The EU’s Controversial Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR): A Deep Dive
On November 26, 2025, after three years of heated debate and negotiation, the EU Council reached a critical agreement on the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR) bill, often referred to as "Chat Control." This agreement marks a significant turning point in Europe’s approach to online safety and privacy but has evoked a strong backlash from privacy advocates.
The Bill’s Background and Contention
The purpose of the CSAR is to combat child sexual abuse online, primarily through measures that would allow the scanning of communications for inappropriate content. However, the path to this agreement has been anything but smooth. Nations like Italy, the Czech Republic, Poland, and the Netherlands have expressed their dissent against the current framework, revealing a divide in the EU regarding how best to tackle this pressing issue.
Many in the privacy community, including renowned experts such as Belgian cryptographer Bart Preneel, have labeled the agreement a "very sad day for privacy." They argue that the compromise path taken—the introduction of "voluntary" scanning—falls short of necessary safeguards and retains a high potential for societal risks.
What Does "Voluntary" Scanning Mean?
Under the new text, providers of messaging services have the discretion to scan messages for child sexual abuse material (CSAM). This shift has been seen by some as a victory for privacy, potentially averting the creation of mandatory backdoors that could compromise encryption. However, critics argue that even a "voluntary" scanning system fosters a culture of surveillance.
The risks are compounded by provisions that might require companies deemed "high-risk" to scan messages, as well as an agreement for the European Commission to review compliance every three years. As such, “voluntary” scanning could morph into obligatory measures in the future.
Expert Reactions: A Mixed Bag
Prominent figures in the digital rights sphere have raised alarms over the bill’s implications. Patrick Breyer, a former MEP, expressed concern that the EU is endorsing a form of mass surveillance under the guise of combating child exploitation. His assertion emphasizes that legitimizing such practices does not align with democratic values and raises questions about the effectiveness of these measures in safeguarding citizens’ rights.
Age Verification and Its Implications
One of the more contentious points of the CSAR is the introduction of age verification requirements. These checks aim to "reliably identify child users" of messaging services, but experts have voiced skepticism about their feasibility and privacy implications.
The Council’s commitment to ensuring that age verification methods are "privacy-preserving" has been met with doubt. Many fear that implementing such systems could lead to increased surveillance and a compromised digital environment for users of all ages. Noteworthy is Preneel’s criticism that age verification technologies currently have no thoroughly validated solutions that ensure functionality without infringing on privacy.
The Slippery Slope of Censorship
In addition to scanning and age verification, concerns have been raised about the implications of proposed website blocking obligations. Critics warn that establishing this infrastructure may set a dangerous precedent for censorship, ultimately jeopardizing free expression online.
As the landscape of digital rights and surveillance continues to evolve, many experts view these developments as not just potential violations of privacy but also as steps toward a future where censorship becomes acceptable within European digital frameworks.
The Road Ahead: Trialogue Negotiations
Now that the EU Council has established a framework for the CSAR, trialogue negotiations involving the EU Parliament, Council, and Commission are poised to kick off, with discussions aimed at finalizing a binding text. The stakes are high as this legislation moves toward the April 2026 deadline for adoption.
During this period, advocates for digital rights such as the Mullvad VPN team, emphasize the need for MEPs to remain steadfast against what they see as the encroachment of mass surveillance. They urge leaders to implement no requirements for mass surveillance without a warrant and to resist the push for ID-verification mandates or censorship of lawful content.
Observations on the Proposed Legislation
The CSAR illustrates a crucial intersection between child protection and digital rights, revealing the complexities that come with legislating in a digital age. While the aim of protecting children is laudable, the means of achieving that aim has ignited fierce debates that will continue as negotiations unfold.
As the EU progresses toward a final version of the CSAR, the digital rights community remains vigilant. The discussions will require delicate balancing—a task that could shape the future of online privacy and security in Europe for years to come.
