8 ms·

The UK’s new age-gating rules are easy to bypass

79 points by pseudolus 1y ago

solids 1y ago
As expected, bureaucrats completely out of touch with current technology producing regulations that are out of touch with current technology
- SXX 1y ago
  They know what they doing exactly. But they now have a reason to require age and ID checks to buy VPN. Then ban payments to VPNs that don't follow said regulation. You'll see.
  - monooso 1y ago
    You greatly overestimate our legislators. Of course, they may react in the way you described, but I sincerely doubt we're witnessing some great master plan.
    - frogarden 1y ago
      I suspect it's more likely that there actually are a handful of politicians and influential people who do think and plan like that, who exploit the fact that most other politicians and influential people are quite ignorant and easy to lead around by their fear.
    - SXX 1y ago
      UK is literally the only country except for China that pushed to disable Apple E2E encryption country-wide. It doesn't matter how secure Avanced Data Protection is and how trustworthy is Apple. Just think on it. Also UK had law for years that can land you in prison for not providing decryption keys for data that you supposedly encrypyted. It's not actively used, but it's there. So nope, there plenty of UK politicians from both parties that will happily push something that will invade your privacy. And really no one who push against it.
      - RansomStark 1y ago
        > Also UK had law for years that can land you in prison for not providing decryption keys for data that you supposedly encrypted. It's not actively used, but it's there. It is actively used, it's just most people fold and hand over the data [0][1][2]. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831 [1] https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/court-of-appeal-orders-men-to-disclose-encryption-keys https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/court-of-appeal-o... [2] https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2017/09/27/campaigner-who-refused-to-decrypt-smartphone-and-laptop-found-guilty/ https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2017/09/27/campaigner-who-refu...
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - SoftTalker 1y ago
      Indeed, the simplest explanation is that they are hearing from voting constituents that porn and other objectionable content is too easy for kids to get online, and want to be seen as "doing something about it." Most parents don't want their kids looking at porn. While there are steps they can take to prevent it, they require some technical knowledge and are generally easy to get around. The easy availability of this content is what has changed. You used to have to go to a seedy bookstore, "adult" movie theatre, or video rental business to get it, and they wouldn't let kids in. Also you had to pay for it, and most kids don't have any money.
  - TacticalCoder 1y ago
    > They know what they doing exactly. They're already using the "online safety act" to silence people online. They're super scared because a great many people have had enough. Crimes numbers, including rapes, are through the roof in the UK. And they want to silence anyone who wants to talk about criminality on the ultra rise. The UK is on a very dark path. It's the country in the world with the most millionaires fleeing the country: mainstream media brainwash the people saying it's supposedly for tax reasons these millionaires are leaving. But I live in a country where many millionaires and families have family offices and trusts and the tune is very different. People are scared of what's going on. Both criminality and religious extremism are rising at a more than alarming rate. And not only is the government doing nothing about it, they're going after those denouncing the crimes. People are now stabbed to death for their watch in London. A few days ago: https://www.lbc.co.uk/crime/three-arrested-man-stabbed-death-rolex/ https://www.lbc.co.uk/crime/three-arrested-man-stabbed-death... Leftists refuse to see it. They'll rationalize that that man was a capitalist oppressor for wearing a Rolex and that he provoked these people by wearing a $10 K watch. That he's the reason these killers were broke and forced to act evil. That they shouldn't get much jail time because now they'll surely be nice members of a high-trust society. These people are precisely those who brought the Online Safety Act. But it's Orwellian and Orwellian talk: for what the Online Safety Act is really used for is to silence talk about crimes. I'm in the EU: in a few years leftists shall probably have put a system in place where police shall come and knock on my door for my posts on HN.
    - badgersnake 1y ago
      This isn’t the Daily Mail comments section.
    - louthy 1y ago
