Home
 » ISP News, Key Developments » 
Sponsored Links

Ofcom Begin Process of Imposing Age Verification on UK Internet Sites

Thursday, Jan 16th, 2025 (10:57 am) - Score 3,640
internet-censorship-forbidden-written-on-keyboard-23208292-123rf

The UK telecoms and media regulator, Ofcom, has today moved forward with implementation of the government’s tedious new Online Safety Act (OSA) by publishing industry guidance on how websites and social media services should introduce “effective age checks“. The goal is to prevent children from encountering online porn and protect them from other harmful content.

The focus around the new age verification requirement is frequently expressed as being something targeted towards pornography services, which must introduce age checks by July 2025 at the latest. But some of the new requirements also stretch to “all user-to-user and search services” in scope of the act (e.g. social media, online forums, tube sites, cam sites, and fan platforms) – both big and small sites alike.

NOTE: Ofcom have decided NOT to introduce numerical thresholds for highly effective age assurance “at this stage” (e.g. 99% accuracy), which in any case would be a very difficult thing to judge with any accuracy.

The regulator’s new guidance sets out how the new legal duty will work and makes clear that any age-checking methods deployed by services must be “technically accurate, robust, reliable and fair” in order to be considered “highly effective“.

Advertisement

Previous methods, including self-declaration of age and online payments that don’t require a person to be 18, are deemed NOT highly effective. By comparison, Ofcom says that open banking, photo ID matching, facial age estimation, mobile network operator age checks, credit card checks, digital identity services and email-based age estimation are highly effective.

What are online services required to do, and by when?

The Online Safety Act divides online services into different categories with distinct routes to implement age checks. However, the action we expect all of them to take starts from today:

  • Requirement to carry out a children’s access assessment.  All user-to-user and search services – defined as ‘Part 3’ services – in scope of the Act, must carry out a children’s access assessment to establish if their service – or part of their service – is likely to be accessed by children. From today, these services have three months to complete their children’s access assessments, in line with our guidance, with a final deadline of 16 April. Unless they are already using highly effective age assurance and can evidence this, we anticipate that most of these services will need to conclude that they are likely to be accessed by children within the meaning of the Act. Services that fall into this category must comply with the children’s risk assessment duties and the children’s safety duties. [i.e. they must record the outcome of their assessment and must repeat the children’s access assessment at least annually].
  • Measures to protect children on social media and other user-to-user services. We will publish our Protection of Children Codes and children’s risk assessment guidance in April 2025. This means that services that are likely to be accessed by children will need to conduct a children’s risk assessment by July 2025 – that is, within three months. Following this, they will need to implement measures to protect children on their services, in line with our Protection of Children Codes to address the risks of harm identified. These measures may include introducing age checks to determine which of their users are under-18 and protect them from harmful content. 
  • Services that allow pornography must introduce processes to check the age of users: all services which allow pornography must have highly effective age assurance processes in place by July 2025 at the latest to protect children from encountering it. The Act imposes different deadlines on different types of providers. Services that publish their own pornographic content (defined as ‘Part 5 Services) including certain Generative AI tools, must begin taking steps immediately to introduce robust age checks, in line with our published guidance. Services that allow user-generated pornographic content – which fall under ‘Part 3’ services – must have fully implemented age checks by July. 

As part of this, Ofcom have also opened an age assurance enforcement programme, albeit focusing their attention “first” on Part 5 services that display or publish their own pornographic content. If sites fail to act, the OSA allows Ofcom to impose financial penalties worth up to 10% of a company’s annual worldwide turnover (max of £18m) and they could also implement “business disruption measures” against third-parties, such as by imposing restrictions via internet search engines, payment providers or by requiring broadband ISPs to block the website.

In addition, porn providers are effectively also forbidden from directing or encouraging people to use circumvention measures (VPN, Proxy Servers, DNS changes etc.), although anybody under 18 who does go actively seeking such content (let’s face it, there will be a lot of active seeking) will have no difficulty finding and using circumvention measures, as has always been the case. The horse on this one bolted a long.. time ago.

Dame Melanie Dawes, Ofcom’s CEO, said:

“For too long, many online services which allow porn and other harmful material have ignored the fact that children are accessing their services. Either they don’t ask or, when they do, the checks are minimal and easy to avoid. That means companies have effectively been treating all users as if they’re adults, leaving children potentially exposed to porn and other types of harmful content. Today, this starts to change.

As age checks start to roll out in the coming months, adults will start to notice a difference in how they access certain online services. Services which host their own pornography must start to introduce age checks immediately, while other user-to-user services – including social media – which allow pornography and certain other types of content harmful to children will have to follow suit by July at the latest.

