Finally!
The entire country has been clamouring for this for weeks, and the government has been completely silent about it. A couple of weeks ago, the entire parliament (with only a single party dissenting) voted for a motion to end the contract with Solvinity, but the government extended it anyway, leaving blocking the takeover as the only option, and there wasn't a lot of confidence that the government would do that.
The whole reason for this is that Solvinity host DigiD, the Dutch e-ID system that handles authentication to all government and many other sensitive systems (healthcare). With the US law that the US government should be able to get access to any data held by a US company, regardless of where it's hosted, this system clearly should be kept out of American hands.
Of course there's still plenty of sensitive data in the hands of Microsoft, Amazon and other US companies. No idea when they're going to do something about that.
It is a bit more complex tham that.
Logius is the company that actually owns and manages the DigiD stack, it's just that they hired Solvinity for their expertise. AFAIK Solvinity can't access the data.
I can't find it right now, but on Tweakers there was a long comment by someone on the inside that explained Logius basically had almost no know-how of how the current stack works, and there's lots of bespoke stuff. Basically classic vendor lock-in. The government (rather, Logius) now really wants to transition away from Solvinity, but that will likely be a 5+ year process.
I also feel like this is another thing that the "fast ring" of the EU should do together. Take Estonia's stack as a base, and then countries like Sweden, Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands adopt it and co- develop it. Make it extensible for the bespoke things the countries need, and every few years check which bespoke extensions can actually be generalized and modularized. Would lead to a much better product. A man can dream :)
> I also feel like this is another thing that the "fast ring" of the EU should do together. Take Estonia's stack as a base, and then countries like Sweden, Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands adopt it and co- develop it. Make it extensible for the bespoke things the countries need, and every few years check which bespoke extensions can actually be generalized and modularized.
Argentina's ministry of education did something like this with university software. The one used by students to sign up and by teachers to track grades, etc. There's a single open source modularised, customisable system made country-wide, and public universities customise it to their needs.
Before this initiative, every university was implementing their own software from scratch. In many cases, different faculties (e.g.: Engineering, Natural Sciences, Humanities, etc) each had their own software development teams developing their own independent software stack.
> Argentina's ministry of education did something like this with university software. The one used by students to sign up and by teachers to track grades, etc.
For what it's worth, this seems roughly equivalent to Moodle, which is open-source (GPL) and used globally, apparently especially popular in some of western Europe, the US, etc. [1] School systems can and do of course customise it as needed.
[1] https://stats.moodle.org/
> AFAIK Solvinity can't access the data.
Solvinity is the hoster. It can fully access the stack.
It's even more complicated: the datacenter and the servers are owned and operated by the government, and the DigiD app itself is owned and operated by government-owned Logius.
From what I have been able to deduce, Solvinity is contracted for some kind of sysadmin services - so basically Kubernetes babysitting?
Are you suggesting sysadmin access isn't sufficient to access data?
How can you be sure that Solvinity can't access the data if Logius doesn't know how the current stack works? 5+ years to migrate sounds really bad.
Honestly they have good separation of concerns in the Dutch government. And running the stack doesn't automatically mean hosting the services, there's enough local expertise in the Netherlands to run that.
A few years ago I had the mispleasure of working for the island government of Bonaire, and they kinda run the same systems as they do in the mainland, being a sort of municipality.
Since all gemeentes in the Netherlands are basically independently run but have to communicate with each other for DigiD but also the GBA (ID system) and loads of other stuff, they invented a standard. It's a SOAP based monstrosity called StUF, and you better spell it like that.
I can't find much about StUF in English, but there is this about the succesor where they lament on how engrained StUF still is.
https://www.conduction.nl/commonground/
It wouldn't surprise me that migration to common ground is what they are refering too. StUF knowledge is not widespread due to the level of vendor lock in. There's not many vendors and outside GovIT nobody cares about StUF.
Estonia's tech was cool maybe 20 years ago. From what I understand it's a bit too hard on fetishization of PKI and Ukraine goes too hard on apps. Netherlands actually gets it really well with DigId that is doing bare minimum needed to actually perform eidas stuff without getting into the woods with legally blessed asn1 schemas and oid [0].
