On the 18th of November 2025 two conferences in two European capitals simultaneously discussed issues pertaining to the buzzword of digital sovereignty: the DINAcon in Bern, Switzerland and the European Digital Sovereignty Summit in Berlin, Germany. Despite addressing similar topics, the conferences could not have been more different in content, however: While Swiss administrators used the DINAcon to present their implementation efforts with respect to the free and open-source software and interoperability requirements outlined in articles 9 and 14 of the EMBAG law, respectively, the European governments represented in the European Council pitched a very different vision of digital sovereignty in Berlin: One which emphasizes the competitiveness of and investment into proprietary European software solutions, most likely at the expense of consumer protections. We, as the Switzerland Chapter of the Internet Society (ISOC-CH), are very concerned about the commercial re-interpretation of the term digital sovereignty. While supporting local businesses to develop and administer digital solutions is an essential part of the equation to achieve digital sovereignty, it must not come at the cost of jeopardizing the ability of states to act independently now and in the future. The reaction to an outsized dependency on (state-sponsored) American and Chinese Big Tech firms cannot possibly be an outsized dependency on (state-sponsored) European or Swiss Big Tech companies. Apart from ignoring the fact that companies can change domiciles, be bought by foreign investors or go bankrupt, the “buy European” approach also showcases a lack of creativity and imaginative power on the part of European politicians who cannot fathom an alternative to emulating other global powers and reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of technological dependencies: The fact that a software vendor or cloud computing provider is domestic does nothing to reduce the vendor lock-in effects, the restrictiveness of proprietary software licenses, and the resulting stifling of competition and innovation. Simply procuring digital services domestically falls massively short of achieving digital sovereignty as defined by either the Swiss (with a narrow focus on the state) or European (with a wider perspective including non-state actors) regulators: > “Digital sovereignty requires the necessary control over and ability to act in > the digital realm to ensure the delivery of state services.” – own translation > of the Swiss government’s definition of digital sovereignty > “Digital sovereignty is the ability of Member States to be able to regulate > their digital infrastructure, data and technologies. It encompasses the > ability of individuals, businesses and institutions in Europe to act > independently in the digital world, allowing for autonomous decisions about > the use, governance, and development of digital systems without undue reliance > on external actors […].” – taken from the Declaration for European Digital > Sovereignty A more encompassing answer as to how ensure digital sovereignty is needed. Any entity which wants to have control over the digital services it uses and aims to be able to change them to serve its specific needs should strive to operationalize the following principles: * local infrastructure: Having access to geographically local computing resources, network infrastructure, and electricity is a prerequisite for being able to exert control over one’s digital services. * local expertise: Without a motivated, experienced and educated local work force who can develop, debug and deploy digital services one cannot truly operate in a self-sovereign manner. * interoperability: Open standards and open data formats allow for connectivity between services and reduced switching costs, thereby preventing vendor lock-ins and increasing one’s agency. * free and open-source software: The four freedoms of free and open-source software (use, change, share and improve) give a legal and technical guarantee to the user to be a self-determined actor rather than a disenfranchised consumer. Instead of paying lip service to free and open-source software like the European Declaration for Digital Sovereignty does by making it optional and conditional, > “Open-source solutions can play an important role enhancing digital > sovereignty, > provided they meet high cybersecurity standards and are complemented by > reliable proprietary technologies where appropriate.” policy makers should recognize that actual digital sovereignty cannot be achieved without a firm commitment to free and open-source software. Operationalizing these criteria is obviously harder than simply procuring domestic digital products. It requires new capabilities, organizational structures and cultural changes. But unlike the simplistic “buy domestic” strategy – whose political appeal in times of economic and geopolitical turmoil is obvious – they actually provide a path to achieve what the Declaration for European Digital Sovereignty sets out as a goal: ensuring “the ability of individuals, businesses and institutions in Europe to act independently in the digital world”. As an NGI-0 consortium member, ISOC-CH will continue highlighting the advantages of free and open-source software, open standards, and open data formats for attaining digital sovereignty to policy makers, administrators, educators, and the wider public. We are happy to support Swiss decision makers on municipal, cantonal and federal levels with our expertise and network to take steps towards true digital sovereignty together. The post The state of discussions on digital sovereignty in Switzerland and Europe appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

