Children and teenagers benefit from the many opportunities the Internet offers, but also face risks to their safety and well-being online. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Policymakers around the globe are responding with online safety legislation, including policies that require age checks for accessing certain apps or websites. While often well-intentioned, these policies create risks for people\u2019s privacy, security, and access to an open Internet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Effective age restrictions must mitigate these risks while ensuring safe, age-appropriate experiences. Strong protections and independent oversight are critical to prevent age check requirements from becoming entry points for data breaches, cybercrime, or personal data misuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Existing policies range from \u201cvouching\u201d confirmed by parents or trusted contacts like a teacher, to allowing online services to estimate age, or requiring people to provide a government ID. These checks can happen at different stages: during device setup, in app stores, on websites or apps, or through network operators. Though some laws impose strong privacy requirements on the handling of sensitive information, others require user identification and tracking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even the perception of a privacy intrusion can stop people from accessing age-restricted online services. For example, teens and parents are skeptical<\/a> of using a web camera to scan their face. This method, known as facial age estimation, has become a common age check solution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The current global patchwork of requirements also creates significant challenges for the open Internet. A lack of common standards leads to incompatible systems across borders, fragmented access to online services, and reduced trust in the Internet. Compliance can be complex and costly with some online services choosing to shut down or withdraw from countries with burdensome regulations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Age checks must protect people\u2019s privacy and limit any data collection and sharing to guard against cyber attacks, online activity tracking, and personal data misuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Age checks must not identify or track people online. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Safety goals are undermined when privacy concerns cause people to seek risky workarounds. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n People should be able to complete age checks regardless of their personal circumstances, computer skills, device, or Internet connection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n People should be able to easily complete age checks from any location and with trust that their data and privacy are protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are many age check methods<\/a>, but all have tradeoffs with reliability, ease of access, privacy, and security. The three age check categories are outlined below and collectively known as \u201cage assurance.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although age check technologies are evolving, this does not mean they are all safe, secure, or effective. Each age check category and technique has tradeoffs. These may vary across countries, cultures, and backgrounds with different perceptions of privacy, free expression, and access to technology. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Age checks can be implemented at the device, operating system, app store, online service, or network level. There is no single best method. All have privacy and security risks and tradeoffs with accuracy and ease of access. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Online services often use third-party age verification providers. It can be difficult for people to tell which companies are trustworthy, especially if there is no independent oversight. Any online service is vulnerable to breaches, and some services may use provided data for commercial purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Online age restrictions can improve safety for young people, but they fail when they create new privacy risks or block access to lawful content and services. Policymakers must prioritize secure technical standards and future-proof regulations to protect people while enabling safe, open access to the Internet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Young people should not be blocked from accessing positive online experiences, and adults should not be cut off from services because they are concerned about their privacy or cannot complete age verification processes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Age checks can help protect minors online by restricting access to harmful services, strengthening safeguards on social platforms, and tailoring protections by age and service type.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The more sensitive personal information that people are required to provide, such as government IDs or biometric data, the greater the security and privacy risks from scams and weak privacy practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Data Breaches and Cyber Attacks:<\/strong> No service is immune from data breaches,<\/a> with risks increased when people provide an ID or services use other sensitive data. Criminals also spoof age check requirements to steal people\u2019s government identification or other sensitive information in phishing attacks<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Privacy Fears:<\/strong> People are concerned about requirements to show their face on camera<\/a> or provide sensitive information<\/a> that could be linked to their identity. They are blocked from accessing services they want to use or seek risky alternatives or workarounds due to those concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Data Privacy:<\/strong> Failure to minimize data collection can violate existing data privacy laws and conflicts with privacy principles<\/a> to only use necessary data for as long as needed. Bad actors collect or sell sensitive information for profit or criminal purposes, especially when there are no privacy laws. <\/p>\n\n\n\n No Fully Privacy-Preserving Approach:<\/strong>\u00a0There is no fully privacy-preserving age verification method. Age checks should confirm a user’s age without revealing their actual identity or age, known as \u201cdouble blind\u201d authentication, to improve privacy.