I'm not sure what bespoke stuff they invented to get their sweet vendor lock in eurobucks, but the whole thing is nothing more than an OAuth provider for 19 million people. I guess NFC integration in the app that reads physical ids is on a fancier side, but I suspect on that side it's vendor locked by card vendor and their SDK.
[0] https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1398-12#Text
Can you elaborate on what you find problematic about the Estonian ID stack?
For one, they had a a major f-up with eIDs in 2017: https://ria.ee/en/news/estonia-resolves-its-id-card-crisis
And they are just good at marketing. Belgium had eIDs earlier never messed up so much as Estonians.
Yeah, but it was the vendor who fucked up, not them. One can argue that using long-term certificates is bad practice in itself, but that's arguable.
Disclaimer: I have more exposure to Ukrainian variation of this setup (see jkurwa) than to actual Estonian and extrapolate a bit from what I heard from people. Half of this may be outdated or wrong, but I believe that the general vibe is correct.
From what I know about Estonian eID stack, they use traditional PKI to the full extent -- LDAP, PKI, OCSP, all the standard designs from the 90ies and then internally (for use by the government itself) they have a sort of a document exchange system on top of that where everything is done through CMS (PKCS). I believe this is why eIDAS and trust services directive talk about trust lists, qualified certificate authorities and all that.
So you get a physical id card that is a smart card for X509 certificate and then sign, encrypt and do all the stuff you do with keys once you figured out key management. Since the key can't leave the card you need to deal either with a special Estonian keyboard that doubles as a keyreader (in Ukrainian flavor we get a mobile app that can generate a key and get x509 issued remotely, maybe Estonia has that too nowdays or we get a file-based key from a trusted provider, like a bank) or get an actual keyreader or a phone. On the provider side you also have to deal with trust lists, because Estonia and Lithuania don't use the same root of course.
The first gotcha is -- if you have LDAP, CSP and OCSP and can query those, that's a bit of a privacy risk (AFAIK, primary key is based on the date of birth, because reasons). Second gotcha -- key rotation is not practical, so certificates are long lived. Certificates that I saw had demographic identifier of the person as a serial, which is not great for privacy, but convenient for deployment I guess (for comparison, Ukrainian flavor only allows CSP through subject key and has the number deep in the directory lookup extension)
I don't think the stack is bad, but I think it's an overkill for the basic feature of logging into the government website and blessing some bytes with your legal persona. It does help when the user signs a legal document and then tries to walk it back (for example because the document is now an exhibit A in a VAT fraud case, yes real story). I think this particular problem can be solved by non-technical means. More specifically, PKI solves the problem of verifying the identity of the user and then allowing to prove to a third party that it happened.
What is actually needed from the ID stack is allowing a first party in a closed system to match the token presented by a second party to their legal identity. I don't believe cryptographic signing or key derivation is really necessary, as the system that produces the key and the system that verifies the signed artifact are the same entity in most threat models.
I think DigID does the right thing by being a glorified OTP generator with more or less nice UX that solves just that. The actual problem is key provisioning anyways, but once you have done that, it isn't necessary to go full PKI.
To make my point even more ahm pointy, we don't use client X509 to log into github or google. We use passwords, HOTP and fidokeys, because x509 has bad UX and bad security too (in practice)
Add: downvotes for explaining why PKI is an overkill? okay, I will not survive that
Logius is actually not a company but a part of the dutch (national) goverment.
It's a state owned enterprise as far as I remember. So technically they don't wear civil service uniforms in the office, but still get the usual government office hours.
No I checked this. They aren't.
The Dutch civil service wears a uniform?
blue jeans with an embroidered logo and 3 liters of hair gel.
No
Except for the military.
I once interviewed for a job at what I think was a civil service branch that developed software for the military. But they were out of budget for this, while the military did have budget, so if I was hired, I'd have to wear a military uniform to the office. A very stylish one, they claimed.
In that case we can indeed safely assume they have no technical knowledge.
The German eID stack does also work well, just as the Austrian one does.
