Concerns over privacy safeguards have resurfaced as the European Data Protection Supervisor urges legislators to limit indiscriminate chat-scanning in the upcoming extension of temporary EU rules.
The supervisor warns that the current framework risks enabling broad surveillance instead of focusing on targeted action against criminal content.
The EU institutions are considering a short-term renewal of the interim regime governing the detection of online material linked to child protection.
Privacy officials argue that such measures need clearer boundaries and stronger oversight to ensure that automated scanning tools do not intrude on the communications of ordinary users.
EDPS is also pressing lawmakers to introduce explicit safeguards before any renewal is approved. These include tighter definitions of scanning methods, independent verification, and mechanisms that prevent the processing of unrelated personal data.
According to the supervisor, temporary legislation must not create long-term precedents that weaken confidentiality across messaging services.
The debate comes as the EU continues discussions on a wider regulatory package covering child-protection technologies, encryption and platform responsibilities.
Privacy authorities maintain that targeted tools can be more practical than blanket scanning, which they consider a disproportionate response.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The EU Digital Identity Wallet is widely seen as a transformative step for cross-border digital services in Europe, yet experts warn that its success is far from guaranteed. While the initiative promises stronger privacy, improved security, and greater user control over personal data, adoption and governance challenges could undermine its potential.
Industry observers caution that large-scale digital identity projects rarely fail because of technical shortcomings. Instead, weak ecosystem buy-in, unclear commercial incentives and fragmented national implementation often derail progress.
If some member states deliver robust solutions while others lag, cross-border usability could suffer, weakening the wallet’s core objective of seamless European digital identity.
Concerns also extend to economic sustainability. Without clear business models for private-sector participants, innovation and long-term investment may slow. A wallet that exists only to meet regulatory requirements, rather than offering clear advantages over existing identity methods, risks low citizen adoption and limited integration by service providers.
Privacy design presents another complex trade-off. The wallet’s principle of unlinkability strengthens user protection, but it may complicate fraud detection and behavioural monitoring. Experts argue that trust in the system will depend on balancing privacy with practical security measures.
Ultimately, the EU Digital Identity Wallet’s future will hinge on coordinated governance, strong incentives and sustained commitment across the entire ecosystem.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A document released by the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee revived claims that the EU digital rules amount to censorship. The document concerns a €120 million fine against X under the Digital Services Act and was framed as a ‘secret censorship ruling’, despite publication requirements.
The document provides insight into how the European Commission interprets Article 40 of the DSA, which governs researcher access to platform data. The rule requires huge online platforms to grant qualified researchers access to publicly accessible data needed to study systemic risks in the EU.
Investigators found that X failed to comply with Article 40.12, in force since 2023 and covering public data access. The Commission said X applied restrictive eligibility rules, delayed reviews, imposed tight quotas, and blocked independent researcher access, including scraping.
The decision confirms platforms cannot price access to restrict research, deny access based on affiliation or location, or ban scraping by contract. The European Commission also rejected X’s narrow reading of ‘systemic risk’, allowing broader research contexts.
The ruling also highlights weak internal processes and limited staffing for handling access requests. X must submit an action plan by mid-April 2026, with the decision expected to shape future enforcement of researcher access across major platforms.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Lawmakers in the European Parliament remain divided over whether a direct ban on AI-driven ‘pornification’ should be added to the emerging digital omnibus.
Left-wing members push for an explicit prohibition, arguing that synthetic sexual imagery generated without consent has created a rapidly escalating form of online abuse. They say a strong legal measure is required instead of fragmented national responses.
Centre and liberal groups take a different position by promoting lighter requirements for industrial AI and seeking clarity on how any restrictions would interact with the AI Act.
They warn that an unrefined ban could spill over into general-purpose models and complicate enforcement across the European market. Their priority is a more predictable regulatory environment for companies developing high-volume AI systems.
Key figures across the political spectrum, including lawmakers such as Assita Kanko, Axel Voss and Brando Benifei, continue to debate how far the omnibus should go.
Some argue that safeguarding individuals from non-consensual sexual deepfakes must outweigh concerns about administrative burdens, while others insist that proportionality and technical feasibility need stronger assessment.
The lack of consensus leaves the proposal in a delicate phase as negotiations intensify. Lawmakers now face growing public scrutiny over how Europe will respond to the misuse of generative AI.
A clear stance from the Parliament is still pending, rather than an assured path toward agreement.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The European Union is revisiting the idea of an EU-wide social media age restriction as several member states move ahead with national measures to protect children online. Spain, France, and Denmark are among the countries considering the enforcement of age limits for access to social platforms.
The issue was raised in the European Commission’s new action plan against cyberbullying, published on Tuesday. The plan confirms that a panel of child protection experts will advise the Commission by the summer on possible EU-wide age restrictions for social media use.
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the creation of an expert panel last September, although its launch was delayed until early 2026. The panel will assess options for a coordinated European approach, including potential legislation and awareness-raising measures for parents.
The document notes that diverging national rules could lead to uneven protection for children across the bloc. A harmonised EU framework, the Commission argues, would help ensure consistent safeguards and reduce fragmentation in how platforms apply age restrictions.