      This is far right fear-mongering rhetoric. It’s the standard hatred of ethnic minorities whipped up by bigots. The UK is not on a “dark path”, that’s absolute nonsense. Nor do people live in fear. I assume you don’t actually live in the UK. Because none of your description is the UK I live in. > “People are scared of what's going on. Both criminality and religious extremism are rising at a more than alarming rate.” Crime is down and has been going down for 10 years. For “religious extremism” I’ll just read “I don’t like brown people”, because extremism is only really growing due to white supremacy groups. > “they're going after those denouncing the crimes.” No, they are not, they are going after those fomenting violence (literal riots). In one case leading to white supremacists trying to burn down a hotel with refugees in it. Crime happens. It doesn’t mean one crime is a symptom of a wider problem. And breaking news: crime is committed by white people too. RE: the Rolex watch crime — I walk through East London with a Patek Philippe on my arm and have zero concerns, I’m not scared, nor do I live in fear. Nobody I know in the UK is scared or living in fear — that’s just agenda driven rhetoric. Maybe get off twitter and/or the far-right manosphere and try changing your news sources for something more balanced.
  - michaelt 1y ago
    Well, it all depends if the politicians actually care if this works. You see, this bill was passed in 2023, under a Conservative government; then a Labour government was elected in 2024, before the bill came into force. A nice little time bomb, set by the outgoing government - impractical and illiberal, but labelled all over with 'children' and 'cyber-bullying' and 'violent pornography' So if the Labour government keeps the legislation, they look like heavy-handed censors silencing LGBT voices and local hobby/community forums, yet if they repeal the legislation you can criticise them for wanting children to have access to violent porn. A Labour politician who thought this was shitty legislation, but who didn't think going on record as a pro-pornography voice would help his or her re-election prospects, might be entirely happy for age checks to be easy to bypass.
    - SXX 1y ago
      I really hope you are right. I'm not UK resident now, but I lived enough there, have family there and know enough about local politics to understand that when it's comes to privacy and freedoms there is very little difference between Conservative and Labour.
      - zahllos 1y ago
        I'd say more like none at all. The last Labour government (1997-2010) passed the counter terrorism act and had multiple public arguments about how long suspects could be detained without being charged or released in their future legislative attempts - see "prolonged detention" in this: https://www.jrrt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Rules_of_the_Game_leaflet-2005.pdf https://www.jrrt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Rules_of_.... They similarly passed the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which amongst other things includes compelled key disclosure (or compelled decrypt). They also had the national identity register planned as part of ID cards. For fairness/balance, the tory government passed multiple acts. Online Safety Act was one, but the Investigatory Powers Act another - this did some relatively mundane things like call security service hacking "equipment interference" and say they were legally allowed to do it, but it was the act used on Apple to mandate technical capability to access iCloud e2e (act written by Tories, but TCN probably by Labour home office I would guess based on timing).
  - mr90210 1y ago
    Mullvad is quite ahead as they sell activation codes on scratch cards.
    - gruez 1y ago
      Banning in-store sales of VPN activation codes seems well within the ability of the British state to do, especially when they already banned bank/credit card payments.
      - justlikereddit 1y ago
        Mullvad also let's you buy by mailing them cash. Or bank wire, or crypto.
      - harvey9 1y ago
        Not on an age basis since we have decades of precedent for retail staff to judge age and not keep a copy of ID. It will have to be on a more blatantly 'we want to be more like the Chinese communist party' basis.
gennarro 1y ago
Except paying the vpn requires a credit card that does the same verification check so it’s not thwarting the rule at all.
- Retr0id 1y ago
  Plenty of VPNs accept crypto or cash-in-envelope, and you don't need to be an adult to have a debit card in the UK.
- bjackman 1y ago
  No don't worry, there are plenty of extremely shady free "VPN" services that this law will provide with a nice stream of victims
  - johnisgood 1y ago
    Thank goodness they have the Government the protect them...
- Hasz 1y ago
  Many, eg Mullvad, allow for crypto payments
  - michaelt 1y ago
    It's surprisingly hard to get cryptocurrency without a KYC check in the UK - bitcoin ATMs and suchlike are banned. Far simpler, if you're a teen that wants to get around the block, to just have an older looking friend do the video selfie.
    - Hasz 1y ago
      Meh, perhaps now, but there is an easy pipeline of work (mostly menial, Turk type tasks) for crypto that runs right past KYC. Cash for crypto is also surprisingly easy to find, again bypassing most KYC. I am not sure what will be easier.
    - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
Brendinooo 1y ago
I dunno, I was imagining much simpler ways before I clicked through. Or maybe easier ways. Having to buy something and then configure it is a real barrier.
- tempodox 1y ago
  There is a sudden surge in face scanning of video game characters.
jayceedenton 1y ago
