingledine and Nick Mathewson.2 This led to the formal founding of The Tor Project, Inc. as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit in 2006 to continue development.1 Early financial supporters included the U.S. International Broadcasting Bureau, Google, and the Swedish government.1
II. A Decade of Financial Evolution: Trends and Turning Points (2012-2022)
The financial history of the Tor Project reveals a complex pattern of high dependency on U.S. government grants followed by a strategic effort to diversify its funding base. This period is marked by fluctuations that can be fully understood only by looking beyond simple percentages and examining the specific grant cycles and the evolution of financial reporting.
In 2012, The Tor Project was heavily reliant on U.S. government funds, which accounted for 80% of its approximately $2 million annual budget.1 Major contributors during this period included the U.S. State Department, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and the National Science Foundation, with a stated purpose "to aid democracy advocates in authoritarian states".1 This high level of dependency continued into 2013, when the project received over $1.8 million in federal funds.8 Audited financials and Form 990 filings for that year reported a total revenue between $2.87 million and $3.53 million, respectively.9 Specific grants included $256,900 from the Department of State and a pass-through grant of $830,269 from the Department of Defense via SRI International.8 The reliance on U.S. government sources remained high in 2015, with 85% of total funding attributed to the U.S. government, while the Open Technology Fund (OTF), a U.S.-funded entity, provided $900,000 for a 12-month period.11
The trend began to shift in 2016, with the U.S. government portion of funding dropping to 76% of total revenue [user query]. That year, the OTF provided $707,300, and the National Science Foundation issued several grants for specific research projects, including one for $350,000 and another for $134,200.11 A more significant decline occurred in 2017, when the U.S. government's contribution dropped to 51% [user query]. According to ProPublica, the Form 990 for fiscal year 2017 showed total revenue of over $4.13 million, with a greater proportion coming from contributions.10
The trajectory of U.S. government funding is not a simple linear decline but a complex, project-based flow. After a low point of 38.17% in 2020–2021, the percentage of government funding increased to 53.5% in 2021–2022.14 This increase, while seemingly a reversal of the diversification trend, is not necessarily an indicator of failure but rather a reflection of the cyclical nature of grant funding.14 The organization's blog post from November 2023 explicitly states that this increase was not a sign that they were failing to diversify but rather that they were continuing to achieve their long-term goal of relying less on one single source.14 The ProPublica data confirms this, showing a shift in financial reporting over time from a broad "Program Services" category to a more specific "Government Grants" line item.10
To provide a clear, consolidated view of this dynamic financial history, the following table presents the key financial data points from various sources.
Table 1: Tor Project Annual Revenue and U.S. Government Funding (2012-2024)
It is important to note the distinction between the audited financial statements and Form 990 filings. The Tor Project's audited financials often include in-kind contributions (e.g., donated services like software development and translations) as a form of revenue, while the Form 990 includes them as an expense.14 This accounting nuance can create a difference of nearly a million dollars in reported revenue for a given year and is a crucial detail for anyone conducting a thorough financial analysis of the organization.14
III. The Contemporary Funding Ecosystem: A Broader Coalition
The Tor Project's strategic diversification efforts have resulted in a broad and complex funding ecosystem that now includes a wide range of donors beyond the U.S. government.
