When the European Union first proposed “Chat Control,” the idea seemed unassailable. Lawmakers promised to protect children from sexual abuse online. Few dared to oppose it. But hidden behind that promise is a plan that would turn every smartphone in Europe into a surveillance device, scanning private messages, photos, and videos before they are sent.The decision on this law, officially called the Regulation to Prevent and Combat Child Sexual Abuse (CSAR), will be made in mid-October. Supporters say it is about saving children. Critics warn it is about ending privacy.At the center of this fight are the platforms people trust most: WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, and even Apple’s iMessage..What Chat Control Would DoThe law would require messaging services to scan communications for child abuse material, even when those messages are end-to-end encrypted. To do that, the EU plans to impose client-side scanning, technology that checks your messages on your device before encryption and reports potential illegal content to authorities.It is a radical idea. Instead of a human or court order, a machine would judge every image or message you send. Every phone, every chat, everywhere in Europe.Platforms like Signal and Telegram, used by hundreds of millions, have said such a system would destroy secure communication. Signal’s president, Meredith Whittaker, warned earlier this year that the app “would rather leave the EU than weaken encryption.” Telegram, which is often accused of being too lax in moderation, argues that privacy is “a human right” and that enforcement should be targeted, not total..The Safety ArgumentThere is no question the problem is real. In 2023, the U.S. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received more than 36 million reports of child sexual abuse material. The scale is horrifying, and law enforcement agencies struggle to keep up.EU officials say existing voluntary measures are insufficient. They argue that mandatory detection is needed to uncover “hidden networks” that use encrypted platforms such as Telegram or WhatsApp. The European Commission insists the goal is not mass surveillance but proportionate detection.Yet privacy experts, cybersecurity researchers, and even several EU member states see the same flaw: scanning every message is, by definition, mass surveillance..Cracks in Political SupportThe Danish EU presidency revived the Chat Control debate this year, setting up a decisive vote for October 14. A handful of countries have shifted positions, with Germany and Belgium moving from opposition to undecided, and Italy and Sweden moving from support to hesitation. Others, including France, Spain, and Ireland, remain in favor.The stakes are enormous. If the regulation passes, the EU will set a global precedent for preemptive message scanning. If it fails, lawmakers will likely return with a new version, perhaps under a softer name..Why the Technology FailsClient-side scanning is not a surgical tool. It is a blunt instrument. Algorithms compare your content against huge databases of known abuse material. The databases are imperfect, and the technology cannot distinguish between context and intent.In 2022, Google’s automated systems flagged two fathers in the United States for sending photos of their children’s rashes to doctors. Police arrived at their homes. Their accounts were permanently banned. The images were entirely innocent.Now imagine that process applied to 400 million Telegram users, 2 billion WhatsApp users, and every photo ever sent. Even a one-in-a-million error rate would produce thousands of false accusations a day.While innocent people get flagged, real abusers can adapt. Slightly altering an image or moving to smaller encrypted apps easily evades detection. The result is a system that fails to protect victims yet endangers everyone else..The Encryption ParadoxEncryption exists to keep data secure, not only from hackers but also from authoritarian governments and criminals. Once broken, even for a good cause, the damage is permanent.Signal, Telegram, and WhatsApp rely on encryption to protect activists, journalists, dissidents, and ordinary users in oppressive regimes. If the EU mandates client-side scanning, these services face a choice: weaken their protection or withdraw from the market.Telegram’s approach is already hybrid. Its “cloud chats” are encrypted between the user and server, while “secret chats” use end-to-end encryption. Implementing scanning would mean compromising both systems and forcing the company to inspect private user data it currently cannot access.The precedent would be global. Countries such as India, the UK, and the United States could point to the EU and demand the same..Legal and Ethical RisksLegal scholars say the proposal collides with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which guarantees privacy and freedom of expression. Several member states have hinted they would challenge it in court.Even the European Parliament’s own research service concluded there is no technology that can achieve the regulation’s goals “without unacceptable risks to fundamental rights.”The law also includes exemptions for government and military communications, raising accusations of double standards. If scanning is safe, critics ask, why does the state exempt itself?.The Emotional ShieldThe child protection argument is powerful. No politician wants to appear indifferent to abuse. But this moral shield can obscure the true consequences.Privacy advocates warn that once a surveillance infrastructure exists, it rarely stays limited to its original purpose. Anti-terrorism laws have been used to track journalists and whistleblowers. Once the system can scan for one type of content, expanding it to hate speech, misinformation, or national security is a matter of policy, not technology.As one former EU data official put it: “You do not build a panopticon and hope it is only used on bad people.”.What Real Protection Could Look LikeThe alternative is not inaction. Experts propose targeted approaches that do not require mass scanning:Warrants and focused investigations against specific suspectsStronger funding for law enforcement and cross-border cooperationFast takedown agreements with hosting platformsUser reporting systems that trigger human reviewEducation programs to prevent grooming and sextortionSupport and therapy for victims instead of overloading systems with false reportsThese solutions are slower and more expensive than automated scanning, but they do not destroy the privacy of an entire continent..The Role of TelegramTelegram often appears in this debate as both scapegoat and symbol. Authorities accuse it of hosting extremist or explicit content. Privacy advocates defend it as a last refuge for free speech in countries with censorship.The truth lies somewhere in between. Telegram has repeatedly taken down known CSAM groups after public pressure, but its semi-encrypted model and loose moderation make it a political target. Under Chat Control, Telegram would either have to deploy intrusive scanning software or face massive fines, potentially forcing it out of the EU.Its founder, Pavel Durov, already faces legal pressure in France, where he was detained earlier this year over moderation concerns. If Chat Control passes, the EU could compel Telegram and other encrypted platforms to act as surveillance arms of the state..The Decision AheadOn October 14, EU governments will vote. If they approve Chat Control, it will become the most invasive digital law in the union’s history. If they reject it, privacy advocates will claim a rare victory, though likely a temporary one.The outcome will shape not just Europe’s tech policy but the global definition of privacy itself. The battle over Chat Control is not about one law or one platform. It is about whether personal communication can still exist in a connected world..To Defend or Not to DefendEvery society faces moments when safety is used to justify control. Chat Control dresses itself in moral language, but its logic is authoritarian. It assumes that in order to protect children, everyone must be watched.Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp, the platforms billions use daily, would become gateways for government inspection. For now, the decision lies with European leaders. History will judge whether they chose to defend children or to make every citizen a suspect..Meta's AI Guidelines Permitted "Romantic" Child Chats, Racist Content.US Defense Secretary's Private Signal Chats Revealed, Again.Apple Plans to Use Map Imagery for AI, Raising Privacy Concerns
