Same old song every year. The EU wants total digital control and sells it to us as child protection. The only new thing is that this time, the UK jumped ahead and has already introduced mandatory ID checks. And although the country is no longer bound by EU rules, European governments are now using this move as a perfect pretext to crack down harder themselves.
The plan is not only that in the future all users of many — or even all — online platforms will have to identify themselves with their ID, but also that every private message, every picture, and every file will be scanned by the state. Without suspicion. Without cause. What supposedly „protects our children” is, in truth, the biggest attack on privacy, anonymity, and freedom of expression in the history of the EU.
The First Step Toward Total Control
The idea sounds simple to some. Anyone who has to identify themselves online and whose chats are automatically scanned by the state leaves no trace for illegal activities. But this assumption ignores the reality of the internet. Criminals, especially in the areas of child abuse or organized hate groups, have long since stopped operating only on platforms like Reddit, Discord, or YouTube, but instead use the Darknet, encrypted channels, or VPNs and fake identities.
The general public, on the other hand, would be affected. Journalists, whistleblowers, people with mental health issues, marginalized groups. All of them would lose their safe spaces through the loss of anonymity and the knowledge that every private message could be read. Online communication would no longer be free, but monitored. The digital space would become a surveillance tool.
Another blind spot in these surveillance plans is the question of how it would even be determined that someone poses a threat. Will certain words or sentence fragments in the future be automatically filtered out by an AI and sent to the nearest police station, even if they are completely harmless in context? The technology is nowhere near advanced enough to reliably detect language, irony, or private inside jokes. The risk of false alarms is enormous, and it is naïve to believe that such mistakes would not have serious consequences. Instead of investing in half baked AI scanners, governments should focus on the places where real problems have gone unsolved for years: offenders who are not convicted despite clear evidence. Stalkers who keep terrorizing their victims despite clear documentation. Anyone who remains inactive here while at the same time seeking to monitor the entire population is proving that this is no longer about safety, but about control.
What Does the Internet Say About It?
On Reddit, Mastodon and in forums, resistance is forming. Many users are openly voicing their concerns. In a thread on r/deutschland, one post reads:
„As soon as we all have to upload our IDs to use chat platforms, there will be a gigantic data leak. Hackers are already dreaming about it.” — u/DigitalGegenwart
Another Redditor puts it even more bluntly:
„We are building a system right now that, in the wrong hands, could become a digital dictatorship.” — u/MetaKritiker
This criticism is more than fearmongering. The introduction of mandatory ID checks does not only mean new identification hurdles, but also central databases full of sensitive information — a paradise for hackers and a ticking time bomb for data protection.
Not Just a Technical Problem, but a Social One
Many warn that such a measure will have a negative impact on social openness and mental health. People use the internet as a place where they can speak anonymously about topics they would never address in real life: suicidal thoughts, trauma, sexuality, violence, discrimination.
„I dared to write about my suicidal thoughts for the first time in an anonymous forum — without anonymity I would never have done it.” — from r/depression
With mandatory identification, such safe spaces disappear. The risk of being recognized or tracked, whether by family, employers or the state, leads to silence. A climate of self censorship emerges.
Whistleblowers, Activists, Journalists in Danger
In authoritarian states, total control over digital communication is already a reality, with catastrophic consequences for press freedom and civil society. If similar mechanisms arise in Germany or Europe, people who want to expose wrongdoing or voice criticism will lose all safety.
The revelations of the Panama Papers or by Edward Snowden would not have been possible under an ID requirement. The source would have automatically exposed themselves and put their life in danger.
Dangerous Infrastructure: Who Protects Our Data?
Alongside the social risks, there is the technical question: Who hosts, protects and controls the identification systems? Government, platform operators, third party providers — vulnerabilities are everywhere. Even today we see how often state systems themselves become targets of cyberattacks. With centralized storage of ID data, a treasure trove of information is created that, with a single leak, could endanger millions of people through identity theft, blackmail or social engineering.
Child Protection or Political Pretext?
The argument of „for the sake of the children” seems like a pretext. Real child protection work needs more personnel, better training and international law enforcement. Instead, a general suspicion is cast over all internet users. Those who criticize this are quickly seen as insensitive, yet the criticism is both justified and necessary.
Rather than seriously holding platform operators accountable by making harmful content inaccessible in the first place, or investing in education, schools, parental awareness and digital media literacy, the entire population is placed under general suspicion. Why must 99 % of people be monitored and scanned just because 1 % of offenders commit these crimes? A targeted, preventive strategy would actually protect children. Mass surveillance, on the other hand, mainly creates a climate of mistrust.
Suddenly the Money Appears
It’s amazing how quickly governments can act when it comes to laws that benefit themselves or from which they think they are the exception. Suddenly funds appear that were previously supposedly „not planned in the budget.” IT infrastructure? No problem, if it serves to monitor chats and collect IDs. Data leaks? Oh, those will somehow be covered up or mysteriously forgotten. But woe betide when it comes to real reforms like a modern education system, a fair pension system, effective integration, or investments that would actually strengthen society in the long term. Then it’s said to be too complicated, too expensive or „unfortunately not the right time.” Instead, they rely on the tried and true political trick: close their eyes, sit out the problem and hope it solves itself. If necessary, in the next legislative period.
Constitutionally Questionable
The planned ID requirement touches on fundamental rights:
- The right to informational self-determination
- Freedom of expression, especially in the digital space
- The right to anonymity, particularly for vulnerable groups
The Federal Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized that surveillance must not be without cause and that measures must always remain proportionate. The broad, blanket ID requirement hardly meets these conditions.
