The EU’s two-tier encryption vision is digital feudalism

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, recently demonstrated a moment of humanity in a technology world that often promises too much, too quickly. He urged users not to share anything with ChatGPT that they wouldn’t also share with a human being. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has already begun to take notice.

His warning touches a deeper core, one that underlies our entire digital world. In a sphere where we can no longer be certain we are dealing with a human being, it becomes clear: often it is software that communicates – not people. This growing uncertainty is more than just a technical challenge. It strikes at the very foundation of trust that holds society together.

This should make us think not only about AI, but about something even more fundamental, much older, quieter and, in the digital realm, more crucial: encryption.

In a world increasingly shaped by algorithms and autonomous systems, trust is more important than ever.

Encryption is the foundation

Encryption is not just a technical layer; it is the foundation of our digital lives. It protects everything from private conversations to global financial systems, authenticates identity, and enables trust to scale across borders and institutions.

Crucially, encryption is not something that can be recreated through regulation or replaced by politics. When trust is broken, institutions fail, or power is abused, encryption remains. It is the safety net that ensures our most private information stays protected – even in the absence of trust.

A cryptographic system is not like a house with doors and windows. It is a mathematical contract: precise, strict, and designed to be unbreakable. A “backdoor” here is not just a secret access point, but a flaw embedded in the logic of the contract – and a single flaw is enough to destroy the entire agreement. Any vulnerability introduced for a specific purpose can become an opening for everyone – from cybercriminals to authoritarian regimes.

A system built entirely on trust through strong, unbreakable code begins to collapse as soon as that trust is broken. And right now, that trust is under threat.

A blueprint for digital feudalism

The European Commission’s ProtectEU initiative proposes a mechanism that would require service providers to scan private communications directly on users’ devices – before encryption is applied. This effectively turns personal devices into surveillance tools and undermines the integrity of end-to-end encryption.

While state actors would never allow such a vulnerability in their own secure systems, this mandate creates a separate, weaker security standard for the public.

At first glance, this sounds like a reasonable compromise: stronger encryption for governments, with so-called “legal access” to citizens’ data. But in reality, it proposes a hard-coded imbalance – one in which the state encrypts, and the public decrypts.

This is not security policy. It is a blueprint for digital feudalism – a future in which privacy becomes a privilege of the powerful, not a right guaranteed to all. Two-tier encryption shifts the balance of trust away from democratic accountability and cements a structure of control that no free society should accept.

Let’s not kid ourselves: This debate isn’t about security. It’s about control.

We should not live in a world where only the powerful are allowed to have private lives.

In an age of ubiquitous AI, state-sponsored hacking, and mass digital surveillance, weakening encryption is not only short-sighted but systemically irresponsible. For those of us in the decentralized world, this is not an abstract debate – it is a practical necessity.

Strong, unbreakable encryption is far more than a technical feature; it is the foundation on which everything else rests.

Truth through verification

The principle of a self-enforcing contract is the reason why truly decentralized systems are built without a keyholder or institution holding the keys. Introducing a backdoor is a contradiction in terms – it creates yet another central vulnerability and violates the fundamental principle of a trustless system.

Security is a binary state: it is either available for everyone – or it is not guaranteed for anyone.

Fortunately, these principles are not merely theoretical. The cryptographic building blocks that emerge from this field – zero-knowledge proofs that confirm facts without revealing data, and proof-of-personhood systems that defend against Sybil attacks without compromising privacy – offer a real, working alternative. They demonstrate that we don’t have to choose between security and freedom.

The irony is obvious: the very field now under threat contains the tools we need to create a safer, more open digital future. A future not based on surveillance or gatekeeping, but on permissionless innovation, cryptographic trust, and personal dignity.

If we want a digital world that is secure, inclusive and resilient, then encryption needs to remain strong and universally standardized – for everyone.

Not because we have something to hide, but because we all have something to protect.

 

yogaesoteric
November 10, 2025