The EUs Two Tier Encryption Vision is Digital Feudalism A new proposal from the European Union called ProtectEU is causing significant alarm among privacy advocates and technologists. The mandate would require private communication services to implement on device scanning of messages and files before they are encrypted. This creates a fundamental split in how security is applied. Governments and state entities would continue to enjoy the full protection of end to end encryption, while the general public would have their private communications subjected to automated mass surveillance. This establishes a dangerous precedent of a two tiered digital security system. The core of the issue lies in the technical requirement for client side scanning. For a service to check the content of a message or file against a database of illegal material before it is encrypted, the scanning must happen on the users own device. This process inherently creates a vulnerability. It bypasses the very principle of end to end encryption, which is designed to ensure that no one except the sender and intended recipient can access the content. By mandating a backdoor, even one framed as a pre encryption check, the EU is effectively breaking a foundational technology that protects everyone from criminals and hostile nation states. Proponents of the legislation argue it is necessary to combat the spread of child sexual abuse material and other serious crimes. They present it as a balanced approach to safety and privacy. However, critics point out that this system is functionally equivalent to a backdoor. Creating a mechanism for scanning private communications fundamentally weakens the security for all users. Once such a backdoor exists, it becomes a target for exploitation. There is no way to build a backdoor that only good actors can use. The same technical infrastructure could be co opted by malicious hackers or abused by an authoritarian government for political repression. This policy codifies a new form of digital feudalism. It creates a clear class system for privacy rights. The ruling class, comprising state actors and government officials, operates behind the impenetrable wall of true encryption. They are granted the full benefits of digital security for their own communications and data. The citizenry, the digital serfs, are denied this basic right. Their private lives, their intimate conversations, and their personal data are rendered transparent and subject to constant automated inspection by the state. This is not a minor policy shift it is a radical rearchitecting of the relationship between the individual and the state in the digital realm. The implications extend far beyond the borders of the European Union. As a major regulatory body, the EUs laws often set a global standard, a phenomenon known as the Brussels Effect. If this proposal is adopted, technology companies around the world may be forced to redesign their products to comply, effectively exporting this system of surveillance to users in other countries who are not subject to EU law. This would undermine encryption and digital privacy on a global scale, making everyone less secure. Furthermore, the concept of on device scanning is technologically problematic. It is often presented as a more privacy preserving alternative to server side scanning because the data does not leave the device. This is a misleading simplification. The scanning algorithm itself must be programmed to look for specific content, and the decision making process about what constitutes a match is controlled by a central authority. This centralizes a immense amount of power, allowing a government or tech company to define what is searched for, potentially expanding beyond the original intent over time. The debate over encryption and privacy is complex, but the solution cannot be to dismantle security for the many while preserving it for the few. A secure digital ecosystem requires that strong encryption is available to everyone, without exception. Weakening this security under the guise of protection creates a far more dangerous world. The EU’s ProtectEU proposal does not represent a compromise it represents the establishment of a surveillance hierarchy, a digital feudal system where the state has rights and privileges that its citizens are denied. The fight for a free and open internet depends on resisting such measures.