On Friday 18 September a small group of people gathered at L200 (and online) to analyze certain important risks associated with the new law on the Swiss E-ID. The discussion was very lively and productive and the main outcomes relevant for keeping a critical attitude with the fast digital transformation that is happening everywhere. We identified 3 major “risk areas” that need to be better understood especially now that the outcome of the referendum was positive, and the Swiss E-ID will be eventually implemented: 1) Unnecessary dependence on technology in everyday life. 2) Extended exposure of one’s private data. 3) Increased potential damage by identity theft, device hacking or failure. Some of these risks could be better addressed by the current law, most notably the lack of clear measures that ensure its optional character. And others, like the increased exposure to surveillance and various forms of attacks or accidents, are questioning the necessity of a Swiss E-ID in the first place.  The main goal of our discussion was not to repeat the main arguments that prioritize those risks in comparison to the respective benefits mostly related to convenience and law enforcement. The goal was to discuss the most effective ways of communicating those risks to raise the awareness and engagement levels toward a wise digital transformation. 1) The optional character of the Swiss E-ID is an empty promise This is a key point to communicate properly: A digital E-ID stops to be “optional” when it is obligatory for an activity that is really important for someone. If the E-ID is required for me to have an operation for a serious disease it stops being optional for me. It is obligatory. And if for people that have an ID, the compromise to have also an E-ID to access vital services might not seem such a disaster, it becomes one for those without an ID in the first place. If you are not one of those that believe that such people should be exterminated, you should make sure that the E-ID stays truly optional. The law does not guarantee this, but the people can still fight for it. Related to this topic, you can read a recent publication by the Computer magazine titled “How much technology is needed to build a smart community space?“, by Panayotis Antoniadis, which explains why it is important to maintain a wide set of more or less technological options for addressing social problems and why FLOSS software is a key ingredient for enabling local communities to make the right choices. 2) Stronger identity means more powerful surveillance Simple narratives around surveillance capitalism like the “age verification with restricted data” case study, as promoted of the “pro” campaign for the Swiss E-ID, can be dangerous. The threats to privacy caused by the avalanche of digitization cannot be addressed only through protection measures. It is a complex issue that requires complex thinking, not an easy task for communication specialists.  The intention of the Swiss E-ID law has a positive dimension. It aims to minimize the amount of personal data shared with private companies when they need to verify certain aspects of our identity, most notably our age. This is a good design, but it underestimates the power of big corporations to extract more than necessary information in the same way that nudge people into accepting their cookies.  Moreover, it adds one more actor that has full access of one’s digital life, the government. Big companies still collect the same amount of personal data they did before and in addition have access also to our official identification information. And the government that was not aware of our online activities, it will now has also access to a significant part of it. Of course, we trust more our government than Facebook. This is clear. But even a benign state can fail sometimes, can become the victim of attacks, or change in light of a big crisis. Finally, even if we do our best to protect our privacy online, this success can cause important side-effects. A more trustworthy digital world can increase our addiction and dependence on digital services and the power of those having access to this information for producing knowledge on human behavior. 3) Increased digitization increases vulnerability to attacks or failures Accidents or failures happen always, with the examples of blackout in Spain and the airport ransomware still present in our memory, we can only hope that we will not be among the victims of the next natural disaster, malicious attack, or internal failure.  