Age limits on buying cigarettes are easily thwarted by finding a corner shop that needs the sale and will sell to kids. Height restrictions on fairground rides are easily thwarted by putting bits of wood in your shoes. None of this matters. The point is that this kind of control will drastically reduce under 18s consuming content that they shouldn't. We don't need the all of society's controls to be flawless.
- figmert 1y ago
  If you think VPN is going to stop kids from accessing porn, I have a bridge to sell you.
  - Aeolun 1y ago
    Porn is a service problem?
- dns_snek 1y ago
  Should or shouldn't is a matter of opinion that I disagree with because it has no evidential basis. Downloading a free VPN isn't just doable, it's completely trivial in the privacy of your home and doesn't require any confrontation or risk unlike trying to buy alcohol or cigarettes illegally. And that is before you consider that what you're ultimately doing, even if your blocking strategies were successful, is steering kids towards the darker markets where illegal and actually harmful content isn't removed and that don't care about your ID laws.
- thomascountz 1y ago
  Without co-opting the loaded notion of what we mean by "shouldn't," I do agree that, at a certain point, manipulating controls to feather through the margins and outliers has diminishing positive returns and increasing negative ones.
- cherryteastain 1y ago
  > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin
meindnoch 1y ago
When I was a teen, all the porn was behind paywalls. But it didn't stop us from accessing it via torrent sites and other file sharing tools.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
pr337h4m 1y ago
The most disturbing thing about this saga is that websites that have no physical/legal/business presence in the UK are proactively geoblocking UK-origin IPs. Censorious governments have always been a thing since the beginning of the internet. Websites (especially non-corporate ones like 4chan or R34) preemptively surrendering to a foreign government that has no jurisdiction over them is what's new.
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  This is because nowadays everything has to be zero-risk and "over-lawyered." We have seen the same with the GDPR and now also with the UK Internet Safety Act.
  - pr337h4m 1y ago
    There is absolutely zero risk as long as you stay out of the UK. Even if you do travel to the UK, there is no practical risk for the foreseeable future.
    - mytailorisrich 1y ago
      And yet we're seeing websites panicking and blocking all UK visitors... which is my point. Also, thinking that there might be a risk if you travel to the UK because your random website on the other side of the world does not comply with a specific UK law is rather overestimating your importance and the British authorities.
    - pyman 1y ago
      High school kids cannot buy weapons in the UK? They can't even watch porn? Jesus Christ, stay away from that country!!
      - harvey9 1y ago
        Actually some idiot politician tried to blame Amazon for knife crime in the UK. Never mind that most kids can find kitchen knives (the type used in a recent crime when the politician made the statement) in the kitchen where they live.
PUSH_AX 1y ago
A technical advisory blunder, or overreach? We can debate all day, but I feel very sad to be in the technology sector in the UK right now.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >I feel very sad to be in the technology sector in the UK right now Why? I feel more sad for the citizens the government is trying to surveil upon 1984 style.
Aeolun 1y ago
Is this hysteria about sex a new thing? I feel like I grew up in an age where it was pretty normal to see these things as soon as you were old enough to be interested in them.
- cherryteastain 1y ago
  It's just iteration N of a series of power grabs to expand the panopticon of mass surveillance on the internet under the guise of 'but think about the children!!!'.
  - pyman 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - tomhow 1y ago
      Please don't post flamebait like this on HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- blitzar 1y ago
  Every since they stopped showing 16 year old girls topless in the UK daily newspapers (2004) things have been trending that way.
- Yeul 1y ago
  Can't solve poverty, drug use, grooming gangs or knife crime.
HPsquared 1y ago
I wonder when the UK will become another one of those countries to ban VPNs. So liberal!
- tempodox 1y ago
  It's no coincidence that the man who wrote “1984” was a Brit.
- Jigsy 1y ago
  The Labour party want to criminalize VPNs, so it won't surprise me if they do.
zigzag312 1y ago
Wouldn't age verification without revealing identity be solved with a service that acts as an identity authority? 1) Site that needs to verify age generates a globally unique id, creates requested data array ["is_over_18"], valid_until property and hmac signature of this message. 2) Client forwards just the id and requested data array to identity authority. Identity authority returns the id, map of data {"is_over_18": true}, public key information, and signature of returned message. 3) Client returns original message with message received from identity authority to the site. Site verifies that id's and requested data match in both messages, original message authenticity via HMAC and signature of message from identity authority using public key cryptography. User hasn't revealed any PII data besides "is_over_18" value to the site and identity authority doesn't know which site user is accessing. Requirements: User registers and verifies identity at identity authority. Site trusts identity authority. Limitations: Site could, behind the scenes, send the generated ID to the identity authority, informing it which site was accessed using this ID.
