" Techradar " is not the best source for legislative journalism, and one could question their credibility about product reviews. Check trustpilot for example; 1 /5 rating.

Added: Afaik, EU institutions are developing a new legislation for a Euroepean digital future containing biometrics, digital identity and Internet safeguards. The GDPR is a basis for this legislation, so privacy safeguards shouldn't be an issue. The existing discussion is about the interpretation/ backdoor abuse of the issuing and handling of (root)certificates.of websites, described in art 45.

Now these certificates are done by businesses and as per 2023 eIDAS EU proposal they should be done by EU and or memberstates. This latter regulation drew the concern of privacy watchdogs. According to the EU itself and the actors involved, it's rather something more about finding the correct legislative terms, then about the intention to enabling " mass surveillance ". At this moment the new law hasn't been adopted, as they are still in full discussion mode about the correct version. Also I'm happy about the privacy watchdogs which help contribute to a better legislation . It's an ongoing discussion and (democratic) process.

here the new open letter with critique as per nov 2023 towards eIDAS 2.0

another letter per dec 2023 from the University KU Leuven.

What would be the best way to oppose / vote against this law proposition?

Nonetheless, experts expect the final agreement to be revealed by the end of March as the Parliament is pushing to close all the open legislative processes before the upcoming European elections scheduled in June.

So basically, the law's unlikely to change much before being pushed to vote, which considering how stupid it is, it's likely to be outright rejected like Chat Control by the Parliement.

Still, it's good to raise awareness on the issue.