Moreover, the danger of identity theft is another reason why the optional character is highly compromised. Here, the Swiss E-ID law cannot do much. It is a matter of implementation and the advantage is always to those that wait in the back instead of leading the process. The fact that the proposed solution is not fully open source can only make us worry. The more we depend on digital devices for our everyday life the more vulnerable we depend on potential failures and accidents. If we get used to our Swiss E-ID and we leave its physical counterpart always at home, the more harmful it will become if we fall from the bicycle and break our phone or if we lose it before going to an important event or trip that requires it. Final note: the critical role of Free/Libre and Open Source Software The result of the referendum was remarkably close despite the fact that the majority of political parties were in favor. This means that the Swiss people are really concerned by the risks of digitization and thus it is really important to discuss and debate about specific details of its implementation. For this, the role of Free/Libre and Open Source Software is critical, and ISOC-CH is a communication partner of the more ambitious funding programmes for supporting FLOSS software worldwide, the NGI0 Commons Fund. Our forthcoming “what does digital sovereignty mean for … ” series, will include this key dimension in the overall debate taking the perspective of different actors and focusing on what can be actually done, now. Just waiting the European industry to fight the American Big Tech on its own field is not very productive. There is a lot we can all do to protect ourselves from actors that abuse their power and from technologies that do not serve our real needs.  Become an ISOC-CH member and/or join our announcements list by sending a message to contact@isoc.ch to stay tuned! The post What could possibly go wrong with the Swiss E-ID? (a short summary) appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

A small group of experts from ISOC-CH, the pEp (pretty Easy privacy) project, former Planck Security AG/SA, Cisco and Google gathered on Thursday, Oct 29 at L200 to discuss the last developments in the email encryption space, securing email, beyond the body to header protection. The cozy Happy Hour approach gave the base for a longer discussion which started by two input talks on the topic. INPUT 1: THE MOTIVATION (WHY WE SHOULD CARE ABOUT EMAIL ENCRYPTION) by Hernâni Marques (ISOC-CH) The first talk by Hernâni Marques (ISOC-CH, formerly pEp) gave some motivational arguments for why it still matters to care about email encryption, given, e.g., the fact that email is still the most widely distributed identity system for services on the Internet, with virtually no service allowing a proper sign up without an email address which also has the advantage that pseudonyms can be used avoiding to (directly) reveal one’s identity. There was also emphasis put on the existing Mass Surveillance practices — over 10 years ago, former national security contractor Edward Snowden showed the pervasive nature of US-led Mass Surveillance. It can be assumed the existing practice got even reinforced in the meantime. Also Switzerland engages in practices of Mass Surveillance — a respective secret service law was approved with majority vote by the Swiss population, making the also mentioned cypherpunk movement’s core point real privacy for citizens, enterprises or even the very own government, can only be achieved by technical means, that is, using cryptography. INPUT 2: TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS (THE RFC 9788 STANDARD) by Bernie Höneisen (Ucom.ch / ISOC-CH) On the second input talk, Bernie Höneisen (Ucom.ch / ISOC-CH) showed ongoing developments from the IETF space which aim at making email encryption more accessible and useful. Main focus was put on the latter part. Using S/MIME or PGP/MIME, emails can be protected body-wise. However, the protection of current email systems typically does not include the header section. But the latter may contain sensitive information; e.g. the Subject header field might give enough clues on what a communication is about (without even knowing the messages’ content). To also protect sensitive information contained in the header section of an email, the IETF recently published a new standard (RFC 9788). In addition to protecting header fields, the document provides means to protect against a few other attacks as well as mechanisms to avoid protected information inadvertently leaking to unprotected (parts of) reply or forwarded emails. As Bernie pointed out and as it can be seen in his slide deck, tests in the past showed that existing header protection attempts showed different kind weaknesses in rendering emails. This included artifacts like having to click on attachments to open an email or even getting nuisance warnings regarding security. Using RFC 9788, also legacy email clients can render the received message without major issues. RFC 9788 describes in details how emails with header protection are created, rendered and replied to in a secure and private manner. Furthermore it includes test vectors and a lot of other useful information. Along with RFC 9788, the IETF also published RFC 9787 providing guidance on End-to-End Email Security for implementers of email systems. OPEN DISCUSSION The discussion following the above was vivid with every person present playing an active role able to talk at length, leading to a few non-obvious take-aways: * People don’t seem to care a lot about email encryption, while the government even has legislation in place targeting that channel (in CH: BÜPF and NDG) * The email system is a legacy system and (because of interoperability) difficult to fix * end-to-end encryption (E2EE) in email is an exception, while most organizations, which use encryption, use S/MIME internally * Other (popular) messaging systems failed at replacing email, and its letter