EU’s ProtectEU Mandates On-Device Scanning Before Encryption

The ProtectEU mandate represents a seismic shift in digital rights architecture, creating what Bill Laboon, vice president of Ecosystem at the Web3 Foundation, characterizes as ‘digital feudalism codified.’ This framework establishes fundamentally different security standards for state entities versus ordinary citizens, with governments retaining full encryption capabilities while requiring pre-encryption scanning of citizen devices. The policy creates a structural power imbalance that echoes historical feudal systems, where digital lords (governments) maintain sovereignty over their domains while digital serfs (citizens) surrender privacy rights.

This two-tier security system operates by mandating that all digital communications undergo on-device scanning before encryption is applied, effectively creating a backdoor that preserves government access to private communications while maintaining the appearance of security through encryption. The United States Department of Homeland Security has already begun monitoring these developments, recognizing their potential implications for global digital governance and citizen rights. The policy represents a fundamental reordering of the digital social contract, where the presumption of privacy gives way to presumption of surveillance.

Sam Altman’s recent caution to ChatGPT users—urging them not to share anything they wouldn’t want a human to see—strikes at the same foundational issue that ProtectEU exposes: the erosion of trust in digital systems. As Altman, CEO of OpenAI, implicitly acknowledged, we can no longer be certain whether we’re dealing with a person or software in digital interactions. This uncertainty challenges the very fabric of digital society, where trust has traditionally been the invisible infrastructure enabling everything from e-commerce to social connection.

The ProtectEU mandate exacerbates this trust deficit by institutionalizing suspicion at the architectural level. When software becomes the mandatory agent scanning private communications before they’re encrypted, the fundamental relationship between users and their devices transforms from one of trust to one of surveillance. This development coincides with growing awareness that artificial intelligence systems, like those developed by OpenAI, increasingly mediate human communication, creating layers of technological intermediation that further complicate trust relationships.

The Department of Homeland Security’s attention to these issues signals recognition that the convergence of government surveillance mandates and AI transparency concerns represents a critical inflection point for digital rights. As Laboon’s characterization of ‘digital feudalism’ suggests, we’re witnessing the emergence of a digital class system where privacy becomes a privilege rather than a right, fundamentally altering the power dynamics between citizens and states in the digital realm.

The implications of ProtectEU extend far beyond European borders, establishing a precedent that could reshape global digital governance. The creation of unequal encryption standards between governments and citizens sets a dangerous template that other nations may emulate, potentially creating a fragmented global digital landscape where privacy protections vary dramatically by jurisdiction. This fragmentation threatens the universal principles that have underpinned internet governance since its inception.

The policy’s timing is particularly significant given the simultaneous rise of sophisticated AI systems. As Altman’s warning demonstrates, we’re already grappling with trust issues in human-AI interactions. Adding government-mandated surveillance layers to this already complex ecosystem creates additional friction in digital trust relationships. The Web3 Foundation’s criticism highlights how these developments contradict the decentralized, trust-minimized future that many in the technology sector envision.

Ultimately, the ProtectEU mandate and the broader digital trust crisis it represents strike at the foundation of what makes digital society functional. When citizens cannot trust that their communications remain private, when they cannot distinguish between human and artificial interlocutors, and when governments institutionalize surveillance as a default position, the social contract that enables digital innovation and connection begins to unravel. The Department of Homeland Security’s monitoring suggests that U.S. authorities recognize these developments as potentially destabilizing to the digital ecosystem that underpins modern economic and social life.