Dutch Government just said no to an American firm buying the keys to their digital State


Dutch Government just said no to an American firm buying the keys to their digital State

Pierluigi Paganini
May 27, 2026

The Dutch government blocked Kyndryl’s €100M bid for Solvinity, citing national security concerns over critical digital infrastructure.

Dutch Government told Kyndryl it can’t buy Solvinity. That sentence doesn’t sound dramatic, but what it means is this: a European government just blocked an American IT company from acquiring the firm that runs DigiD, the platform Dutch residents use to book a doctor’s appointment, buy a house, file their taxes, and interact with virtually every public service in the country. The deal was worth roughly €100 million. The Dutch government said no anyway.

“The Dutch government is blocking a United States-based company’s attempts to acquire a key online identification IT supplier.” reads the post published by Politico.

Kyndryl announced the acquisition in November 2025. The reaction was immediate. Concerns spread that a critical piece of Dutch digital infrastructure would fall under foreign control, and the investment screening authority took those concerns seriously. State Secretary for Digital Economy Willemijn Aerdts wrote to parliament on Tuesday to confirm the government had adopted the authority’s advice in full. The purchase was seen as posing “a possible risk to the public interest”

The Dutch government was careful to frame the decision as principled rather than anti-American.

“The Netherlands attaches great value to the presence of foreign, especially U.S.-based tech companies, and their added value to the Dutch economy and digital infrastructure, but it maintains, at the same time, an independent investment screening framework aimed at protecting the public interest and which applies equally to all investors, independent of their country of origin.” states the letter to parliament.

The underlying concern is the US CLOUD Act. Passed in 2018, it gives American law enforcement and intelligence agencies the power to compel US companies to hand over data stored on servers anywhere in the world, regardless of the host country’s privacy laws. If Kyndryl owned Solvinity, the data behind the Dutch national identity system would theoretically be reachable by US authorities on demand. That’s not a hypothetical Europe wants to test right now.

Kyndryl didn’t take it quietly. The company called the decision “extremely disappointed” and went further: “The politicization of this process has overshadowed the clear and important benefits this transaction would have brought to Solvinity’s customers and Dutch citizens.”

It’s a pointed line. Whether the process was politicized or simply working as designed depends on where you sit.

The timing matters beyond the Netherlands. The decision lands a week before the European Commission unveils its tech sovereignty package, a set of proposals to cut Europe’s dependence on foreign technology across cloud, microchips, and AI. The Dutch block gives Brussels a concrete, live example to point to. What The Hague did with one screening authority this week, Brussels may soon ask every member state to replicate by law.

For any American technology company selling cloud or managed services to European public institutions, the message is plain. A signed deal and a clean antitrust review aren’t enough. The question regulators are now asking is simpler and harder: can you guarantee that your own government can’t reach into European data when it decides to? Most US companies can’t honestly answer yes.

Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Dutch Government)







Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Modern displays are amazing when it comes to detail, brightness, color, and all the ingredients that make for an impressive picture—except motion clarity.

CRT screens are still the king of motion clarity, but plasma flat-panel screens hold a respectable second place, and in many ways I still miss my old 720p 51-inch plasma TV and the crisp motion I gave up by switching to a 4K LCD.

Plasma solved motion the “right” way

Plasma displays didn’t just show an image—they flashed it.

While they operate on different principles, CRTs and plasma TVs have a few things in common. First, the phosphors used by CRTs and plasma displays are the same. Second, because these phosphors fade quickly, they need to be continuously refreshed.

In a CRT, the electron beam scanning from the top to the bottom of the screen achieves this, and in a plasma, a high-speed electric pulse does the same. Because of this rapid pulse-and-fade, these screen technologies have crisp perceptual motion, since our brains tend to interpret moving images that don’t pulse as “smearing” across our retinas.