rather than chat / office room character; in that sense subject protection, for setting a topic, is very helpful * Encryption between email servers, which got momentum after Snowden revelations, like widespread HTTPS use, might be enough to solve “80% of the issue with 20% of the effort”, as one participant put; even though this not being a true E2EE solution. * Companies hesitant to E2E email encryption due to legal requirement or preserving information after a employee moves on ABOUT THE EVENT FORMAT The Happy Hour format proved to be a nice way to discuss a topic in an easy atmosphere, with the social aspect playing a bigger role than normally, this by the soon break of the line between presenters and (interested). Happy Hours are a suitable format for events where ISOC-CH members want have to a topic discussed and elaborate on a topic with an expert group, and not just to present a piece of content without the expectation of much engagement. The post EVENT SNAPSHOT: ISOC-CH Happy Hour on email encryption appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

From 21–23 November 2025, the Miljenko Dereta Center in Belgrade hosted DESCON 9.0. Organized by the Internet Society – Serbia Chapter, this year’s conference carried the theme “Trust and Power: AI is a Harsh Mistress.”Participants from diverse fields—developers, researchers, activists, artists, and technologists—gathered to explore how today’s technological infrastructure is reshaping society. The event once again distinguished itself through its interdisciplinary reach across ecology, open hardware, digital rights, citizen science, and artificial intelligence. Opening the conference, Desiree Miloshevic, DESCON’s founder, reminded the community that DESCON is where hands-on experimentation meets policy. What began as a small IoT and security meetup has grown into a platform for sustainable connectivity, civic innovation, and climate technology. She called on participants to question assumptions, collaborate across sectors, and build technology that protects dignity and the public good. The keynote by Marianthe Stavridou, Vice-Chair of the Internet Society – Switzerland Chapter, traced a line from Plato’s Cave to the algorithmic systems shaping our perception today. She warned of a drift toward “technofeudalism”, where data becomes the ultimate commodity in the hands of a few. The message is clear: AI is not the fate of humanity but its mirror—ethics, transparency, and openness must guide its developments. The Finnish researcher Jari Arkko spoke remotely, examining AI’s massive and growing environmental footprint, from energy-hungry data centers to costly hardware. Yet he emphasized that AI can still be a net-positive force when used judiciously to optimize energy systems in transport, buildings, and industry. Sometimes, he noted, the best solution is not AI. Later, Urs Gehrig demonstrated how AI is transforming reliability engineering across sectors, from automated train inspections to integrated data systems. His takeaway: AI succeeds when organizations collaborate, understand their processes, and move beyond proofs-of-concept toward practical deployment. Andrijana Gavrilović of the Diplo Foundation unpacked why global AI governance remains slow and fragmented. Drawing on the work of the UN High-Level Advisory Body on AI, she highlighted recommendations for a scientific panel, regulatory interoperability, global data frameworks, and a smaller but focused UN AI office. With forums like the Global Digital Compact taking shape, she stressed that AI is global—and its governance must urgently catch up. From the UNDP, Slobodan Marković reflected on Serbia’s early AI leadership through its 2019 strategy and institutions like the National AI Institute and the national data center. But momentum is fading: political backing has weakened, pilots have stalled, and the upcoming AI strategy lacks a funded action plan. Serbia’s future AI progress, he argued, depends entirely on renewed political will and sustained investment. The Share Foundation team—Andrijana Ristić, Tijana Stevanović, and Filip Milošević—offered a clear-eyed analysis into global spyware operations and Serbia’s own NoviSpy case. They warned that spyware is now an expanding industry threatening not just individuals but democratic systems. Encryption is meaningless if the device is compromised, they stressed, and “I have nothing to hide” is not a defense but a dangerous surrender of rights. The workshop “AI Is a Harsh Mistress” tackled the promises and risks of autonomous decision-making. One group highlighted the strain data centers place on power grids, the erosion of coding competence due to AI assistance, and conflicts between commercial and human-centered AI models. Another group emphasized existing EU protections—such as GDPR Article 22—while noting that enforcement lags behind technological reality. Both agreed on the need for human oversight, stronger legal safeguards, and attention to how AI disproportionately affects vulnerable communities. The DESCON 9.0 Hackathon launched with high energy, challenging teams to upgrade KLIMERKO, the citizen-science air-quality network born at DESCON 7.0. Teams explored new sensors, solar-powered prototypes, LoRaWAN connectivity, indoor TFT displays, and predictive models combining Klimerko data with weather forecasts. Across three days, DESCON 9.0 showed how bottom-up initiatives can bring together people from different disciplines to confront the defining challenges of the algorithmic age. The event underscored a shared belief: technology is not an inevitable force but a human choice. The systems we design must elevate dignity, strengthen trust, and distribute power fairly. The labyrinth of the digital future may be complex—but navigating it is a collective effort. Many thanks to Desiree Miloshevic Evans, Ivan Jelić, Milena Milivojev, Jan Krasni, Božidar Tanasković, Vanja Stanić, the team and the Internet Society – Serbia Chapter for an inspiring and unforgettable event. The post DESCON 9.0: Navigating Trust and Power in the Algorithmic Age appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

