Key Takeaways:
- Germany stands firm again: After weeks of uncertainty, Berlin has reaffirmed its opposition to the EU’s Chat Control plan, calming privacy advocates who feared a sudden reversal.
- Encryption still under fire: Chat Control would scan URLs, images, and videos before encryption – a process Signal compares to ‘malware on your device.’
- EU divisions remain: Denmark and Ireland support the proposal, while Italy, Latvia, Sweden, and Belgium remain undecided as the October talks continue.
- Privacy at a crossroads: Critics warn that Chat Control could erode Europe’s digital rights and set a global precedent for government surveillance.
The European Union’s most controversial surveillance proposal, ‘Chat Control,’ is back, and it’s sparking another round of panic among privacy advocates
This time, the tension centered on Germany — long the EU’s defender of privacy — after reports indicated it might relax its opposition. But after days of backlash, Berlin’s Justice Ministry clarified that it will not agree to mandatory message scanning. For now, Germany is back on the privacy side of the fight.
That’s a significant issue. For years, Germany has been the EU’s privacy pillar, blocking overreaching laws and insisting that citizens’ rights take priority over government convenience.
Its renewed resistance might be the only thing stopping Chat Control from becoming law — at least in its current form.
Signal, the world’s loudest encrypted messenger, has already sounded the alarm. Its message is clear: even one major country flipping could destroy Europe’s digital privacy equilibrium.
What Exactly Is Chat Control?
Chat Control, officially called the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR), is the European Commission’s attempt to crack down on the sharing of child abuse material online.
A noble goal, yes. But the method is something out of a digital dystopia.
The plan would compel messaging services, including encrypted ones like Signal, and even partially encrypted platforms like Telegram, to automatically scan URLs, photos, and videos for signs of illegal content before encryption applies.
Imagine your phone quietly scans what you send on-device against government-mandated databases. If there’s a match, it files a report. That’s basically Chat Control.
EU lawmakers say it’s about child protection. However, critics – and there are many – argue that it’s merely mass surveillance wearing a moral veneer.
The Privacy Community Is Furious
Privacy experts, cryptographers, and human rights organizations have all been clear: Chat Control breaks encryption. Period.
End-to-end encryption means only the sender and receiver can read the message.
No governments, no hackers, not even the app itself. But Chat Control would create what’s known as a ‘backdoor.’ Once such a door exists, it’s open to abuse – by anyone smart or powerful enough to find it.
Signal has called the proposal ‘like malware on your device.’ The app’s vice president of global affairs, Udbhav Tiwari, said the requirement to scan messages before encryption ‘compromises your device to gain access to information.’
That’s exactly what spyware does.
Signal’s president, Meredith Whittaker, said the company would leave Europe entirely if forced to comply.
‘We won’t weaken encryption,’ she told a German outlet earlier this month. ‘We would rather stop providing services than become an accomplice to surveillance.’
Signal later published a detailed paper explaining how client-side scanning would undermine end-to-end security and open every device to exploitation.
But this isn’t just about Signal. The same problem applies to WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, and every other secure messenger.
Germany’s Position: From Uncertainty to Opposition
For years, Germany’s government was one of Chat Control’s strongest opponents. Lawmakers and digital rights groups argued that the policy was unconstitutional and a violation of human rights.
Then came confusion in late September when reports suggested that Berlin might reconsider.
That alone was enough to cause panic across the privacy community. But by October 8, Germany’s Federal Ministry of Justice reaffirmed its ‘no,’ confirming it would not support any version of Chat Control that weakens encryption.
The result? The October 14 EU Council vote, once expected to finalize the law, is now uncertain. Without Germany’s support, there isn’t enough backing to pass the proposal.
Privacy advocates say that would be catastrophic – not just for Europe, but globally.
Denmark, Ireland, and the Undecided Bloc
While Germany digs in, Denmark, currently holding the EU Council Presidency, is taking the lead in pushing the Chat Control proposal forward.
Copenhagen has drafted a so-called ‘Danish version’ of the law, which would slightly limit scanning requirements but still allow client-side message inspection. This is a significant feature, according to privacy experts, that compromises encryption.
Ireland is also firmly in the pro-Chat Control camp, echoing Brussels’ focus on child protection. Dublin’s position isn’t new. It often aligns with EU regulation while hosting the European headquarters of companies like Meta and Apple.