- Xelbair 1y ago
  That limitation is enough to kill such proposal. Also authority could also do it. Nothing stops them from that.
  - zigzag312 1y ago
    Yes, if site shares data with identity authority then a malicious identity authority can also share full identity data with the site.
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  You're making this far more complicated than it needs to be. It requires no cryptography more than a random number generator. Create a service that generates a random token and then gives it to anyone who is over 18. Any service with any employee who is over 18 can get the token and then compare it to the one submitted by the client. Everyone uses the same token across every service and the token is only available to someone over 18. The security isn't any worse than having user or service-specific tokens and the privacy is significantly better.
ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
I suspect that a porn websites will see a large number of customers looking like Norman Reedus: https://www.thegamer.com/death-strandings-sam-porter-bridges-is-delivering-uk-discord-users-from-a-need-for-age-verification/ https://www.thegamer.com/death-strandings-sam-porter-bridges...
JetSetIlly 1y ago
According to the article, Ofcom are encouraging "parents to block or control VPN usage by their children to keep them from dodging the age checkers." This might be stupidest advice I've ever heard. If parents aren't willing to block or control access to porn sites, there's even less chance of them blocking or controlling VPN usage. But if nothing else, it does show up this law for the nonsense that it is.
- cdrini 1y ago
  Controlling VPN seems much easier, no? Since you have to pay for a VPN service, and I imagine most kids don't have a credit card to make arbitrary purchases independently, so it would have to bubble up to a parent.
  - JetSetIlly 1y ago
    That's assuming the child is smart enough to only use a paid-for VPN. I can foresee a lot of children being suckered into using a dodgy VPN.
    - kbelder 1y ago
      Suckered? I'd describe it more as 'pushed'.
  - vidarh 1y ago
    The fact that you think you need to pay for a VPN service is a good illustration of the problem with this. There's a plethora of free VPN services operating outside the reach of UK authorities. My sons friend circle all figured out how to use free VPN's at around 8-9 to bypass bans on gaming servers.
bsenftner 1y ago
Are people still thinking a face image can be used to verify age? That's absurd. Former globally leading facial recognition developer here, and the article lightly mentions using a face image and age verification face analysis - that's not age accurate at all. Ask many ethnicities with experience, "age verification" image analysis is so unreliable it is fraud used in this context.
- rcxdude 1y ago
  I think it is convenient for the services and probably the regulators to pretend so.
  - bsenftner 1y ago
    It allows a class of low quality providers to basically trick people into the industry with products that claim but cannot deliver. Then that customer either abandons, or ponys up the real amount of investment necessary for a real solution, and due to being burned already, they are more diligent in their research. Which the industry wants, because too many knock on tech company doors expecting magic genies to grant wishes.
    - rcxdude 1y ago
      That assumes that the customer actually wants the problem solved, as opposed to doing the bare minimum to be able to say 'we tried' to the regulators. And that works doubly well if the regulators also just want to do the bare minimum so they can say 'we tried' to the politicians, press, and segment of the public that thinks this is a good idea.
      - bsenftner 1y ago
        That's a very good point: just as theater.
- t_a_mm_acq 1y ago
  Can you share more about this please? I work in the industry and would love to know more about your experience with this verification method.
steveharman 1y ago
Uptick in TOR usage?
msgodel 1y ago
It's another "we got rid of families and nations so we need administrative policy to fix the problems" episode.
azalemeth 1y ago
Obligatory comment: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903
Barrin92 1y ago
the most confusing thing about this is, do people think there's just one porn site on the internet? Nobody needs a vpn, they can literally type "porn" into any search engine and land on one of fifteen million sites sitting in Russia or some random island nation if there's one thing the internet doesn't have a shortage of it's bootleg streaming sites
Jigsy 1y ago
What saddens me about the UK geoblock notices is not a single one of them refers to the UK as Airstrip One.
- Yeul 1y ago
  IIRC the regime in 1984 produced porn for the proles. They had more sense than these middle class pricks from Somerset.
tim333 1y ago
Also I just the Reddit age test thing. It just wanted me to look at the webcam, so anyone who has access to an older person to do that can get verified.