From 7th to 8th of November over 1,000 programmers, activists, academics and business leaders have gathered in Bolzano, South Tyrol, Italy for the 25th edition of the South-Tyrol Software Freedom Conference (SFSCON). Given the huge dependency of European businesses and administrations on American Big Tech companies, which the current US administration is not hesitant to use as leverage in international relations, Digital Sovereignty has been one of the key topics1 of the conference. Discussions ranged from how Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) can make communities resilient in times of crises, efforts to put existing interoperability requirements into practice, how Free Software communities can assist policy makers in switching to FOSS, to funding opportunities for Free Software by means of * regulatory requirements of the European Union’s Cyber Resilience Act (CRA), * effective public procurement policies which favor Free Software while preventing open washing, or * direct public investments into innovative ecosystems. In addition to attending the informative conference talks, we’ve used the opportunity to connect with our fellow NGI Zero consortium members from OW2 and FSFE, who were both present with booths at the conference, and discuss recent European developments in the realm of Free Software like the upcoming Digital Commons European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (DC-EDIC) and what one can expect from them. Our main takeaway from this year’s SFSCON is a somewhat surprising concurrency of encouraging and discouraging developments in Europe when it comes to the role of Free Software: On the one hand European institutions cut funding for important and successful FOSS projects and increase their dependency on US Big Tech in, e.g., schools, while at the same time making provisions for Free Software in landmark legislation like the CRA or institutionalizing FOSS efforts in, e.g., the European Open Source Academy or the aforementioned Digital Commons DC-EDIC. This situation shows that there is more advocacy work to be done to realize the full potential FOSS offers to achieve Digital Sovereignty. The (unfortunate) fact that we were the, to our knowledge, only Swiss organization at the conference is symptomatic of the – with few laudable exceptions – low importance Swiss policy makers and businesses assign to FOSS. We’re convinced that Swiss administrations, businesses and society at large would stand to benefit from engaging with and learning from the experiences our neighbors make with Free Software. 1. The others being: Health, Engineering, Cybersecurity, Open Hardware, Automation, Fediverse, Skills & Training, Culture, Data Spaces, Community Building. ︎ The post SFSCON 2025: The ever-growing importance of Free Software appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

The 10th edition of the South Eastern European Dialogue on Internet Governance (SEEDIG 10) convened in Athens under the theme “A Decade of Dialogue and Cooperation: What’s Next?” The event brought together policymakers, regulators, academics, civil-society representatives, technical experts, private-sector leaders, and youth delegates from across South Eastern Europe to reflect on a decade of digital transformation — and the dilemmas that accompany it. Returning to Athens, where the first global Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was held nearly twenty years ago, lent the event symbolic resonance. Yet SEEDIG 10 was far from a nostalgic gathering; it was forward-looking and, at times, uneasy. A decade on, the region continues to grapple with a central question: how to pursue digital innovation without compromising democratic accountability or sovereignty. A major strand of discussion focused on artificial intelligence (AI) and the digital transformation of public administration. Greece’s gov.gr platform was presented by government officials as a regional model for digital public services. By unifying over 1,500 state functions — from tax filing and healthcare to business registration — under one single digital identity, gov.gr aims to transform how citizens interact with the state. Yet its success also exposes structural dependencies. The platform’s reliance on partnerships with major global technology providers sparked debate over data sovereignty, infrastructure localisation, and long-term control. As a participant said innovation without autonomy risks replacing old inefficiencies with new dependencies. In parallel, Greece has taken visible steps to strengthen digital skills and AI literacy in the public sector and education. The government has recently signed agreements with OpenAI (Initiative: OpenAI for Greece) and Google Greece (Initiative: AI for All) to promote digital capacity-building and “transform public service with AI.” The OpenAI for Greece memorandum, announced in September 2025, introduces ChatGPT Edu in upper-secondary schools and provides teacher training. It also offers mentoring for start-ups in the health, climate, and public-service sectors. Google’s AI for All initiative, launched in 2024, will provide hands-on training for hundreds of civil servants in AI applications, data analysis, and modernisation practices, according to government officials.  