The pulsing nature of plasma technology isn’t the only reason for its better motion reproduction. These screens also have very low latency and very fast pixel response times. Combined, it’s not quite as good as CRT motion handling, but it’s significantly better than LCD and OLED technology, even today.

Modern TVs rely on sample-and-hold—and that’s the problem

Stand and deliver blurry images

Blur Busters UFO Test

Modern LCD and OLED televisions are “sample and hold” technologies. They can hold each frame of video perfectly for the entire duration of that frame without deviating in brightness and then instantly snap to the next frame without any dipping to black in-between.

On paper, this sounds like a good thing, but your eyes don’t stay still when tracking motion. As they follow a moving object, the image being held on screen effectively drags across your retina, creating the perception of blur. Even if the panel itself is perfectly sharp.

You might not even realize how blurry motion is on modern displays if all you’ve ever seen with the naked eye is an LCD or plasma. However, if you see a CRT or plasma in person, the difference is quite striking.

The sample and hold issue means that no matter how much you increase the refresh rate, that type of blur persists. It’s why my 85Hz CRT monitor is clearly less blurry in motion than my 240Hz LCD monitor. It’s especially apparent when you’re playing 2D games that scroll the entire screen, with LCDs or OLEDs smearing the image in a way that gives me a bit of a headache if I’m being honest.

Playing Diablo 2 on a CRT. Credit: Sydney Louw Butler/Shutterstock.com

It creates this weird situation where a modern TV can be incredibly sharp in a freeze frame but somehow look softer than a lower-resolution display that isn’t sample and hold as soon as you press play.

Motion interpolation is a workaround, not a solution

It’s an abomination, that’s what it is

One of the “fixes” that TV makers came up with to reduce unwanted motion blur is a technology known as frame interpolation, or more commonly “motion smoothing.” Here an algorithm creates fake frames that guess at what the middle step of motion would look like if it were captured. This creates a high frame-rate video output, which we see as smoother and more crisp.

While this doesn’t take away sample-and-hold blur, it does improve motion clarity. Unfortunately, it also destroys the intended frame rate that shows and movies were meant to be seen at. It’s also useless for video games, because it introduces an enormous amount of input lag. NVIDIA’s DLSS technology is also frame interpolation, but it works for games because of several mitigations NVIDIA put into the technology. These measures don’t exist on TVs.

While some people think motion smoothing isn’t all bad, TV makers are no longer activating it by default as much anymore, and my advice is to always turn it off because the trade-offs are just not worth it.

Screenshot 2025-07-01 at 9.21.03 AM

7/10

Brand

TCL

Display Size

85-inches

The 2025 model TCL QM6K Google TV delivers a stunningly clear and bright picture with a new Mini-LED panel, improved local dimming zones, Dolby Vision IQ, and a neat new Halo Control system for improved visuals. Get this TV and elevate your living room. 


Black frame insertion tries to recreate plasma—but comes with trade-offs

Who turned out the lights?

The other trick sample-and-hold screens have to mimic what CRTs and plasma TVs do naturally is called BFI, or Black Frame Insertion. As the name suggests, the display inserts a full black frame between every original frame. This provides an instant and dramatic increase in motion clarity. However, it also has a big impact on brightness. As much as half of the light is now gone, so the image is much dimmer. Pushing overall brightness to compensate makes things hotter and more energy-hungry.

Some BFI implementations cause visible flicker, for which I personally have no tolerance at all, but the biggest problem here is that BFI doesn’t have the smooth pulsing roll off of the phosphors used in CRTs and plasma.


The future might circle back—but we’re not there yet

That might be changing, however, because a new generation of LCDs can leverage the power of multi-zone backlight technology to strobe the backlight across the screen in a way that mimics a CRT scanline.

NVIDIA’s G-SYNC Pulsar has received rave reviews from the biggest motion blur haters, and I sincerely hope that a similar technology becomes standard in TVs going ahead, so we can go back to enjoying the crisp motion we used to have without all the compromises.



Source link