- House of Lords Peers propose VPN ban for children
- VPN providers will have to implement age verification measures
- The bill still needs to clear the Commons to become law
A cross-party group of House of Lords Peers has tabled an amendment that would ban children in the UK from using VPNs. If passed, the government would have to enforce the restrictions within 12 months.
Under the new rules, VPN providers would be forced to verify the age of all UK users, using “highly effective” age verification methods to ensure that no one using the service is under 18.
The government will also be tasked with establishing a monitoring regime, including “effective enforcement measures” that would penalize non-compliant companies.
The requirements will apply to any VPN service that markets itself to UK consumers or is used by a “significant number” of people in the country.
In their explanatory note, the peers wrote: “This new clause will require the Secretary of State to take steps to promote and protect the well-being of children and further support child protection measures in the Online Safety Act by prohibiting the provision to children in the United Kingdom of VPN services which may facilitate the circumvention of OSA processes for those of age.”
This proposal is being considered at report stage of the Child Wellbeing and Schools Bill in the House of Lords. To become law, the amendment still needs to be voted through both the Lords and the House of Commons.
What’s next?
This proposal is likely to cause significant concern among the privacy and cyber security community in the UK. “Highly effective” age verification typically requires people to submit government-issued ID or facial scans, a requirement that dramatically undermines the privacy that VPNs are designed to provide.
Designed with the Online Safety Act specifically in mind, the change addresses fears that people have turned to the best VPNs and free VPNs to bypass age verification measures.
While the amendment has cross-bench support in the House of Lords, it still faces an uncertain future.
In another proposed amendment, Peers has suggested that: “Any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have tamper-proof system software installed which is highly effective in preventing the recording, transmission… and display of CSAM by that device.”
The proposal has been called “Orwellian in scope” by James Baker, who works for the Open Rights Group. “Instead of imposing blanket bans or invasive surveillance, there are smarter, more liberal ways to tackle online harm,” he wrote.
We will continue to monitor the process, including its likely opposition in the House of Commons, and reach out to the peers responsible for introducing the amendment for comment.
More to follow…