79 points by pseudolus 1y ago

As expected, bureaucrats completely out of touch with current technology producing regulations that are out of touch with current technology

SXX 1y ago
They know what they doing exactly. But they now have a reason to require age and ID checks to buy VPN. Then ban payments to VPNs that don't follow said regulation. You'll see.
- monooso 1y ago
  You greatly overestimate our legislators. Of course, they may react in the way you described, but I sincerely doubt we're witnessing some great master plan.
  - frogarden 1y ago
    I suspect it's more likely that there actually are a handful of politicians and influential people who do think and plan like that, who exploit the fact that most other politicians and influential people are quite ignorant and easy to lead around by their fear.
  - SXX 1y ago
    UK is literally the only country except for China that pushed to disable Apple E2E encryption country-wide. It doesn't matter how secure Avanced Data Protection is and how trustworthy is Apple. Just think on it. Also UK had law for years that can land you in prison for not providing decryption keys for data that you supposedly encrypyted. It's not actively used, but it's there. So nope, there plenty of UK politicians from both parties that will happily push something that will invade your privacy. And really no one who push against it.
    - RansomStark 1y ago
      > Also UK had law for years that can land you in prison for not providing decryption keys for data that you supposedly encrypted. It's not actively used, but it's there. It is actively used, it's just most people fold and hand over the data [0][1][2]. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831 [1] https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/court-of-appeal-orders-men-to-disclose-encryption-keys https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/court-of-appeal-o... [2] https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2017/09/27/campaigner-who-refused-to-decrypt-smartphone-and-laptop-found-guilty/ https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2017/09/27/campaigner-who-refu...
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - SoftTalker 1y ago
    Indeed, the simplest explanation is that they are hearing from voting constituents that porn and other objectionable content is too easy for kids to get online, and want to be seen as "doing something about it." Most parents don't want their kids looking at porn. While there are steps they can take to prevent it, they require some technical knowledge and are generally easy to get around. The easy availability of this content is what has changed. You used to have to go to a seedy bookstore, "adult" movie theatre, or video rental business to get it, and they wouldn't let kids in. Also you had to pay for it, and most kids don't have any money.
- TacticalCoder 1y ago
  > They know what they doing exactly. They're already using the "online safety act" to silence people online. They're super scared because a great many people have had enough. Crimes numbers, including rapes, are through the roof in the UK. And they want to silence anyone who wants to talk about criminality on the ultra rise. The UK is on a very dark path. It's the country in the world with the most millionaires fleeing the country: mainstream media brainwash the people saying it's supposedly for tax reasons these millionaires are leaving. But I live in a country where many millionaires and families have family offices and trusts and the tune is very different. People are scared of what's going on. Both criminality and religious extremism are rising at a more than alarming rate. And not only is the government doing nothing about it, they're going after those denouncing the crimes. People are now stabbed to death for their watch in London. A few days ago: https://www.lbc.co.uk/crime/three-arrested-man-stabbed-death-rolex/ https://www.lbc.co.uk/crime/three-arrested-man-stabbed-death... Leftists refuse to see it. They'll rationalize that that man was a capitalist oppressor for wearing a Rolex and that he provoked these people by wearing a $10 K watch. That he's the reason these killers were broke and forced to act evil. That they shouldn't get much jail time because now they'll surely be nice members of a high-trust society. These people are precisely those who brought the Online Safety Act. But it's Orwellian and Orwellian talk: for what the Online Safety Act is really used for is to silence talk about crimes. I'm in the EU: in a few years leftists shall probably have put a system in place where police shall come and knock on my door for my posts on HN.
  - badgersnake 1y ago
    This isn’t the Daily Mail comments section.
  - louthy 1y ago
    This is far right fear-mongering rhetoric. It’s the standard hatred of ethnic minorities whipped up by bigots. The UK is not on a “dark path”, that’s absolute nonsense. Nor do people live in fear. I assume you don’t actually live in the UK. Because none of your description is the UK I live in. > “People are scared of what's going on. Both criminality and religious extremism are rising at a more than alarming rate.” Crime is down and has been going down for 10 years. For “religious extremism” I’ll just read “I don’t like brown people”, because extremism is only really growing due to white supremacy groups. > “they're going after those denouncing the crimes.” No, they are not, they are going after those fomenting violence (literal riots). In one case leading to white supremacists trying to burn down a hotel with refugees in it. Crime happens. It doesn’t mean one crime is a symptom of a wider problem. And breaking news: crime is committed by white people too. RE: the Rolex watch crime — I walk through East London with a Patek Philippe on my arm and have zero concerns, I’m not scared, nor do I live in fear. Nobody I know in the UK is scared or living in fear — that’s just agenda driven rhetoric. Maybe get off twitter and/or the far-right manosphere and try changing your news sources for something more balanced.
- michaelt 1y ago
  Well, it all depends if the politicians actually care if this works. You see, this bill was passed in 2023, under a Conservative government; then a Labour government was elected in 2024, before the bill came into force. A nice little time bomb, set by the outgoing government - impractical and illiberal, but labelled all over with 'children' and 'cyber-bullying' and 'violent pornography' So if the Labour government keeps the legislation, they look like heavy-handed censors silencing LGBT voices and local hobby/community forums, yet if they repeal the legislation you can criticise them for wanting children to have access to violent porn. A Labour politician who thought this was shitty legislation, but who didn't think going on record as a pro-pornography voice would help his or her re-election prospects, might be entirely happy for age checks to be easy to bypass.
  - SXX 1y ago
    I really hope you are right. I'm not UK resident now, but I lived enough there, have family there and know enough about local politics to understand that when it's comes to privacy and freedoms there is very little difference between Conservative and Labour.
    - zahllos 1y ago
      I'd say more like none at all. The last Labour government (1997-2010) passed the counter terrorism act and had multiple public arguments about how long suspects could be detained without being charged or released in their future legislative attempts - see "prolonged detention" in this: https://www.jrrt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Rules_of_the_Game_leaflet-2005.pdf https://www.jrrt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Rules_of_.... They similarly passed the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which amongst other things includes compelled key disclosure (or compelled decrypt). They also had the national identity register planned as part of ID cards. For fairness/balance, the tory government passed multiple acts. Online Safety Act was one, but the Investigatory Powers Act another - this did some relatively mundane things like call security service hacking "equipment interference" and say they were legally allowed to do it, but it was the act used on Apple to mandate technical capability to access iCloud e2e (act written by Tories, but TCN probably by Labour home office I would guess based on timing).
- mr90210 1y ago
  Mullvad is quite ahead as they sell activation codes on scratch cards.
  - gruez 1y ago
    Banning in-store sales of VPN activation codes seems well within the ability of the British state to do, especially when they already banned bank/credit card payments.
    - justlikereddit 1y ago
      Mullvad also let's you buy by mailing them cash. Or bank wire, or crypto.
    - harvey9 1y ago
      Not on an age basis since we have decades of precedent for retail staff to judge age and not keep a copy of ID. It will have to be on a more blatantly 'we want to be more like the Chinese communist party' basis.

