Big Brother's Watchful Eye: The EU’s Push for Surveillance and Control, By Richard Miller (Londonistan)
In George Orwell's dystopian novel 1984, Big Brother's omnipresent surveillance stripped individuals of privacy, fostering a society where control was absolute and dissent was impossible. Today, the European Union's ambitious ProtectEU strategy, unveiled in April 2025, brings us closer to that chilling vision. Under the guise of public safety, the EU's roadmap to ensure "lawful and effective" law enforcement access to private data by 2030 threatens to erode end-to-end encryption (E2EE), target VPNs, and expand metadata collection. This initiative, rooted in the Going Dark framework launched in June 2023, signals a dangerous creep toward mass surveillance and control, cloaked in the rhetoric of fighting crime. As privacy advocates sound the alarm, the spectre of Big Brother looms large over the digital landscape.
At its core, the ProtectEU strategy aims to dismantle barriers to law enforcement access to encrypted communications, particularly those protected by E2EE, used by apps like Signal and WhatsApp, and privacy tools like VPNs. The EU Commission's roadmap, presented on June 24, 2025, builds on recommendations from the High-Level Group (HLG), which identified E2EE and VPNs as "key challenges" to investigating crimes like terrorism and child exploitation. By 2030, the EU seeks to equip authorities with tools to decrypt private data, effectively creating backdoors into systems designed to protect user privacy.
The strategy's implications are staggering. E2EE ensures that only the sender and recipient can access message content, making it a cornerstone of digital privacy. Mandating backdoors would weaken this security, exposing data to not only law enforcement but also hackers, as demonstrated by the Salt Typhoon attacks, where exploited encryption vulnerabilities compromised critical systems. Europol's 2025 Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) further escalates the push by calling for expanded metadata collection, which could force VPN providers to abandon no-log policies, undermining their ability to protect user anonymity.
The ProtectEU strategy is not an isolated effort but part of a broader pattern of EU policies aimed at tightening control over digital communications. Its predecessor, the Chat Control proposal, sought to mandate scanning of encrypted chats for illegal content. Despite being scaled back to voluntary measures after public backlash, Chat Control laid the groundwork for ProtectEU's more ambitious goals. Privacy experts, including Jan Jonsson, CEO of Mullvad VPN, describe ProtectEU as a rebranded continuation of these efforts, designed to normalise surveillance under the pretext of public safety.
The EU's eIDAS regulation adds another layer of control, potentially allowing governments to intercept web traffic via browser certificates. This could render even VPNs ineffective, as they operate at the network level, not the application level. Such measures align with a dystopia, where governments quietly push surveillance laws during distractions like elections to minimise public scrutiny. The removal of a TechRadar article on July 5, 2025, detailing these plans, further fuels suspicions of censorship, suggesting that critical voices may be silenced to protect the narrative of "security."
The EU's actions are part of a global trend toward increased government oversight of digital spaces. Switzerland and Sweden are exploring similar laws to weaken encryption, while Florida's recent data access mandates reflect a parallel push in the U.S. These efforts share a common thread: prioritising state control over individual privacy. The Global Encryption Alliance, in a May 26, 2025, open letter signed by 89 tech stakeholders, warned that weakening encryption threatens cybersecurity, user trust, and democratic freedoms. As governments worldwide demand backdoors, the internet risks becoming a fragmented patchwork of surveillance states, where anonymity is a relic of the past.
This global creep is not just about data access but about control. By monitoring communications and metadata, governments can track dissent, suppress activism, and shape narratives. The EU's refusal to disclose the authors of ProtectEU's proposals, as noted on Hacker News, underscores a lack of transparency that echoes Orwell's depiction of an unaccountable regime. When combined with tools like eIDAS, which could enable censorship at the browser level, the potential for Big Brother-style control becomes alarmingly real.
The consequences of ProtectEU and similar initiatives extend beyond privacy:
Cybersecurity Threats: Encryption backdoors are inherently insecure. The Salt Typhoon attacks demonstrated how vulnerabilities created for law enforcement can be exploited by hackers, endangering personal data and critical infrastructure.
Erosion of Trust: Tech companies offering encrypted services, like Signal or Proton VPN, may lose user confidence if forced to comply with backdoor mandates. Providers like Mullvad have warned they may exit the EU market rather than compromise their no-log policies.
Chilling Free Speech: Surveillance discourages open discourse. Knowing that communications are monitored, individuals may self-censor, stifling dissent and innovation.
Global Precedent: If the EU succeeds, other nations may follow, creating a domino effect that normalises surveillance and undermines the internet's open nature.
The EU's ProtectEU strategy, with its goal of decrypting private data by 2030, represents a significant step toward a surveillance state reminiscent of Orwell's Big Brother. By targeting encryption, expanding metadata collection, and potentially censoring critical voices, the EU risks undermining the very freedoms it claims to protect. The global trend, evident in Switzerland, Sweden, and beyond, suggests a coordinated effort to opt for control over privacy, threatening the open internet. Yet, resistance is possible. By using privacy tools, staying informed, and advocating for change, individuals can push back against this digital dystopia.
Comments