Briar once promised a different way to connect. No servers. No cloud. Just phones talking directly to each other over Bluetooth, Wi-Fi or the Tor network. Journalists in protest zones, activists under surveillance, communities cut off from the internet all relied on it. Now the project sits in maintenance mode. Only critical security patches and bug fixes will arrive. New features? They wait.
The announcement landed quietly on July 9. The Briar project site spelled it out. “The project is still active but we’re only making essential security updates and bugfixes for now.” Rumors of a full shutdown had spread through privacy circles last year. Those rumors, the team says, no longer hold.
But the reasons run deep. For years the developers wrestled with stubborn problems. Battery drain chewed through phones during long operations. Background tasks on Android proved unreliable. Features many users expect, such as easy account backups or sending files, never arrived. Adding contacts offline felt clumsy. The user experience suffered.
They weighed big changes. A complete rewrite. Separate apps for online and offline modes. None came easily. And money remained tight. Without a clear long-term plan the team hesitated to chase grants. Work happened in spare hours. Last year they reached a hard choice. Shut it down. They prepared one final update for Android and the desktop client to keep the app working as long as possible.
Then voices from the community pushed back. Support poured in from users in the internet freedom and privacy space. New people kept downloading the app. The team reversed course. Maintenance mode became the compromise. Incremental fixes may come later. For now the focus stays narrow. Keep it secure. Keep it alive.
The decision reflects wider pressures on open-source privacy software. Grants from foundations have sustained Briar since its early days. The project lists support from the Small Media Foundation, Access Now, the Open Technology Fund, the NLnet Foundation, the Next Generation Internet programme and others. Yet that backing proved uneven. When major grants dried up the developers faced reality.
Similar stories play out across the sector. Tools built for high-risk users often depend on a handful of funders. When priorities shift those projects stall. Briar’s creators felt the strain. They avoided seeking new money without a solid roadmap. The result was a slow drift until the community’s reaction pulled them back.
Even in limited form Briar fills a unique spot. Most secure messengers assume constant internet access. Signal, WhatsApp, they route messages through central servers. Briar does not. It forms peer-to-peer meshes. Messages hop from device to device. In places where governments throttle the web or shut it down entirely the app keeps working. That capability drew human rights groups and reporters covering unrest.
Yet technical debt mounted. Android’s aggressive power management broke reliable background syncing. Tor integration added complexity. Desktop support arrived later and remained in beta. The team released updates such as Briar Desktop 0.6.0-beta and introduced a Briar Mailbox to improve connectivity. Those efforts helped but never erased the core pain points.
Now the roadmap narrows. Security remains the priority. Three vulnerabilities were found and fixed in recent years according to the project’s own posts. The current stance protects existing users without promising rapid evolution. And that stance carries risks. Competitors keep adding features. Users may drift toward apps that feel more polished even if they sacrifice some resilience.
The team itself consists of a small group. Nico Alt, Torsten Grote and Michael Rogers appear as primary contacts with PGP keys provided for secure outreach. They maintain a Mastodon account at @Briar on fosstodon.org. No large company backs them. No venture funding props them up. The project grew from ideals about decentralized communication and stayed close to those roots.
But spare-time development has limits. Longstanding issues such as high battery usage continue. Unreliable operation on modern Android versions persists. The difficult offline contact exchange process remains. Without dedicated resources those problems may linger for years. The announcement acknowledges as much. Incremental progress is the hope. Not transformation.
Privacy advocates reacted quickly online. Discussions on Hacker News highlighted the post within hours of its release. One thread drew dozens of comments weighing the trade-offs between pure peer-to-peer design and practical usability. Some users expressed disappointment. Others praised the honesty. A few pointed to alternative projects exploring related ideas such as Cwtch or updates to Secure Scuttlebutt protocols. None match Briar’s exact mix of offline-first and Tor-based connectivity.
Recent coverage stayed sparse. A July 12 post on MediaThrive WatchTower noted the shift alongside other tech news. The story echoed the original announcement without adding fresh reporting. On X, or Twitter as some still call it, the news spread mostly through automated Hacker News accounts and a handful of privacy-focused users. One Japanese-language post on July 9 summarized the key points for a security audience. Interest appears genuine but contained.
The bigger picture involves more than one app. Internet shutdowns and network throttling occur with troubling frequency. Governments from Myanmar to Sudan have cut access during protests. Activists need tools that survive those cuts. Briar delivered that survival through direct device links and delay-tolerant networking. Its maintenance status raises questions about who will carry that torch next.
Some developers in the space experiment with new approaches. Mesh networks using Bluetooth Low Energy show promise. Others explore WebRTC for browser-based peer connections. Yet building something as battle-tested as Briar takes time, money and sustained focus. The project’s history demonstrates both the demand and the difficulty.
Funding acknowledgments in the announcement read like a who’s who of digital rights grantmakers. The Open Internet Tools Project, Internews, eQualit.ie and the Prototype Fund all contributed at various stages. That patchwork support kept the lights on but never scaled the team. When the money paused the work paused with it.
So the project continues. Smaller. Slower. Still useful for those who understand its limits. Users in censorship-heavy regions may keep it installed for exactly the scenarios it handles best. Journalists covering elections or crackdowns can still pass messages without relying on local telecom infrastructure. The app won’t vanish tomorrow.
Yet the maintenance label signals a holding pattern. The team hopes to chip away at old problems eventually. Battery optimization. Better backups. Smoother contact pairing. Whether those improvements arrive depends on renewed funding, clearer plans and the stamina of a small volunteer group.
The privacy community now watches closely. Will other funders step in with targeted support for offline messaging? Can the core developers recruit help or pivot to a sustainable model? Or does Briar join a list of worthy experiments that burned bright before settling into quiet upkeep?
Its story offers a cautionary lesson. Building software that resists surveillance and censorship requires more than clever code. It demands steady resources, realistic roadmaps and honest reckoning with technical trade-offs. Briar’s creators made that reckoning public. Their decision may disappoint some users. It also models transparency that many projects lack.
Meanwhile the app keeps running. Messages still travel phone to phone. In places where the internet fails Briar still tries to connect. That persistence matters even if the pace has slowed. The team bought time. Now comes the harder part. Deciding what happens after maintenance ends.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication