EU Funds Are Flowing Into Spyware Companies and Politicians Demanding Answers
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
theregister.comOtherstoryHigh profile
heatednegative
Debate
80/100
EU FundingSpywareSurveillanceDigital Rights
Key topics
EU Funding
Spyware
Surveillance
Digital Rights
The EU is being criticized for funding spyware companies, sparking concerns about data monitoring and manipulation, while the discussion highlights the broader implications for digital rights and democratic controls.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
46m
Peak period
35
0-3h
Avg / period
8.9
Comment distribution62 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 62 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 2, 2025 at 8:34 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 2, 2025 at 9:20 AM EDT
46m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
35 comments in 0-3h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 4, 2025 at 7:31 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45448825Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 6:36:47 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
By having people get digital IDs, you can require them to use it when registering for social network accounts, etc., because it's already in their phones and requires just one tap to 'sign' the account with your real identity. Want to complain about a local politician on r/uk on reddit? You'll need a valid UK account to even post there, and it'll be tied to your real name. Want to join a discord? You need UK ID and your real identity tied to it. Organizing a protest? Well, your real name is there, the police will be visiting soon.
The government has also talked about making drivings licences digital (i.e. apps)
People suspect a lot more than it being used in conjunction with the OSA. it can be extended in all sorts of ways. Once available it will be used for more and more.
It is not necessary for employment and housing as there are already documents that can be checked on the rare occasions people rent housing or get a new job. It is only worth doing if it is something people will use daily. Essentially people will be coerced into carrying a Google or Apple smartphone with the ID app on it.
I hadn't heard about that one. Source?
https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/62773/documents/708...
> 16LB (1) The Secretary of State may by regulations specify a description of consistent identifier for the purposes of this section.
Such provisions are ripe for abuse – somewhat tempered by 16LB(6), but that relies on the designated person's discretion (which itself is constrained by 16LB(12), and my experience with educational folk suggests they take such guidance seriously, even when they profoundly disagree with it), and having a database in the first place is the major issue. Ignore the rest of this comment.
---
That doesn't seem to say that? It says:
> 16LB (2) “Consistent identifier” means any identifier (such as, for example, a number or code used for identification purposes) that—
> (a) relates to a child, and
> (b) forms part of a set of similar identifiers that is of general application.
School ID plus some school-specific identifier would suffice, if I'm reading this right.
That said, I'm not sure why you'd write this into a law under my interpretation, since it's already current practice to take actions that are "likely to facilitate the exercise by any person of a function of that person that relates to safeguarding or promoting the welfare of children", and to avoid actions that "would be more detrimental to the child than not including it", so maybe this is one of the things that you need to be a legal expert to understand.
On the other hand, according to The Times yesterday the cabinet isn't happy with digital ID. It's as obvious to them as it is to everyone else that digital ID won't make a jot of difference to illegal working. And may well lose them votes.
It doesn’t really matter either way because the tyranny and authoritarian control will descend upon people regardless; but do they at least have some kind of guilt, maybe shame, or even realize they are also guilty, not just in basically helping their own enemy, the people in charge of the government implementing these things?
Or do they simply in a somewhat typical narcissistic way just hand wave it away and generously absolve themselves of any guilt and responsibility for the misery they are/will be responsible for?
Turns out the “…fools, and even the ambitious…” were also the “…traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely…”. It was a stroke of genius to psychologically and emotionally manipulate and wage war on the minds of the folks who were fools, i.e., the majority in a “democracy” who gleefully voted themselves into a trap under influence of the created reward system that had them getting feedback that told them they are the good people.
Care to explain how a state providing an official way to allow its citizen to prove they are who they say they are and avoid identity usurpation on the internet is somehow tyrannical and authoritarian?
That seems like a valuable public service to me.
Also saw some of my countries government’s webpages have google analytics scripts. I’m guessing they didn’t even get a bribe for that, it is really ..
The use-case for age verification is not a law yet, the EC has only produced a blueprint which means that this will probably not be adopted by everyone before EIDAS is fully implemented.
"Gee, dat dere shore is a nice marriage ya gots dere. It'd shore be a shame, if da wifey wuz t' find out about ya mistress..."
That was pretty much how J. Edgar Hoover was able to grab Congress by the short hairs for years.
—- the late venerable Prime Minister Jim Hacker
It's also helped create a boom in the cybersecurity industry, and helped build the hiring pipeline most American and Israeli cybersecurity firms are using in the CEE today.
[0] - https://www.politico.eu/article/parliament-defense-subcommit...
[1] - https://vsquare.org/pegasus-spyware-poland-hungary-slovakia-...
Huge part of my decades long IT career is linked with Polish IT industry and I have no idea what are you talking about. Poland is most likely spending heavy millions on Israeli and American spyware mostly used to consolidate power internally.
Try visiting Czechia sometime. That's where exploit dev is largely consolidated thanks to the OS dev teams MS and RedHat offshored there decades ago plus Avast which developed a OS dev and detections engineering pipeline, and the Israeli FDI boom that started a decade ago to take advantage of that.
Poland's scene is mostly Incident Response and SOC, but the Polish talent pool has started climbing up the ladder.
Linked with US and Israel even tighter, now because of let's call it "a family connection".
> OS dev teams MS and RedHat offshored
Their pinnacle achievement is antivirus for Windows and MS Teams.
Denying the role a number of CEE countries play in detection engineering and exploit development isn't helping if you actually care about reducing this kind of erosion.
And I have always used CEE to denote all of Central and Eastern Europe, not just Poland.
If that passes that's not just EU funds being misused but the EU directly mandating spyware on a continental scale!
Spyware in EP parlance means rootkits and zero-day exploits.
This is largely a result of Predator which was co-developed in Czechia and Israel.
They are exempt, but exemption won't help if they get hit by spyware.
This has all to do with the authoritarian tendencies of Europeist movements/ideology.
Those who attain power are corrupted enough to seek to hold on to it; and spying on those you govern is one of the ways to hold on to that power. “What are they up to? Scheming? Against me?”
It's ironic because if politicians do a good job, and don't have much to hide, we'll trust them more and re-elect them.
You can't have wealth without power, because then I can come over and take your wealth from you. Power through violence (monopolized by the state), is what guarantees your rights to your wealth.
The wider the wealth inequality increases, the wider the gap between the haves and the have-nots becomes, the more threatened the wealthy feel and so the more draconical surveillance and speech law enforcement crackdowns becomes on the masses. See modern day UK, EU, etc.
In my EU country the government increased the budget and drill training frequency for riot police this year even if they've been no major events to necessitate that. They know what's coming, since more and more people are poorer from government actions, and they're preparing already to crack down on what's to come. I assume Pegasus and other such spyware to spy on us to prevent descent, is part of that budget too.
So power beats wealth. Easy to see these days with today’s wealthiest people on the planet cowering and paying tributes to Trump.
Also, power is convertible into wealth, as countless politicians have proven, while wealth is not necessarily convertible into power (like Bloomberg’s failed presidential bid has shown).
In conclusion - it’s about power, specifically political power, and the individuals yielding it: the politicians.
Power is just the ability to make more choices, and make bigger choices. Power is, really, the exercise of decision.
The more money you have, the more choices you can make. You can choose to buy a yacht. I can't, the decision is made for me - no.
10 more comments available on Hacker News