gennarro 1y ago

Except paying the vpn requires a credit card that does the same verification check so it’s not thwarting the rule at all.

Retr0id 1y ago
Plenty of VPNs accept crypto or cash-in-envelope, and you don't need to be an adult to have a debit card in the UK.
bjackman 1y ago
No don't worry, there are plenty of extremely shady free "VPN" services that this law will provide with a nice stream of victims
- johnisgood 1y ago
  Thank goodness they have the Government the protect them...
Hasz 1y ago
Many, eg Mullvad, allow for crypto payments
- michaelt 1y ago
  It's surprisingly hard to get cryptocurrency without a KYC check in the UK - bitcoin ATMs and suchlike are banned. Far simpler, if you're a teen that wants to get around the block, to just have an older looking friend do the video selfie.
  - Hasz 1y ago
    Meh, perhaps now, but there is an easy pipeline of work (mostly menial, Turk type tasks) for crypto that runs right past KYC. Cash for crypto is also surprisingly easy to find, again bypassing most KYC. I am not sure what will be easier.
  - AnthonyMouse 1y ago

Brendinooo 1y ago

I dunno, I was imagining much simpler ways before I clicked through. Or maybe easier ways. Having to buy something and then configure it is a real barrier.

tempodox 1y ago
There is a sudden surge in face scanning of video game characters.

