[fp64]

My understanding is that the research service is providing legislation with research to inform them on how to implement. What is your claim? That the parliamentary research service is just a bunch of people writing documents nobody cares about and if you look just long enough you will find for each of their results something that claims the opposite?

[AlecSchueler]

> My understanding is that the research service is providing legislation with research to inform them on how to implement

And do you think the research would be complete or honest if it didn't present criticisms and a comprehensive list of use cases for VPNs? It says so many positive things about VPNs and describes them as "essential" so it's really difficult to comprehend how anyone could spin it as somehow calling for a VPN ban.

[fp64]

As I replied before, in that document,

>As the EU reviews cybersecurity and privacy legislation, VPN services may also come under stricter regulatory scrutiny. For instance, it is likely that the revised Cybersecurity Act will introduce child-safety criteria, potentially including measures to prevent the misuse of VPNs to bypass legal protections.

[AlecSchueler]

Again, I can't quite fathom how you're spinning that.

> "may also come under," "it is likely that," "potentially including."

And that's potentially including only " measures to prevent the misuse of VPNs to bypass legal protections" which is a very specific thing.

And it even comes as part of a report that also lists genuine uses of VPNs including secure remote work, protection from surveillance and circumventing authoritarian censorship.

[traceroute66]

> My understanding is that the research service is providing legislation with research to inform them on how to implement.

Dude, just go read the damn website.

The research service does not operate on its own volition. An MEP requests a piece of research to assist them in their parliamentary work because they require independent, objective and authoritative analysis of a topic.

Please stop with the damn conspiracy theories. Sheesh.

A random MEP asked for this research. The MEP may or may not ever table anything based on the research. Ergo, it may or may not ever progress into the parliamentary debate, let alone votes, let alone member state implementation.

Its just RESEARCH.

Stop with the FUD.

[fp64]

I am not aware I was spreading conspiracy theories, and I do not understand why you have to be so aggressive and simultaneously defensive.

An independent, objective, and authoritative analysis requested by a MEP speculates that a restriction or ban on VPN is likely. I think this is valuable information. You are saying this is worth nothing until it actually gets up to a vote. I disagree, I see your point and maybe it's fine to panic only when it actually comes to a vote, but I prefer to know what to expect, and what the Research Service considers an "independent, objective, and authoritative analysis" on this topic.

[traceroute66]

> analysis requested by a MEP speculates that a restriction or ban on VPN is likely.

What the hell are you on about ?

There are what, 700 MEPs from 27 member states ?

Do you even realise the sheer amount of work required to get it from "piece of RESEARCH an MEP requested" to "legislation enacted by member state" ?

And that assumes it survives parliamentary debates and votes intact !

Just because an MEP requested a piece of RESEARCH it DOES NOT MEAN it is "likely" to become legislation.

Stop with the conspiracy theories.