Is Europe preparing to enter a new era of mass digital surveillance? On October 14, the draft regulation called “Child Sexual Abuse Regulation” (CSAR) in English will be presented to the Council of the European Union, made up of the governments of the Member States, a regulation that establishes standards to prevent and combat the sexual abuse of children, in French, and nicknamed “Chat Control.”
This text aims to strengthen the fight against online child sexual abuse. Its main objective is to require communication service providers to automatically detect, report and remove child pornography content, in particular using artificial intelligence technologies.
Therefore, the project plans to force all platforms, including those that offer end-to-end encryption like Whatsapp or Signal, to automatically scan users’ private messages for suspicious content. This method, called “client-side scanning,” involves analyzing data directly on user devices before encryption.
But this project is widely debated. While some see it as “a necessary step in the fight against online child pornography and the protection of minors”, many digital freedom advocates, cybersecurity experts and some Member States denounce a major attack on online privacy and communications security. This even shocked the EDPS, the European data protection supervisor.
“Chat Control is nothing less than a widespread intrusion into our digital lives, mass surveillance that threatens the confidentiality of encrypted messages, the privacy and fundamental freedoms of every European citizen,” explains Rodrigo Arenas, deputy of the LFI of Paris and member of the Committee on Cultural Affairs and Education, interviewed by us.
A project in dispute
For Estelle De Marco, lawyer and doctor in private law and criminal sciences, “the project is not proportionate to the desired objective.” “The logic for acting on rights and freedoms, whether a State or a private actor, is based on a three-step reflection: why to act, the action will be effective and whether it is proportionate to the objective,” explains the lawyer.
“In the case of Chat Control, the objective is legitimate, the protection of children, but its effectiveness is doubtful because criminals will resort to other less accessible networks. Finally, the measure is very disproportionate because it provides for widespread surveillance of private communications, without prior suspicion, which constitutes a serious violation of privacy and an authoritarian approach incompatible with the principles of a democratic regime,” it states. perspective.
For her part, Mathilde Androuët, MEP of the National Rally, also recognizes a “very problematic” project. “We were alerted by citizens, because this really calls into question private life, the intimate nature of exchanges between individuals,” he tells Tech & Co. “There are real problems: pornography, prostitution of minors, children under guardianship… and the answer is clearly not to spy on the emails of 450 million Europeans.”
“A direct threat to democracy”
According to the MEP, the argument of the European institution and some defenders of the project, which is based on the idea that “if we have nothing to hide, we have nothing to fear”, is totally obsolete and invalid. “Precisely because I am honest, I don’t have to be scrutinized. My private life remains my private life,” she says.
“The protection of privacy is not a luxury, it is not a gadget. It is what guarantees freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of association. If every word, every image, every message can be analyzed, classified, archived, freedom becomes memory. The protection of privacy is nothing more than the maintenance of democracy in short,” analyzes Estelle De Marco.
And this also raises questions regarding industrial and economic security. “When you have the possibility of consulting the emails of people involved in the business world, involved in commercial espionage issues, it is dangerous,” adds Mathilde Androuët. Imagine being able to access messages from leaders at EDF, Dassault or other strategic companies. In an international negotiation, that obviously has an interest.”
Artificial intelligence and ethics
Another issue raised by opponents of the project is the place and growing role of artificial intelligence in automated controls. There remain few certainties and many doubts about, in particular, the reliability and inherent biases of the algorithms used.
Deputy Rodrigo Arenas wonders: “There is a whole ethical debate, an anthropological debate, even about the moment when humanity could cede its prerogatives to the machine. But also, as soon as we let AI search, it can make mistakes. We say that to err is human, but what about AI?”
Even more worrying is that some deputies denounce a denial of freedom in favor of algorithmic decision-making: “The first step towards decision-making by algorithm is, in fact, the denial of individual freedom. It is the Trojan horse that is about to take root in Europe,” denounces another elected representative. This mechanism raises fears of a security drift in which surveillance becomes widespread, automated and difficult to control, thus posing a significant challenge to the protection of fundamental rights.
Interviewed by Tech & Co, Robin Wilton, Internet Trust Director of the Internet Society, an international non-profit organization founded in 1992 by web pioneers, summarizes the situation, with an analysis shared today by many experts. “This is, therefore, an ineffective, disproportionate and dangerous approach, which distracts attention from real solutions: strengthening existing research capabilities, instead of creating an unmanageable and liberticidal gas factory.”
Europe very divided
And these issues go far beyond France: the reactions across Europe are just as strong. Currently, 12 member states officially support the proposal, but several key countries remain hesitant. Germany, Belgium, Italy and Sweden, which initially opposed or hesitated, are reconsidering their position or are now leaning in favor of the project.
Many NGOs, such as European Digital Rights, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Committee to Protect Journalists, denounce a risk of mass surveillance and a serious attack on privacy. A YouGov survey carried out in ten countries of the European Union reveals that 72% of respondents are opposed and rejection reaches 73% among young people between 18 and 24 years old.
Mobilization also took the form of petitions and demonstrations. In Malta, students addressed Parliament to demand that the text be scrapped, while an online petition has already collected more than a thousand signatures. The largest of them, called “Stop Chat Control”, now has more than 80,000 signatures. In Stockholm, several hundred citizens gathered to warn of a drift that they compare to the “largest listening platform in history.”
The draft regulation also provokes widespread opposition from the European political class. Charlie Weimers, MEP for the Sweden Democrats, calls the project “another step towards Chinese-style Internet censorship.” Emmanouil Fragkos, Greek MEP from the ECR group, notes that “the proposal provides for the scanning of private communications, including encrypted conversations, which raises serious doubts about compliance with Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.”
Patrick Breyer, German MEP from the Pirate Party, warns in Le Monde that “this mass surveillance project constitutes a model for authoritarian states. It seriously compromises privacy and weakens digital security.” Finally, an MEP speaking on condition of anonymity summarizes the fear shared by many: “widespread automated surveillance, even of encrypted communications, is an unacceptable setback in digital freedoms.” An “Orwellian project” that does not arise from an attack on our borders, but from the very heart of our democratic system. How can we be free when we become permanent slaves to an omnipresent surveillance that can blame anything in case of error or authoritarian drift? However, Orwell brilliantly demonstrated that freedom is not slavery…
Source: BFM TV
