As the UK edges closer to age-gating the internet, a think tank has warned that no technology can provide a “magic fix” for online harms – and politicians need to be more honest about the limitations of age-assurance tooling.

The warning comes after the government’s education minister Olivia Bailey told Parliament in April that some form of social media restrictions on young Brits was likely, regardless of the government’s consultation into the matter.

In its 10-page response to the government's Growing up in the online world consultation– which concluded last month – the Foundation of Information Policy Research (FIPR) argues policy makers risk placing too much faith in technologies that may not yet be capable of delivering what ministers hope.

The submission was authored by FIPR submission Dr Ben Collier, a University of Edinburgh researcher specialising in cybercrime and online harms, and vice chair and Dr Monica Horten, a tech policy expert and LSE visiting fellow focused on online safety and digital rights.

“While it is tempting to rely on 'magic' technological fixes for online harm, these will not work."

Foundation of Information Policy Research

“While it is tempting to rely on 'magic' technological fixes for online harm, these will not work, will concentrate even more power in the hands of large tech platforms, and will risk letting them off the hook for the wider social harms to which they contribute,” they said.

ID honeypots

FIPR argues that age-verification systems are often presented as a way of protecting children from harmful content, but that savvy youngsters are likely to find ways around restrictions through VPNs, borrowed devices, purchased accounts and other workarounds.

In some cases, researchers warn, those efforts to circumvent controls could expose children to even greater risks.

For age verification to be effective, both children and adults may be required to prove their age to use online services, for example, by providing biometric information, credit cards or government-issued identification to verification services or online sites.

The Cybernews community is talking about this. Be a part of the conversation.

This poses security and privacy risks for both adults and children, and requires users to trust the verification service will store their data securely.

Security researchers (and criminals) have proven that it is possible to hack verification apps – most recently in April a newly-unveiled European age verification app came under fire after a security researcher claimed he bypassed its protections in under 2 minutes.

Rather than relying solely on age-verification technology, the FIPR is urging ministers to focus on the underlying causes of harm, including platform, design, business models and content moderation practices.

“We believe it would be helpful if the government and [UK regulator] Ofcom explained that no set of laws and regulations can provide complete protection from online harm."

Foundation of Information Policy Research

TikTok’s age-verification provider speaks out

Speaking to Cybernews, Olli Krebs, an SVP at Incode, the startup helping TikTok roll out age verification, said the existence of a workaround does not automatically mean the technology isn’t effective.

"You need to ask whether age assurance will make a meaningful difference."

Olli Krebs, SVP Incode.

“You need to ask whether age assurance will make a meaningful difference. Is it reducing underage access compared to systems that rely on someone simply entering a birth date? Is it raising the barrier enough to improve safety outcomes in the real world? That’s how we should evaluate it," he said.

Krebs, whose firm also works with major banks and financial institutions, added that privacy was equally important.

“Age assurance should be built around data minimization. In many cases, you only need enough information to establish age eligibility, not collect or retain unnecessary personal data. The goal should be to improve safety while protecting privacy."

---

Unlock exclusive Cybernews content on YouTube.