U.S. Government Grants in Detail
While the percentage of U.S. government funding has fluctuated, the support remains significant and is tied to specific, mission-aligned projects. Key U.S. government agencies and the projects they fund include:
U.S. Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL): The DRL, which leads U.S. efforts to promote democracy and human rights globally, funds projects like "Empowering Communities in the Global South to Bypass Censorship" and "Making the Tor network faster & more reliable for users in Internet-repressive places".6 These grants are often multi-year and focus on specific, measurable objectives, such as improving censorship detection and streamlining network performance.14
National Science Foundation (NSF): The NSF provides funding for academic and collaborative research projects on topics such as "Defending against website fingerprinting in Tor" 13 and the development of a "Next-Generation Anonymous Communication Experimentation (ACE) Framework" through institutions like Georgetown University.3 This type of funding is more akin to a research grant than a procurement contract, as Tor co-founder Roger Dingledine has noted.1
Open Technology Fund (OTF): A U.S.-funded entity, OTF has been a long-term supporter of The Tor Project, with a total funding amount of over $3.5 million over a decade.11 Their grants have been instrumental in ensuring the resilience of the underlying technology and improving the usability of the Tor Browser for non-technical users.11
Table 2: Key U.S. Government Grants by Agency and Purpose (2013-2024)
The Rise of Non-Governmental Support
A core strategic goal of The Tor Project has been to diversify its funding to reduce reliance on any single source.17 This has been a pronounced success, particularly in the area of individual donations. The organization has explicitly appealed to its user base to become financially self-sufficient.18 This effort has paid off, with individual donations more than doubling from 2018 to 2019, reaching over $833,000.19 The most recent 2024 year-end campaign successfully raised over $816,000, which helped propel the organization towards greater stability.18
The project has also attracted significant support from private foundations, philanthropies, and privacy-oriented companies. Supporters include the Ford Foundation, the Open Society Foundations (founded by George Soros), Craig Newmark Philanthropies, and Jack Dorsey's #StartSmall initiative.6 Corporate and other support comes from a variety of sources, including Fastly, which generously hosts Tor Browser downloads, and companies like Mullvad VPN, Proton VPN, and Brave.6
IV. The Mechanics of Accountability and Independence
The core of the public's concern centers on whether government funding compromises the Tor Project's independence. An examination of its technical and administrative structures reveals that its autonomy is not merely a matter of funding source but is a function of its fundamental architecture.
Navigating the Audit Trail
The Tor Project maintains a high degree of financial transparency by publishing both its audited financial statements and Form 990 tax filings.14 Audits are a standard requirement for organizations that receive federal grant money over a certain threshold, providing a layer of formal accountability and public scrutiny.10 These documents provide detailed breakdowns of revenue and expenses, including the specific government grants and their associated projects.15 This level of public disclosure serves as a crucial check on how funding is used and helps to build trust within the community.17
The Technical and Social Safeguards
The primary defense against external control is the project's technical and social structure. Tor is a free and open-source project, meaning its source code is publicly available for anyone to inspect.4 This transparency makes it extremely difficult for any entity, including a government, to secretly insert a "backdoor" without being discovered by the global community of security researchers and developers who constantly review the code.4
Furthermore, the Tor network is not centrally controlled by the Tor Project, Inc. It is a decentralized network run by thousands of independent, volunteer-operated relays worldwide.22 This distributed nature makes it fundamentally resistant to control or shutdown by any single government or organization. The Tor Project's role is to develop the software, not to operate the network itself. This model is a direct application of the "anonymity loves company" paradigm: the project's success and security are dependent on a global, independent community, making it impractical for any one funder to subvert its mission for private gain.
V. A Future in Flux: Sustainability and Strategic Outlook
The Tor Project recognizes the challenges of maintaining a stable funding base from multiple, often transient, sources. Its long-term strategic goals are focused on ensuring the network's sustainability and continued growth.
The organization's strategy is centered on scaling the network to handle an increase in users, particularly in anticipation of potential integrations like a Tor tab within the Firefox browser.24 This will require ongoing investment in performance and usability, especially for users with slower connections, older devices, or limited data access.24 Individual donations are seen as a critical component of this strategy, as they provide flexible, reliable income that can be used for projects not covered by larger, more restrictive grants, such as live user support and community outreach.25
To further future-proof its financial model, The Tor Project is exploring new and emerging funding models, including blockchain-based approaches and quadratic funding.26 This proactive approach to fundraising demonstrates a clear commitment to reducing its reliance on any single source and ensuring the long-term health and independence of the organization.
Conclusion
The U.S. government's funding of The Tor Project is a complex, multi-faceted, and evolving relationship that is best understood as a strategic investment rather than an act of state control. The government's motivations are rooted in its own security needs and foreign policy objectives—specifically, enabling secure communication for its own personnel and supporting internet freedom for democracy advocates in authoritarian states.1 The paradox of this funding is resolved by the network's fundamental architecture: a decentralized, open-source platform that requires a large, diverse user base to function effectively for anyone.
