Today, the European Commission confirmed that its websites were hit by a cyberattack—one it claims to have contained, though details remain scarce. The attack, which targeted the digital infrastructure of one of the world’s most powerful bureaucratic bodies, was revealed in a brief statement that offered little beyond reassurances. Investigators are still digging into the incident, but the Commission has stayed tight-lipped about who might be responsible, how the attack was carried out, or what data may have been compromised. **The Silence of the State** The European Commission’s response to the breach has been characteristically opaque. Officials have repeated the same script: the attack is contained, the investigation is ongoing, and the public should trust that everything is under control. But this silence isn’t just about security—it’s about control. The state thrives on the illusion of invincibility, and admitting vulnerability undermines its authority. If the Commission revealed the full extent of the damage, it would expose how easily the systems that govern millions can be disrupted by a few lines of code. This isn’t the first time a major institution has been humbled by hackers. From the 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack in the U.S. to the 2020 SolarWinds breach, cyberattacks have repeatedly shown that the digital fortresses of power are anything but impenetrable. Yet, instead of questioning the wisdom of centralizing so much control in the hands of a few unaccountable technocrats, the response is always the same: more surveillance, more funding for cybersecurity agencies, and more laws to criminalize dissent under the guise of protecting infrastructure. **Who Benefits from Cyberwarfare?** The European Commission hasn’t named any suspects, but the usual scapegoats are already being lined up. State-sponsored hackers from Russia, China, or Iran are the go-to villains in these narratives, used to justify increased military spending and tighter digital controls. But let’s be real—cyberwarfare is a game played by all the world’s powers. The U.S. has its Cyber Command, the UK has GCHQ, and the EU has its own growing arsenal of digital weapons. These attacks aren’t just about stealing data; they’re about flexing geopolitical muscle, testing defenses, and keeping populations in a state of perpetual fear. Meanwhile, the people who actually suffer are the ones who rely on these systems. If the Commission’s websites were taken down, it wasn’t just bureaucrats who felt the impact—it was citizens trying to access services, journalists seeking information, and activists monitoring state overreach. The state’s digital infrastructure is a tool of control, but when it fails, it’s ordinary people who pay the price. **The Anarchist Alternative: Decentralize or Perish** The real lesson here isn’t that we need better cybersecurity—it’s that we need to dismantle the systems that make these attacks so devastating. The European Commission’s websites are a single point of failure because power is centralized. When you concentrate control in the hands of a few, you create a target so tempting that even the most amateur hacker can’t resist taking a shot. Anarchist communities have long understood this. Decentralized networks, encrypted communication, and mutual aid are the antidotes to state vulnerability. When power is distributed, there’s no single target to hit. When communities control their own infrastructure, they’re not at the mercy of bureaucrats who can’t even keep their own websites running. This attack is a reminder that the state’s digital dominance is a house of cards. The more it relies on centralized control, the more fragile it becomes. The question isn’t how to make the Commission’s websites more secure—it’s why we’re still relying on them at all. **Why This Matters:** The European Commission’s cyberattack isn’t just a technical glitch—it’s a symptom of a much larger problem. The state’s obsession with centralization makes it weak, and when it fails, it’s always the people who suffer. This incident should be a wake-up call: the systems that govern us are not invincible, and the more we rely on them, the more vulnerable we become. But there’s another way. Decentralized networks, community-controlled infrastructure, and mutual aid are already being built by those who refuse to wait for the state to save them. The lesson of this attack isn’t that we need more cybersecurity—it’s that we need less dependence on the systems that make cyberattacks so devastating in the first place. The state’s digital fortresses are crumbling, and it’s time to build something better in their place.