While these initiatives demonstrate a strong political commitment to digital upskilling and reskilling, SEEDIG 10 participants urged a more critical reading. Vendor-led training — even when labelled a partnership — risks embedding dependence at the level of tools, methods, and institutional knowledge. When the same corporations that dominate global data and AI markets are entrusted with training governments and educators, the boundary between capacity-building and market capture becomes blurred. Without parallel investment in publicly governed expertise, open educational frameworks, and national research capacity, such collaborations risk deepening the dependencies of every country that seeks to remain independent. Furthermore, the European Union’s ambition to maintain a common area of research and development may be jeopardised by dependence on U.S.-based private vendors. With this approach, EU member states could undermine the Union’s efforts toward a sustainable, ethical, and independent digital ecosystem. Debates around the EU AI Act, the Digital Services Act (DSA), and media sustainability reflected similar tensions. Participants broadly welcomed Europe’s regulatory ambition but warned that outsourcing compliance to the same dominant technology companies undermines accountability. Smaller markets in South Eastern Europe face the dual challenge of aligning with EU frameworks while building independent infrastructures that protect local media, data, and civic space. Behind these regulatory discussions lay a quieter but crucial theme: technical resilience. Panels on routing security, domain-name management, and universal acceptance underscored that regional strength depends not only on regulatory compliance but also on sustained investment in infrastructure, expertise, and governance capacity. Youth participants brought energy and sharp insight, challenging older generations to move beyond symbolic inclusion. Their workshops on AI ethics and cybersecurity called for youth-driven monitoring of digital rights, greater transparency in policymaking, and stronger support for regional innovation networks. SEEDIG’s commitment to intergenerational dialogue reflects its broader ethos: an open, inclusive, and multistakeholder approach to digital governance. The issues raised at SEEDIG 10 — from AI governance to data sovereignty — resonate deeply with the priorities of the Swiss Internet Society (ISOC-CH). Switzerland, too, must navigate the balance between technological innovation and digital self-determination. Questions of trust, accountability, and open standards are not regional but universal. By linking discussions across Europe’s regions, SEEDIG and ISOC-CH can jointly strengthen efforts toward an open, resilient, and rights-based digital future. This time, Athens provided an apt metaphor: a meeting place of historic ideals and modern contradictions. For South Eastern Europe, the question is no longer whether to embrace the digital age — but on whose terms; because, as another participant said, innovation without sovereignty is not progress. ISOC-CH members are encouraged to follow SEEDIG’s initiatives, contribute their expertise, and participate in shaping the next decade of digital governance across Europe. The post SEEDIG 10: Innovation without Sovereignty is Not Progress appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

On September 28, 2025, the Swiss electorate will decide the fate of the Federal Act on Electronic Identity Credentials. This legislation proposes the introduction of a state-issued electronic identity, a centralized digital credential designed to streamline access to public and private services alike. While the Federal Council and Parliament advocate for its adoption, a coalition of civic organizations has successfully triggered a referendum, ensuring the final arbiter will be the citizenry. The shadow of the 2021 vote, where a similar proposal was resoundingly defeated, looms large over the debate. Proponents frame the E-ID as an indispensable cornerstone of Switzerland’s digital infrastructure. They contend that a state-controlled system, bound by strict legal and security frameworks, offers a superior alternative to the current patchwork of private commercial logins, thereby fostering greater public trust. The government assures that the E-ID will remain voluntary and free of charge, positing it as a tool of inclusion rather than compulsion. The practical advantages are presented as self-evident: a seamless, paperless conduit for administrative tasks, financial operations, and civic duties, promising unparalleled efficiency. Economically, it is envisioned as a catalyst for innovation and a bolster to the nation’s competitive standing. The broad, cross-spectrum political endorsement is cited as testament to the proposal’s balance and robust design.  