Beyond those two, the European bloc is sharply divided. According to Member State trackers compiled by digital rights advocates, countries such as France, Spain, Portugal, Malta, Cyprus, Hungary, Lithuania, Bulgaria, and Croatia are also listed among the supporters of the proposal.
The opposition includes Austria, Finland, Poland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, and now Germany, which recently reaffirmed that it will not accept any law requiring message scanning.
These governments argue that the plan violates fundamental rights and endangers cybersecurity.
That leaves a large undecided group — comprising Italy, Belgium, Sweden, Latvia, Greece, and Slovenia — whose positions are constantly shifting. Some had previously leaned toward support but are now pausing amid public backlash and legal doubts.
The EU remains deeply split, and with Germany holding the line, the legislation currently lacks the votes to move forward. Still, pressure from Denmark and Ireland ensures the debate is far from over.
The EU Knows It’s Risky
The controversy runs deep, even within EU institutions.
After months of criticism from privacy experts, lawmakers quietly added a clause to the proposal exempting government and military accounts from scanning.
In other words, everyone’s messages are scanned – except those of officials. If that doesn’t scream ‘double standard,’ nothing does.
Sweden and the Netherlands have already warned that client-side scanning could become a national security risk.
By forcing billions of devices to run surveillance code, the EU could create new vulnerabilities instead of closing them. Hackers wouldn’t even need to break encryption – they could simply exploit the scanning layer itself.
That’s why Peter Todd, a respected cryptographer and blockchain researcher, called Chat Control ‘a crime against humanity‘ on X.
He argued that if it passes, Signal’s only ethical choice is to refuse to comply, even if that means being blocked in the EU.
The Slippery Slope Problem
Child protection laws are notoriously easy to expand.
Once governments have the power to scan messages for one kind of illegal content, it’s only a matter of time before they start scanning for others – terrorism, hate speech, disinformation, or whatever’s politically fashionable next year.
Signal’s Tiwari called this a ‘slippery slope with global consequences.’ And he’s right. Once the technology exists, it will be used. Not just by democratic governments, but by authoritarian regimes eager to monitor dissent.
The EU likes to present itself as the world’s champion of privacy. However, normalizing message scanning could erode that reputation overnight – turning Europe into a testing ground for global surveillance technology.
The Bigger Context: Digital IDs and CBDCs
This debate isn’t happening in a vacuum.
The European Central Bank plans to introduce a digital euro by 2029, pending legislative approval, while the U.K. is rolling out a national digital ID system, including mandatory digital Right-to-Work checks by the end of this Parliamentary Term.
Privacy advocates fear that if Chat Control and digital IDs evolve in parallel, the combined effect could create an infrastructure of continuous surveillance, tracking both identity and communication.
That’s what worries digital rights groups most. Chat Control may start as a child-protection tool, but combined with digital identity and money systems, it risks becoming a blueprint for full-spectrum surveillance across Europe.
What Happens Next
With Germany’s opposition restored, the immediate risk of Chat Control becoming law has faded, but only temporarily.
The Danish Presidency could still push a new compromise later this year, and other governments remain undecided.
The stakes couldn’t be higher.
This isn’t just about encrypted chat apps. It’s about whether Europeans will continue to have private spaces online, or whether every message, photo, and emoji will soon be subject to automated inspection.
Privacy on the Edge
Europe once led the world in digital privacy. The GDPR became a global benchmark. But Chat Control threatens to undo that legacy in one vote.
Germany’s latest decision buys time, not safety. The proposal isn’t dead – it’s regrouping. And if governments continue to frame surveillance as ‘safety,’ the line between protection and control may soon become blurred.
If the EU goes through with this, it won’t just scan for illegal content. It will scan away the very trust that holds the digital world together.
Because when governments decide your phone should spy on you ‘for your own good,’ it stops being your phone. It becomes theirs.
The Tech Report editorial policy is centered on providing helpful, accurate content that offers real value to our readers. We only work with experienced writers who have specific knowledge in the topics they cover, including latest developments in technology, online privacy, cryptocurrencies, software, and more. Our editorial policy ensures that each topic is researched and curated by our in-house editors. We maintain rigorous journalistic standards, and every article is 100% written by real authors.