The Tor Project's independence is not a happy accident but a direct result of its transparent, auditable financial practices and, more importantly, its technical and social design. Far from being a tool for state surveillance, its funding is a transparent and publicly documented process that upholds the project's core mission of providing anonymity and freedom of expression—a mission that, paradoxically, benefits both citizens in restrictive regimes and the U.S. government's own interests.
Works cited
The Tor Project - Wikipedia, accessed September 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tor_Project
History - Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.torproject.org/about/history/
The Secret History of Tor: How a Military Project Became a Lifeline ..., accessed September 19, 2025, https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/the-secret-history-of-tor-how-a-military-project-became-a-lifeline-for-privacy/
Tor was made by the U.S. Government? - Reddit, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/TOR/comments/sdkf06/tor_was_made_by_the_us_government/
Tor (network) - Wikipedia, accessed September 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(network)
Supporters - Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.torproject.org/about/supporters/
en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(network)#:~:text=Tor%20has%2C%20for%20example%2C%20been,through%20the%20Broadcasting%20Board%20of
Feds Gave Tor Project $1.8M While NSA Actively Tried to Destroy It - Reason Magazine, accessed September 19, 2025, https://reason.com/2014/07/30/feds-gave-tor-project-18m-while-also-act/
Who Funds Tor Project May Surprise You, or Maybe Not - eWEEK, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.eweek.com/security/who-funds-tor-project-may-surprise-you-or-maybe-not/
Tor Project Inc - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica, accessed September 19, 2025, https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/208096820
Tor Project | OTF, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.opentech.fund/projects-we-support/supported-projects/tor-project/
Támogatók - Tor Projekt, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.torproject.org/hu/about/supporters/
The Tor Project (ZFLJCT6DHBD7) - HigherGov, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.highergov.com/awardee/the-tor-project-inc-13263788/
Transparency, Openness, and Our 2021-2022 Financials | The Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://blog.torproject.org/transparency-openness-and-our-2021-and-2022-financials/
Revenue and Expense - GuideStar, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.guidestar.org/Profile/GetRevenueAndExpenseSheet?ein=20-8096820&guid=7d68a7b7-2a9f-4613-a985-1638da87abdf
The Tor Project, Inc. Financial Statements and Independent Auditor's Report June 30, 2023, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.torproject.org/static/findoc/2022-2023-The_Tor_Project-AuditedFinancialStatements.pdf?h=4643ad20
Who funds Tor? | Tor Project | Support, accessed September 19, 2025, https://support.torproject.org/misc/misc-3/
Celebrating 2024 year-end campaign | The Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://blog.torproject.org/celebrating-2024-yec/
2019 End of Year Campaign Wrap Up - Thanks for Helping Tor Take Back the Internet, accessed September 19, 2025, https://blog.torproject.org/2019-campaign-wrapup-tor-take-back-the-internet/
Posts in category 'financials' | The Tor Project - Tor Blog, accessed September 19, 2025, https://blog.torproject.org/category/financials/
THE TOR PROJECT, INC. Financial Statements June 30, 2022, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.torproject.org/static/findoc/2021-2022-The_Tor_Project-AuditedFinancialStatements.pdf?h=1fe92666
Was TOR created by the US govt.? - Reddit, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/TOR/comments/anq680/was_tor_created_by_the_us_govt/
Transparency, Openness, and our 2014 Financials | The Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://blog.torproject.org/transparency-openness-and-our-2014-financials/
The Tor Project Inc. - GuideStar Profile, accessed September 19, 2025, https://www.guidestar.org/profile/20-8096820
Thank you! Our 2023 year-end fundraising results | The Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://blog.torproject.org/2023-fundraising-results-thank-you/
Frequently asked questions - Tor Project, accessed September 19, 2025, https://donate.torproject.org/faq/
No comments:
Post a Comment