jayceedenton 1y ago

Age limits on buying cigarettes are easily thwarted by finding a corner shop that needs the sale and will sell to kids. Height restrictions on fairground rides are easily thwarted by putting bits of wood in your shoes. None of this matters. The point is that this kind of control will drastically reduce under 18s consuming content that they shouldn't. We don't need the all of society's controls to be flawless.

figmert 1y ago
If you think VPN is going to stop kids from accessing porn, I have a bridge to sell you.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  Porn is a service problem?
dns_snek 1y ago
Should or shouldn't is a matter of opinion that I disagree with because it has no evidential basis. Downloading a free VPN isn't just doable, it's completely trivial in the privacy of your home and doesn't require any confrontation or risk unlike trying to buy alcohol or cigarettes illegally. And that is before you consider that what you're ultimately doing, even if your blocking strategies were successful, is steering kids towards the darker markets where illegal and actually harmful content isn't removed and that don't care about your ID laws.
thomascountz 1y ago
Without co-opting the loaded notion of what we mean by "shouldn't," I do agree that, at a certain point, manipulating controls to feather through the margins and outliers has diminishing positive returns and increasing negative ones.
cherryteastain 1y ago
> Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin

meindnoch 1y ago

When I was a teen, all the porn was behind paywalls. But it didn't stop us from accessing it via torrent sites and other file sharing tools.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

pr337h4m 1y ago

The most disturbing thing about this saga is that websites that have no physical/legal/business presence in the UK are proactively geoblocking UK-origin IPs. Censorious governments have always been a thing since the beginning of the internet. Websites (especially non-corporate ones like 4chan or R34) preemptively surrendering to a foreign government that has no jurisdiction over them is what's new.

mytailorisrich 1y ago
This is because nowadays everything has to be zero-risk and "over-lawyered." We have seen the same with the GDPR and now also with the UK Internet Safety Act.
- pr337h4m 1y ago
  There is absolutely zero risk as long as you stay out of the UK. Even if you do travel to the UK, there is no practical risk for the foreseeable future.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    And yet we're seeing websites panicking and blocking all UK visitors... which is my point. Also, thinking that there might be a risk if you travel to the UK because your random website on the other side of the world does not comply with a specific UK law is rather overestimating your importance and the British authorities.
  - pyman 1y ago
    High school kids cannot buy weapons in the UK? They can't even watch porn? Jesus Christ, stay away from that country!!
    - harvey9 1y ago
      Actually some idiot politician tried to blame Amazon for knife crime in the UK. Never mind that most kids can find kitchen knives (the type used in a recent crime when the politician made the statement) in the kitchen where they live.

PUSH_AX 1y ago

A technical advisory blunder, or overreach? We can debate all day, but I feel very sad to be in the technology sector in the UK right now.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>I feel very sad to be in the technology sector in the UK right now Why? I feel more sad for the citizens the government is trying to surveil upon 1984 style.

Aeolun 1y ago

Is this hysteria about sex a new thing? I feel like I grew up in an age where it was pretty normal to see these things as soon as you were old enough to be interested in them.

cherryteastain 1y ago
It's just iteration N of a series of power grabs to expand the panopticon of mass surveillance on the internet under the guise of 'but think about the children!!!'.
- pyman 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - tomhow 1y ago
    Please don't post flamebait like this on HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
blitzar 1y ago
Every since they stopped showing 16 year old girls topless in the UK daily newspapers (2004) things have been trending that way.
Yeul 1y ago
Can't solve poverty, drug use, grooming gangs or knife crime.

HPsquared 1y ago

I wonder when the UK will become another one of those countries to ban VPNs. So liberal!

tempodox 1y ago
It's no coincidence that the man who wrote “1984” was a Brit.
Jigsy 1y ago
The Labour party want to criminalize VPNs, so it won't surprise me if they do.

zigzag312 1y ago

Wouldn't age verification without revealing identity be solved with a service that acts as an identity authority? 1) Site that needs to verify age generates a globally unique id, creates requested data array ["is_over_18"], valid_until property and hmac signature of this message. 2) Client forwards just the id and requested data array to identity authority. Identity authority returns the id, map of data {"is_over_18": true}, public key information, and signature of returned message. 3) Client returns original message with message received from identity authority to the site. Site verifies that id's and requested data match in both messages, original message authenticity via HMAC and signature of message from identity authority using public key cryptography. User hasn't revealed any PII data besides "is_over_18" value to the site and identity authority doesn't know which site user is accessing. Requirements: User registers and verifies identity at identity authority. Site trusts identity authority. Limitations: Site could, behind the scenes, send the generated ID to the identity authority, informing it which site was accessed using this ID.