However, a closer look reveals significant misgivings. The current proposal is best understood as a hybrid model—not fully open-source, though not entirely a black-box system either. Detractors issue a sobering warning against the creation of a monolithic data repository, arguing that such a concentration of sensitive personal information presents an irresistible target for malicious actors, notwithstanding any promised safeguards. They challenge the very premises of the proposal, suggesting the E-ID is likely to be neither entirely secure, truly free, nor meaningfully voluntary in the long term. History offers a clear pattern of such tools evolving from conveniences into necessities—much as the credit card or mobile number became de facto requisites for participation in modern life. The potential for a similar trajectory here effectively nullifies the principle of voluntary use.  A critical technical objection lies in the system’s architecture not being fully open source. This opacity, critics argue, inherently slows the identification and remediation of security vulnerabilities. In such a model, the relentless search for flaws is ceded to adversaries, while the community of independent researchers and developers is sidelined. This creates a fertile ground for “zero-day exploits” and ensures that when a breach occurs—a scenario treated as inevitable—its impact will be maximized. Additional misgivings include the risks of enrollment fraud and the implications of a centralized—rather than decentralized—digital identity model. Critical questions about data minimization and the exclusion of vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, remain largely unanswered. For opponents, a rejection of this proposal is not a rejection of digital progress itself. Rather, it is a battle for its soul. It’s about being for good and ethical digital progress: decentralized, open-source, and free. It is the affirmation that Switzerland can, and should, aspire to a more sophisticated model: one that is inherently privacy-respecting, decentralized, voluntary and truly worthy of public trust. The referendum presents a fundamental choice: is the E-ID a key to a more efficient and secure future, responsibly stewarded by the state? Or is it a step toward heightened surveillance and systemic vulnerability? On September 28, voters will weigh these competing visions and shape Switzerland’s digital destiny. Marianthe Stavridou PS. The Internet Society has championed  for all these values since the Internet’s early days and has weathered many turning points when the perceived urgency to “catch up” with rapid developments proved destructive. Preserving different options truly available, including non-digital choice, is essential if Swiss society is to defend itself against addiction, cyberattacks, and disasters. Taking slow, careful steps is a Swiss tradition; in this case prioritizing safety and resilience is more important than ever. The post The referendum is not a rejection of digitalization, but a battle for its soul appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

Switzerland’s model highlights how open-source AI can democratize technology, breaking the dominance of a handful of corporations over critical digital infrastructure. By making AI models transparent, auditable, and adaptable, open-source frameworks empower governments, researchers, and businesses to innovate without vendor lock-in. This approach not only safeguards digital sovereignty but also accelerates local AI ecosystems, enabling startups and public institutions to build tailored solutions for education, healthcare, and administration. Moreover, open-source AI fosters collaborative progress. Unlike closed systems, where development is siloed within private entities, publicly available models allow global contributions; researchers can refine biases, developers can optimize efficiency, and policymakers can assess risks. This collective effort mitigates the “black box” problem of proprietary AI, where decisions are opaque and accountability is limited. Critically, in a geopolitical landscape where data control equates to power, open-source AI offers a counterbalance. It reduces dependency on foreign tech giants, ensuring that nations retain autonomy over their digital futures. For Switzerland-and other countries adopting similar strategies-this means stronger resilience against external pressures, whether in data governance, economic competition, or ethical standards. Switzerland’s combination of permissive licensing, multilingual inclusivity, and sector-specific oversight offers a noteworthy template for small nations seeking to develop AI capacity without ceding control to large technology firms. By prioritizing transparency and ethical safeguards, this approach ensures that AI serves the public interest rather than corporate interests. Smaller economies, in particular, can leverage this framework to punch above their weight in the global AI race, fostering homegrown innovation while avoiding technological subjugation. Ultimately, Switzerland’s experiment could inspire a new paradigm in AI development: one where transparency, ethics, and public benefit take precedence over profit-driven exclusivity. As the world grapples with AI’s societal risks, open-source models may prove indispensable in aligning technology with democratic values and human rights, proving that innovation need not come at the cost of accountability. Marianthe Stavridou, August 1st, 2025 The post The Wider Impact of Open-Source AI appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

