I'm not a huge fan of this monitoring, but why be so dramatic? You aren't losing any rights here, let alone all rights. You do not have a right to use your employer's computer without your employer's permission.
If you want to do something that isn't monitored, just use your own computer instead of your employer's computer. You should be doing this anyway, keystroke monitoring or not.
Thankfully not true in sane countries
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lci.fr/amp/societe/video-en...
In short, you definitely have a right to send e.g. personal emails from your work computer and your employer definitely does not have the right to go look into them for instance
I'm not so sure about that. Do large-enough French companies supply their own Certificate Authority to all company computers (like all large corporations)? If so, then they're free to browse/search/store all https communications from any company machine, right?
The assumption is that employers and IT departments will always "follow the rules", but it's impossible to verify something like that. The way corporations would be "caught" would be from huge numbers of whistle-blowers but that's a risky career move for most IT workers.
The good news is IT departments and individuals generally don't care to spy unless there's something really high-value at stake and only then towards very specific "targets". With few exceptions, the vast majority of workplaces tolerate ordinary personal use of corporate computer resources.
These are the same laws that also allow surveillance cameras not only within company properties, but even in public.
You do not have the right to privacy when you are not in a private space. This applies to company computers just the same.
In Europe you generally have a graded expectation of privacy that does not disappear the moment you enter the workspace.
We recognise that people have needs that are not met if you treat them as automatons.
To your surveillance camera point, I live in the UK which is renowned for the number of cameras. If I point a surveillance camera at the sidewalk in front of my house, I'd break the law.
Is this true? So your camera is only allowed to point at your property and nothing else? I don't see how this could possibly be true when you're allowed to take photos in public. Or does the fact the surveillance camera is fixed make a difference?