\u00a0Zero-knowledge proofs<\/a>\u00a0provide a technical solution to this privacy-preserving approach, but\u00a0the technology is still under development<\/a>\u00a0and not widely deployed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Everyone should be able to complete age checks, regardless of location, socioeconomic status, or personal circumstances. This includes people using older devices, without access to a government ID or financial account, or who use assistive technologies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Disproportionate Impact:<\/strong> Some age check tools are less accurate<\/a> or inaccessible due to race, disability, age, or other characteristics. Not everyone has access to a government ID, good lighting, a web camera, or the technical knowledge to complete an age check process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Technical Barriers and Limitations:<\/strong> Frequent age checks will slow connections and facial age estimation has technical barriers by requiring a working web camera and from being less accurate at estimating<\/a> some ethnicities and ages than others. <\/em>Facial age estimation has improved in recent years but is an average of about two years off<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Challenge for Older Adults:<\/strong> Older adults may be wrongly flagged or unable to complete age checks while teenagers are often misidentified as being adults<\/a> or can more easily find workarounds. Conditions like cataracts, stroke, or other ailments<\/a> may prevent older adults from completing age checks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n People with Disabilities:<\/strong> Many age check methods don\u2019t account for people with disabilities, making it difficult to complete age checks or access. People unable to drive may not have ID<\/a>, some disabilities make people look younger<\/a>, and assistive technology complicates any age check process. <\/p>\n\n\n\n People must be able to easily complete age checks regardless of where they are connecting to the Internet. Affected online services, minimum ages, and requirements for age checks vary across borders. This patchwork of age-restriction rules fragments and splinters people across a global Internet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Internet Fragmentation:<\/strong> People living in different jurisdictions have increasingly different experiences on the Internet. Age gates and varying access to online services further splinters the Internet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Regional Requirements:<\/strong> Requirements for government IDs and financial accounts are often unavailable to people outside of a certain region who are traveling or marginalized communities who are unable to attain those credentials, like refugees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Varying Internet Connections and Devices:<\/strong> Technology limitations in some regions make it difficult to rely on checks that use web cameras, like face scans, or otherwise require a modern device or strong Internet connection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Impede Online Security Tools:<\/strong> People try to find ways around age checks when laws go into effect. Lawmakers are considering banning<\/a> tools like virtual private networks (VPNs) that can help people circumvent restrictions but are relied on by journalists, human rights activists, and global companies and regular people to protect against government censorship and security vulnerabilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Internet Society. Texas\u2019 Mandatory Age Verification Law Will Weaken Privacy and Security on the Internet. (September 2024) https:\/\/www.internetsociety.org\/blog\/2024\/09\/texas-mandatory-age-verification-law-will-weaken-privacy-and-security-on-the-internet<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The Center for Growth and Opportunity. Keeping Kids Safe Online: How Should Policymakers Approach Age Verification? (June 2023) https:\/\/www.thecgo.org\/research\/keeping-kids-safe-online-how-should-policymakers-approach-age-verification<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Digital Trust and Safety Partnership. Age Assurance: Guiding Principles and Best Practices. (September 2023) https:\/\/dtspartnership.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/DTSP_Age-Assurance-Best-Practices.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n European Data Protection Board. Statement on Age Verification. (February 2025) https:\/\/www.edpb.europa.eu\/our-work-tools\/our-documents\/statements\/statement-12025-age-assurance_en<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Forland, Sarah. Exploring Privacy-Preserving Age Verification: A Close Look at Zero-Knowledge Proofs. New America (July 17, 2025) https:\/\/www.newamerica.org\/oti\/briefs\/exploring-privacy-preserving-age-verification<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Forland, Sarah, Nat Meysenburg, Erika Solis. Age Verification: The Complicated Effort to Protect Youth Online. New America. (April 2024) https:\/\/www.newamerica.org\/oti\/reports\/age-verification-the-complicated-effort-to-protect-youth-online\/age-assurance-and-age-verification<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n ICO. Age assurance \u2013 estimating or verifying the age of service users. https:\/\/ico.org.uk\/for-organisations\/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources\/childrens-information\/childrens-code-guidance-and-resources\/how-to-use-our-guidance-for-standard-one-best-interests-of-the-child\/best-interests-framework\/age-assurance<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Lang, David, Benjamin Listyg, Brennah V. Ross, Anna V. Musquera, and Zeve Sanderson. Do Age-Verification Bills Change Search Behavior? A Pre-Registered Synthetic Control Multiverse. (March 2025). https:\/\/osf.io\/z83ev<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n OECD. The legal and policy landscape of age assurance online for child safety and well-being. (June 2025) https:\/\/www.oecd.org\/en\/publications\/the-legal-and-policy-landscape-of-age-assurance-online-for-child-safety-and-well-being_4a1878aa-en.html<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nGuiding Principles Overview<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Protect People\u2019s Privacy and Security<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Ensure Accessibility<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
Protect Open and Global Online Participation <\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
Key Considerations<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Types of Age Checks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Implementing Age Checks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Challenges<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Key Risks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Key Benefits<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Guiding Principles and Recommendations<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Protect People\u2019s Privacy and Security<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Recommendations<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
Ensure Accessibility for All Users <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Recommendations<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
Protect Open and Global Online Participation <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Recommendations<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
Additional Resources<\/h2>\n\n\n\n