While well-intentioned efforts to protect minors online are broadly welcomed, a set of amendments moving through the UK parliament is attracting increasing criticism from technologists, educators and human-rights lawyers. The draft provisions would compel platforms and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to bar anyone under 18 from using social-media services or Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). Below, we unpack the details, explore the technical and legal ramifications, and explain why many experts believe the policy could erode privacy for people of all ages without delivering the promised safety benefits for children.
What the Proposed Legislation Actually Says
The relevant clauses—tabled during the committee stage of the Online Safety Bill—would:
- Mandate social-media platforms to perform real-time age verification before granting access to any account or content.
- Require ISPs to block or throttle VPN traffic originating from devices that cannot prove the user is 18 or older.
- Fine companies up to 10 per cent of global turnover for non-compliance.
The stated goal is to keep children away from harmful content and from “online strangers who might groom them.”
How an Age-Based VPN Ban Would Work in Practice
Because VPN traffic is encrypted and intentionally obscures its destination, the only reliable enforcement mechanism would be blanket blocking. ISPs would have to:
- Identify traffic patterns matching popular VPN protocols (OpenVPN, WireGuard, IPSec, etc.).
- Interrupt or degrade those connections unless the user has previously whitelisted their device through an “adult-verified” account.
- Maintain a constantly updated registry of approved devices—an approach critics call “client-side licensing.”
This effectively forces every VPN user—adult or child—to reveal personal data just to browse privately.
Collateral Damage: Adult Privacy at Risk
Legal and cybersecurity specialists warn the policy would have a series of knock-on effects:
- Mass data collection: Broad age checks encourage platforms to gather passports, driving licences or biometric scans, creating new targets for hackers.
- Chilling of free expression: Journalists, whistle-blowers and activists rely on VPNs to avoid surveillance. Obligatory registration ties their real identities to sensitive research.
- Mission creep: Once infrastructure for blocking VPNs exists, it can easily be repurposed for censorship of political content or dissent.
Technical Reality Check: Can VPNs Even Be Blocked Reliably?
History suggests not:
- Protocol obfuscation: Modern VPNs can disguise traffic as ordinary HTTPS. Detect-and-block cycles become a cat-and-mouse game, raising costs for ISPs but rarely stopping determined users.
- Tunnelling through new ports: Tools like SSH tunnelling, domain fronting and even gaming networks (e.g., Minecraft) can ferry encrypted data undetected.
- Global precedent: Countries such as Iran and Russia have tried similar blocks with limited success; usage often shifts to decentralized or stealth networks.
Does the Ban Actually Make Children Safer?
Child-protection researchers outline several shortcomings:
- Risk displacement: Bans push minors to less regulated corners of the Internet, including unmoderated forums or piracy sites.
- No behavioural component: Grooming and cyberbullying thrive on private messaging apps, many of which are end-to-end encrypted and not classified strictly as “social media.”
- Dependency on age-verification accuracy: Determined teens routinely bypass checks with borrowed IDs, deepfakes or sibling accounts.
Feasible Alternatives Cited by Experts
Rather than sweeping bans, specialists advocate:
- Robust digital literacy curricula in schools and homes, teaching children to recognize scams, grooming attempts and misinformation.
- Stronger reporting and takedown mechanisms obligating platforms to act on abuse reports within hours, not days.
- Privacy-preserving age assurance using cryptographic proof-of-age tokens that confirm adulthood without revealing identity.
- Well-funded mental-health and support services to address underlying vulnerability factors.
Legislative Outlook
At the time of writing, the amendments remain under debate in the House of Lords. Industry groups—including the Internet Service Providers’ Association (ISPA) and the Open Rights Group—have lobbied for “tech-neutral, proportionate” safeguards instead of outright bans. Whether the government will temper or withdraw the clauses may hinge on upcoming impact assessments and the positions of cross-bench peers.
Final Thoughts
Protecting children online is unquestionably vital, but blunt bans on VPNs and social-media use risk undermining the very fabric of private communication the Internet relies upon. A world where every citizen must prove adulthood before browsing privately is not merely a child-safety measure—it is a fundamental restructuring of digital civil liberties. Law-makers still have time to pivot toward solutions that enhance safety without sacrificing universal privacy.