ABOUT THE POSITION ISOC-CH is a key partner in the Horizon Europe NGI0 Commons Fund, and through this engagement a great opportunity arises to develop as an organization both locally in Switzerland and abroad, creating links between local issues and struggles for digital rights and important developments at the European and global level. The role of ISOC-CH in the NGI0 project is to develop the so-called “Tech dossiers” of Free/Libre and Open Software (FLOSS), as summarized in this page: https://isoc.ch/dossiers/ For this job position, we are searching for a candidate that will cover the topic of digital sovereignty and cloud solutions, addressing policy makers and the government with an expected engagement of 30% (0.3 FTE / 1.5 days per week) for a period of 1 year, with a possible extension up to 2 years, under an employment contract with ISOC-CH under Swiss law with social security, taxation, and paid in Swiss Francs. The 100% salary is fixed to CHF 8,000 gross per month, which for a 30% contract translates to CHF 2,400 / month. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Document and analyze the digital sovereignty efforts across Europe, with a special focus on cloud solutions and collaborative tools. 2. Develop a digital sovereignty policy strategy in Switzerland, documented in a way to be re-usable in different contexts. 3. Become part of the ISOC-CH NGI0 team and contribute to the development of tech dossiers related to cloud solutions and collaborative tools, and others, according to the needs of the project. APPLICATION DOSSIER Please submit the below documents at contact@isoc.ch before August 20th: 1. A 2-page CV 2. A letter of intent (max. 1,000 words) with your own perspective on digital sovereignty in light of recent developments in Europe and Switzerland and ways to approach it from a policy perspective include a short list of references to relevant material (max. 5). DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS * A degree in law, policy, social science, or other related fields preferred. * More than 3 years work experience on policy related topics * Track record of effectively analyzing issues, thinking creatively and strategically about bringing difficult issues on the policy table. * Good understanding of the Free/Libre and Open source software ecosystem. * Experience working collaboratively and effectively through influence with internal and external stakeholders including government officials, foundations, civil society, industry. * Excellent writing, speaking, and presentation skills with ability to synthesize and summarize findings and recommendations to diverse audiences. * Ability to adapt to shifting priorities and deadlines, while engaging effectively with other teams * Knowledge of research and current trends in Internet-related issues across geographies, with a special focus on digital sovereignty. * Fluency in English is mandatory, as all outputs will be produced in English for European level dissemination. Proficiency in German and/or French is strongly preferred for effective engagement with local stakeholders, review documents, regulations, and participate in regional policy discussions. TIMELINE * 15.06.2025 Job opening and procedure announced * 20.08.2025 Deadline for application submission * 05-15.09.2025 Interviews with top-5 candidates * 01.10.2025 Beginning of the first year contract (30%) ABOUT ISOC The Internet Society Switzerland Chapter (ISOC-CH) is a non-governmental not-for-profit association seated in Zurich, Switzerland, founded in 2012. ISOC-CH is recognized as a chapter of the (global) Internet Society (ISOC), headquartered in Reston, Virginia, USA, and Geneva, Switzerland. ISOC as the umbrella organization is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1992 to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education and policy and specifically ISOC global, the organizational home for groups responsible for Internet infrastructure standards, including the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). The ISOC-CH association is an equal opportunity employer. Employment selection and related decisions are made without regard to sex, race, age, disability, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, color or any other protected class. Compensation and benefit package for this position will be competitively commensurate with the successful applicant’s qualifications. Applications will be evaluated until the position has been filled. The list of applicants will not be posted publicly and will be reviewed in confidence by members of the evaluation committee. ABOUT NGI0 COMMONS FUND NGI0 Commons fund is part of the NGI Zero coalition, led by NLnet Foundation, which uses a very flexible cascading funding scheme that enables a large number of carefully curated small grants for FLOSS projects (between 5 000 and 50 000 euro). Between now and 2027 the project will award an unprecedented 21.6 million euro in small to medium-size R&D grants towards solutions that bring the next generation of the internet closer. The post ISOC.ch is hiring – application process is open appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.

Policy related content The post Policy appeared first on ISOC Switzerland Chapter.