Positive Aspects? They Exist — But With Conditions
Despite all the criticism, there are still some potentially sensible aspects to a targeted ID requirement and chat monitoring if implemented smartly, limited, and securely:
- Fighting online crime: fewer fake profiles, scams, blackmail
- More efficient law enforcement: quicker action on real offenses
- Child protection: age verification for certain content could make abuse harder
- Responsibility in debates: less hate speech, fake news, trolls
- Security in online commerce: more trust through real profiles
But: all this only works if data protection is extremely high, platforms act responsibly, and not all data is stored centrally. So far, the risks clearly outweigh the benefits.
And Now, Honestly: Who’s Actually Controlling Whom?
While citizens soon have to upload their IDs just to open a subreddit on Reddit, post a comment, or share a meme on Discord and our private chats will be read, our dear politicians naturally remain untouched by all of this. Their chat histories mysteriously disappear, their meetings with lobbyists happen in half shadows, and their texts seem to regularly delete themselves. Maybe an exclusive feature for government devices. Control for the people, discretion for the powers that be. Because transparency is important. But please only downwards.
And while we’re at it… When will Ursula von der Leyen’s chat histories actually be published? Shouldn’t she lead by example here? While millions soon have to identify themselves online with their ID cards (of course, for the sake of the children), one of many questions remains unanswered: Where are the infamous messages from the EU Commission president to Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla? The famous texts about the billion-dollar vaccine deal that are allegedly just „no longer findable.” Maybe we don’t need new internet surveillance but first a functioning undo button for deleted politicians’ chats.
Two Classes, One Law?
With all these plans for total surveillance, one inevitably asks: Does this actually apply to politicians as well—or just the common people? Will the Bundestag soon be scanned with surveillance software? Will ministers have to report their private chat histories to the state? Or are we once again witnessing how laws are made to work top-down, not the other way around?
Because while citizens will soon face real consequences for a satirical comment, a controversial meme, or a critical forum post, from account bans to police visits to charges, it remains questionable whether government officials, lobbyists, or large corporations will be equally monitored, recorded, or sanctioned.
Spoiler: Probably not.
In practice, surveillance mainly hits those who have no PR department and no constitutional judges on speed dial. What arises is no “safe space for children” but a climate of fear, self censorship, and legal arbitrariness. For everyone except those shaping the system.
Authoritarian States as Role Models?
For a long time, the surveillance state was the symbol of authoritarian regimes, loudly opposed by democracies. China, Russia, Iran: countries known for mass surveillance, internet censorship, and real-name requirements.
- In China, the state controls communication completely, including a social credit system.
- Russia stores communication data and monitors regime-critical content.
- Iran forces users to identify themselves; platforms are blocked or censored.
Europe criticized these practices as undemocratic for years. And now?
The EU wants it too. Officially, the aim is to protect children from abuse, prevent hate speech, or combat disinformation. But in practice, widespread control of digital communication is on the table: chat monitoring, upload filters, mandatory ID checks. Our government members want an exception for themselves. And again, it only applies to citizens. Not the higher-ups.
Civil rights organizations warn that what is emerging here is not a safe space but a control instrument. And if you wonder whether this even works, just take a look at the UK.
There, age and identity checks are already mandatory for certain online content. Users must upload selfies and ID documents on platforms whose data protection practices are more than questionable.
The result? Digital masquerade. Many cover their faces with video game characters like Mario or Shrek to hide their identity and protect their data. A silent protest that at the same time shows how little trust remains in state-authorized surveillance.
The curious thing is: It still works (for now). And it makes clear how absurd and at the same time disturbing this development is.
Welcome to the Scan Age
According to a leaked memo, the EU Parliament is pushing for an agreement on the controversial chat monitoring proposal (CSAM scanning). As the digital rights organization Netzpolitik reports, the parliament threatened on July 11 to block the extension of the current temporary voluntary scanning rule—a temporary regulation allowing messaging services to scan user chats on request—if the Council does not agree to a mandatory scanning obligation.
„This political blackmail forces a bad decision and contradicts the parliament’s own declared position against mass surveillance,” said former Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer to TechRadar. Denmark reintroduced the controversial law on the very first day of its EU Council presidency. New obligations for all messengers in Europe to scan chats could thus be decided as early as October.
Conclusion: Freedom at Risk
The EU is moving in a direction it once sharply criticized. It risks the open society it claims to protect. And it does so not despite but under the guise of security.
What is needed are no new surveillance laws. What is needed is trust, data protection, and genuine political transparency. Those who make the rules must not become the exception.
What You Can Do:
- Educate and inform: share articles, videos, and comments on the topic
- Apply pressure: contact representatives and demand clear positions
- Use privacy-friendly alternatives: Signal instead of WhatsApp, Mastodon instead of X
- Sign petitions: e.g. at Campact or Change.org
- Support organizations: e.g. Digitalcourage, EDRi, or Chaos Computer Club
A Sarcastic Note from the Author:
It’s comforting to know my chat about cat pictures is now safer while corruption deals continue offline. I also understand that we all have to be monitored—just in case someone spontaneously tries out democracy.
https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/#WhatYouCanDo
https://netzpolitik.org/2025/internes-protokoll-eu-juristen-kritisieren-daenischen-vorschlag-zur-chatkontrolle/
https://www.it-boltwise.de/eu-plant-umfassende-ueberwachung-privater-nachrichten.html
https://european-pirateparty.eu/chatcontrol-eu-ministers-want-to-exempt-themselves/