Tbh I like the German one even better because you need your physical Identity Card and can use your phone as the reader
Maybe better, but less useful. I don't carry my Identity Card at all, unless I cross the border within EU where it is used. All other functions I have in our country app. To which I can log in using physical card, but I have other options that are online.
In the Netherlands it is mandatory to carry your ID card or passport at all times.
Germany as well
For some of functionality, DigiD itself requires an iOS or Android app (for which you need to enter a contractual agreement with either Apple or Google and they decide whether you are allowed to install and use the app).
I understand that this particular path doesn't allow them to access further sensitive data, but it does give these corporations the power to block any individual for accessing the DigiD app.
You don't need the app for most functionality, but for a few healthcare related tasks, it's the only option, with no fallback.
Which tasks? I use DigiD with SMS and I've never needed to install an app, I have healthcare etc etc.
> A couple of weeks ago, the entire parliament (with only a single party dissenting) voted for a motion to end the contract with Solvinity, but the government extended it anyway, leaving blocking the takeover as the only option,
Given what we know now, this seems perfectly logical. It's just that we don't know what else is going on behind the scenes.
I'm sure there was some negotiations on how to keep the data separate or something, with the threat of blocking it altogether as a final solution.
But agreed, this is a good outcome
> I'm sure there was some negotiations
which i'm sure the current administration would honour
There should be grave consequences alone for the fact that the goverment acted against the parliament
> which i'm sure the current administration would honour
It would've been the same administration as the one doing the negotiations, so I would assume yes.
> There should be grave consequences alone for the fact that the goverment acted against the parliament
In general I think there's a pretty good understanding between the legislative branch and the executive branch. The Netherlands has always had coalitions. Also, every single government will talk to the other parties.
I'm not sure what country you're referring to but the Netherlands has a properly functioning democracy. The only problem it has is splintering into too many small factions making coalitions super hard
> executive branch
I didn't think the Netherlands had one of those.
Sure they do: https://prodemos.nl/kennis/informatie-over-politiek/wat-is-e...
'het kabinet' or 'de regering' is the executive branch in NL. You don't need a president to have an executive branch.
Eerste/tweede kamer. Legislative, make the laws Ministers/staatssecretarissen, executive, implement policy Hoge Raad etc, legislative.
Look up trias politica
There are certainly countries that have it worse, but Netherland has some weird political games being played sometimes.
The voters don't always deal the cards favorably for the coalition system. Compared to a 2 or 3 party system, I think I still prefer the coalitions though as it forces them to negotiate
There was that chip company that was almost nationalized by the Dutch government few months ago when their Chinese owners started making funny noises.
>> Finally!
You are behind the curve. You read here first. Lets revisit this comment in 2 years...
This will be overturned by both Dutch and European courts after the company appeals, and specially after Mark Rutte Daddy calls. The only purpose of this action is for the Dutch government to save face, and its for internal consumption. They already have the internal legal advice stating this, hidden away in some closet. But then they will say: You see, we wanted to do it but a court blocked us.
>>Of course there's still plenty of sensitive data in the hands of Microsoft, Amazon and other US companies.
The WHOLE Dutch diplomatic and broader civil service, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, runs extensively on Microsoft infrastructure for its daily operations, cloud services, and email. And they leak....
"Microsoft Accused Of Sharing Dutch Officials’ Data with U.S. Government" - https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/microsoft-accus...
This will also be the core legal argument by the appealing company. They will argue that the decision was politicized, insufficiently reasoned, or disproportionate because binding technical/legal safeguards would have solved the risks... And they will use as example, the diplomatic service extensive use of Microsoft :-)
So is nothing more than another Polder hypocritical take, by the Dutch government.
> They will argue that the decision was politicized,
It’s not ‘politicized’, it’s the gateway to all Dutch government services and as such it is inherently political.
> insufficiently reasoned, or disproportionate because binding technical/legal safeguards would have solved the risks...
There are no legal safeguards against the CLOUD act. There can be no technical or legal safeguards as long as the physical hardware is owned by a US company.