So far, the Commission has relied on non-binding guidance under the Digital Services Act to encourage platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and Snap to protect minors. Increasing pressure from member states pursuing national bans may now prompt a shift towards more formal EU-level regulation.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The Court of Justice of the EU has ruled that WhatsApp can challenge an EDPB decision directly in European courts. Judges confirmed that firms may seek annulment when a decision affects them directly instead of relying solely on national procedures.
A ruling that reshapes how companies defend their interests under the GDPR framework.
The judgment centres on a 2021 instruction from the EDPB to Ireland’s Data Protection Commission regarding the enforcement of data protection rules against WhatsApp.
European regulators argued that only national authorities were formal recipients of these decisions. The court found that companies should be granted standing when their commercial rights are at stake.
By confirming this route, the court has created an important precedent for businesses facing cross-border investigations. Companies will be able to contest EDPB decisions at EU level rather than moving first through national courts, a shift that may influence future GDPR enforcement cases across the Union.
Legal observers expect more direct challenges as organisations adjust their compliance strategies. The outcome strengthens judicial oversight of the EDPB and could reshape the balance between national regulators and EU-level bodies in data protection governance.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The European Commission has issued implementation guidelines for Article 18 of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), setting out how large platforms must protect recognised media content through self-declaration mechanisms.
Article 18 has been in effect for 6 months, and the guidance is intended to translate legal duties into operational steps. The European Broadcasting Union welcomed the clarification but warned that major platforms continue to delay compliance, limiting media organisations’ ability to exercise their rights.
The Commission says self-declaration mechanisms should be easy to find and use, with prominent interface features linked to media accounts. Platforms are also encouraged to actively promote the process, make it available in all EU languages, and use standardised questionnaires to reduce friction.
The guidance also recommends allowing multiple accounts in one submission, automated acknowledgements with clear contact points, and the ability to update or withdraw declarations. The aim is to improve transparency and limit unilateral moderation decisions.
The guidelines reinforce the EMFA’s goal of rebalancing power between platforms and media organisations by curbing opaque moderation practices. The impact of EMFA will depend on enforcement and ongoing oversight to ensure platforms implement the measures in good faith.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The ambitions of the EU to streamline telecom rules are facing fresh uncertainty after a Commission document indicated that the Digital Networks Act may create more administrative demands for national regulators instead of easing their workload.
The plan to simplify long-standing procedures risks becoming more complex as officials examine the impact on oversight bodies.
Concerns are growing among telecom authorities and BEREC, which may need to adjust to new reporting duties and heightened scrutiny. The additional requirements could limit regulators’ ability to respond quickly to national needs.
Policymakers hoped the new framework would reduce bureaucracy and modernise the sector. The emerging assessment now suggests that greater coordination at the EU level may introduce extra layers of compliance at a time when regulators seek clarity and flexibility.
The debate has intensified as governments push for faster network deployment and more predictable governance. The prospect of heavier administrative tasks could slow progress rather than deliver the streamlined system originally promised.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A global health organisation is urging the EU to make fuller use of its digital rules to curb health disinformation as concerns grow over the impact of deepfakes on public confidence.
Warnings point to a rising risk that manipulated content could reduce vaccine uptake instead of supporting informed public debate.
Experts argue that the Digital Services Act already provides the framework needed to limit harmful misinformation, yet enforcement remains uneven. Stronger oversight could improve platforms’ ability to detect manipulated content and remove inaccurate claims that jeopardise public health.
Campaigners emphasise that deepfake technology is now accessible enough to spread false narratives rapidly. The trend threatens vaccination campaigns at a time when several member states are attempting to address declining trust in health authorities.
The EU officials continue to examine how digital regulation can reinforce public health strategies. The call for stricter enforcement highlights the pressure on Brussels to ensure that digital platforms act responsibly rather than allowing misleading material to circulate unchecked.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A cyber-attack targeting the European Commission’s central mobile infrastructure was identified on 30 January, raising concerns that staff names and mobile numbers may have been accessed.
The Commission isolated the affected system within nine hours instead of allowing the breach to escalate, and no mobile device compromise was detected.
Also, the Commission plans a full review of the incident to reinforce the resilience of internal systems.
Officials argue that Europe faces daily cyber and hybrid threats targeting essential services and democratic institutions, underscoring the need for stronger defensive capabilities across all levels of the EU administration.
CERT-EU continues to provide constant threat monitoring, automated alerts and rapid responses to vulnerabilities, guided by the Interinstitutional Cybersecurity Board.
These efforts support the broader legislative push to strengthen cybersecurity, including the Cybersecurity Act 2.0, which introduces a Trusted ICT Supply Chain to reduce reliance on high-risk providers.
Recent measures are complemented by the NIS2 Directive, which sets a unified legal framework for cybersecurity across 18 critical sectors, and the Cyber Solidarity Act, which enhances operational cooperation through the European Cyber Shield and the Cyber Emergency Mechanism.
Together, they aim to ensure collective readiness against large-scale cyber threats.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