Xelbair 1y ago
That limitation is enough to kill such proposal. Also authority could also do it. Nothing stops them from that.
- zigzag312 1y ago
  Yes, if site shares data with identity authority then a malicious identity authority can also share full identity data with the site.
AnthonyMouse 1y ago
You're making this far more complicated than it needs to be. It requires no cryptography more than a random number generator. Create a service that generates a random token and then gives it to anyone who is over 18. Any service with any employee who is over 18 can get the token and then compare it to the one submitted by the client. Everyone uses the same token across every service and the token is only available to someone over 18. The security isn't any worse than having user or service-specific tokens and the privacy is significantly better.

ndsipa_pomu 1y ago

I suspect that a porn websites will see a large number of customers looking like Norman Reedus: https://www.thegamer.com/death-strandings-sam-porter-bridges-is-delivering-uk-discord-users-from-a-need-for-age-verification/ https://www.thegamer.com/death-strandings-sam-porter-bridges...

JetSetIlly 1y ago

According to the article, Ofcom are encouraging "parents to block or control VPN usage by their children to keep them from dodging the age checkers." This might be stupidest advice I've ever heard. If parents aren't willing to block or control access to porn sites, there's even less chance of them blocking or controlling VPN usage. But if nothing else, it does show up this law for the nonsense that it is.

cdrini 1y ago
Controlling VPN seems much easier, no? Since you have to pay for a VPN service, and I imagine most kids don't have a credit card to make arbitrary purchases independently, so it would have to bubble up to a parent.
- JetSetIlly 1y ago
  That's assuming the child is smart enough to only use a paid-for VPN. I can foresee a lot of children being suckered into using a dodgy VPN.
  - kbelder 1y ago
    Suckered? I'd describe it more as 'pushed'.
- vidarh 1y ago
  The fact that you think you need to pay for a VPN service is a good illustration of the problem with this. There's a plethora of free VPN services operating outside the reach of UK authorities. My sons friend circle all figured out how to use free VPN's at around 8-9 to bypass bans on gaming servers.

bsenftner 1y ago

Are people still thinking a face image can be used to verify age? That's absurd. Former globally leading facial recognition developer here, and the article lightly mentions using a face image and age verification face analysis - that's not age accurate at all. Ask many ethnicities with experience, "age verification" image analysis is so unreliable it is fraud used in this context.

rcxdude 1y ago
I think it is convenient for the services and probably the regulators to pretend so.
- bsenftner 1y ago
  It allows a class of low quality providers to basically trick people into the industry with products that claim but cannot deliver. Then that customer either abandons, or ponys up the real amount of investment necessary for a real solution, and due to being burned already, they are more diligent in their research. Which the industry wants, because too many knock on tech company doors expecting magic genies to grant wishes.
  - rcxdude 1y ago
    That assumes that the customer actually wants the problem solved, as opposed to doing the bare minimum to be able to say 'we tried' to the regulators. And that works doubly well if the regulators also just want to do the bare minimum so they can say 'we tried' to the politicians, press, and segment of the public that thinks this is a good idea.
    - bsenftner 1y ago
      That's a very good point: just as theater.
t_a_mm_acq 1y ago
Can you share more about this please? I work in the industry and would love to know more about your experience with this verification method.

steveharman 1y ago

Uptick in TOR usage?

msgodel 1y ago

It's another "we got rid of families and nations so we need administrative policy to fix the problems" episode.

azalemeth 1y ago

Obligatory comment: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903

Barrin92 1y ago

the most confusing thing about this is, do people think there's just one porn site on the internet? Nobody needs a vpn, they can literally type "porn" into any search engine and land on one of fifteen million sites sitting in Russia or some random island nation if there's one thing the internet doesn't have a shortage of it's bootleg streaming sites

Jigsy 1y ago

What saddens me about the UK geoblock notices is not a single one of them refers to the UK as Airstrip One.

Yeul 1y ago
IIRC the regime in 1984 produced porn for the proles. They had more sense than these middle class pricks from Somerset.

tim333 1y ago

Also I just the Reddit age test thing. It just wanted me to look at the webcam, so anyone who has access to an older person to do that can get verified.