>The WHOLE Dutch diplomatic and broader civil service, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, runs extensively on Microsoft infrastructure for its daily operations, cloud services, and email. And they leak....
There is a broad digital strategy to migrate off from American infra. Will take 10 years, but this stuff has inertia once it starts moving.
In 2 years the contract is up for renegotiation to a different entity (and there's now plenty of political pressure to go with a different one), so I don't think it's a problem by then.
Tying the process up in the courts for that period is also a political victory, since by the time it'd be resolved, Solvinity wouldn't have the contract anymore anyways.
> This will also be the core legal argument by the appealing company. They will argue that the decision was politicized, insufficiently reasoned, or disproportionate because binding technical/legal safeguards would have solved the risks... And they will use as example, the diplomatic service extensive use of Microsoft
How would that argument support a sale to the US? It sounds like the perfect argument against it. Those technical/legal safeguards clearly didn't work for Microsoft either.
You are using logic to argue for the best and most correct outcome, I am using logic, to state how and why, this will play the way it will...
> Mark Rutte Daddy calls
Mark Rutte, the chief of NATO and ex-PM, that has nothing to do with civilian tech? Can we please leave unfounded conspiracy theories to Reddit?
I have no idea if he's involved in this at all (does seem fairly unrelated) but Mark Rutte is indeed an extremely dodgy bloke.
Not sure exactly who he represents but his actions as NATO secretary have been genuinely a bit concerning for me, he seems determined to start a war with Russia
Dutch and belgian citizens are being misled over and over again. The more you'd dig into it, the less it all makes sense.
All we get are documents with nearly everything censored except for very benign things. Only time will tell what's going on, but I doubt I'll live the day
[1]- NATO Secretary General responsibilities:
"...Above and beyond the role of chair, the Secretary General has the authority to propose items for discussion and use their good offices in case of disputes between member states....
...In order to facilitate this process, the Secretary General maintains direct contact with Heads of State and Government, and Foreign and Defence Ministers in NATO and partner countries...."
[1] - https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/organization/nato-structure...
And Mark Rutte has been shaping the domestic fiscal debate inside the Netherlands [2]: "...Mark Rutte said the Netherlands must significantly boost defence spending and pointed to Dutch spending on pensions, healthcare and social security, saying only a small fraction of those allocations would strengthen defence..."
[2] - https://nltimes.nl/2024/12/03/nato-leader-rutte-netherlands-...
And on conspiracy theories - Do you trust the Financieele Dagblad?
https://nltimes.nl/2025/11/20/asml-offered-spy-us-breaking-e...
Does that sound outlandish to you? It doesn't to me...
It's probably something he would use as 'change' to resolve something unrelated with NATO. Then he can sell how well he's keeping NATO together
> unfounded conspiracy theories
Their sentiment is that Trump intervenes by whining to Mark Rutte, who seems to be the only European Trump is actually willing to listen to, at the expense of course of giving up all his dignity in calling Trump, literally, Daddy [1].
And I would not put it past Trump to do that... I mean, that's what he already did regarding Tiktok.
With Trump nothing is impossible any more, especially if he or someone in his circle stands to make or lose money. And that's the greatest danger in the US turning into a full blown banana republic.
[1] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/25/nato-chief-calls-tr...
So what do you expect the outcome to be if Trump complains to Rutte, who will then do... what exactly? Ask the current PM to do him a favor because of "reasons"? An overwhelming majority of people in the Netherlands oppose selling this company to the US, an overwhelming majority of political parties voted to block the sale and now the secretary of state in charge of this particular department indeed blocked it.
It seems to me that there is no way that Trump could overturn this decision via Rutte that Trump couldn't accomplish on his own by just threatening the Netherlands directly.
> With the US law that the US government should be able to get access to any data held by a US company
Er, what law is this, exactly?
CLOUD Act and FISA §702
CLOUD Act.
*for months
lets be frank, these are changes caused by the downgrading of the American administration to a subscription services behind a paywall that requires DLC, root based encryption bypasses and a Clippy popup that instead of trying to be helpful is indistinguishable from a mafia racket.