We’ll be monitoring the response from industry closely. Those companies that fail to meet these new requirements can expect to face enforcement action from Ofcom.”

As usual Ofcom, just like the government, are still giving the impression above that this is only impacting “companies“, which remains very misleading as many of the rules also catch small blogs and forums that may have nothing to do with porn content – often imposing an intolerable level of legal liabilities and complexity on those least able to be able to understand, afford or handle it. This is to say nothing of the wider problems.

Advertisement

One of the risks above stems from the fact that users of some services may end up being forced to share their private personal details with companies connected to unreliable porn peddlers. The infamous “Ashley Madison” data breach in 2015 highlighted just how dangerous such information could be in the wrong hands (multiple cases of blackmail and suicide etc.).

Ofcom does state that all age assurance methods must be subject to the UK’s privacy laws, including those concerning the processing of personal data – as enforced by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Porn services must also keep written records explaining how they protect users from a breach of these laws. But we suspect that won’t provide end-users with much reassurance, given the frequency of modern data breaches – even at state level.

Back in 2023 the European Policy Information Center (EPICENTER) published a report that summed these challenges up quite nicely, not least by highlighting the tendency of politicians to “promise the impossible without fully understanding the dynamics of what they are trying to regulate and without giving sufficient consideration to the side-effects of the proposed solutions.” That’s really the OSA, in a nutshell.

At the same time there’s a concern about treating all under-18’s so generically as merely “children” in the realm of any internet content. This is something that many in their late teens (particularly the 15-18 bracket) will no doubt find to be quite insulting. It could also make it harder for them to engage online in even safe communities that having nothing to do with porn or harmful adult content, as site owners will be thinking first of their own liability etc.

Advertisement

Finally, many have questioned whether such a system is even necessary, since all of the major broadband and mobile providers already offer optional network-level filtering systems that cover porn and adult content (e.g. gambling) – these are usually enabled by default.

Lest we also forget that there could be unintended impacts in other areas too, such as on sex workers (i.e. pushing them off-line and back onto the streets). Likewise, there’s the question of freedom of expression, not least with respect to the debate over what is and what is not porn (i.e. general nudity, medical content and erotic stories). The puritanical approach being taken by the Government does seem to create a few grey areas.

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
Mark-Jackson
By Mark Jackson
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook, BlueSky, Threads.net and .
Search ISP News
Search ISP Listings
Search ISP Reviews
Comments
52 Responses

Advertisement

  1. Avatar photo BigBrad says:

    This sums up how clueless ofcom really are.

    It should be the responsibility of parents etc.

    This is about control and govt want us all to be sheep

    1. Avatar photo tonyp says:

      In a way I feel sorry for Ofcom in that they have to perform the will of the law, in turn enacted by politicians, who, in turn, have been lobbied by pressure groups. On the other hand, how do they prevent harmful material from overseas legal jurisdictions? Age verifications, with all sorts of ID will only work if there are some sort of physical characteristic (such as retinal scanning) of a site user and that brings privacy issues too.

      I agree it is up to parents to keep a watchful eye, but that depends on the parental attitude which could either be lassaiz-faire or ultra-restrictive, demonic or angelic. And what teenager/sub-teen wants their parents overseeing their activities?

      Don’t get me wrong, I think age limitation is a good thing. Responsibility comes with maturity.

    2. Avatar photo Pro4TLZZ says:

      Don’t forget that the current labour government supported this law and also voted it through

  2. Avatar photo Mr Scorn Hub says:

    And why should all these websites be trusted with highly sensitive information? What is my compensation when inevitable leaks occur? Why should they get all this data for free?
    They can dream on, they’ll never be able to lock down any of that anyway, they’ll be standing in the ocean demanding the waves stop coming in next

    1. Avatar photo Tony says:

      It’s worse.. it doesn’t specify ‘big’ websites at all. If you’re running a home mastodon server you are also required to do these checks. You likely don’t trust meta with your passport.. I bet you don’t trust random network admins with it..

      There are already a few forums that have announced closure due to this act. A lot more will follow, and likely those hosted overseas will simply ban UK users from using them (The act, rather hillariously, claims jurasdiction over every website in the world).

  3. Avatar photo Lucian says:

    Mark & all, it’s worth following Neil as he is a professional solicitor interested in the subject and may be able to nudge people in the right direction.

    https://mastodon.neilzone.co.uk/@neil

  4. Avatar photo Phil says:

    It’s down to parental responsible! Get a grip Ofcom useless

    1. Avatar photo Bob says:

      You are either not a parent, or a clueless ignorant parent.

      Your kids are smarter than you and will find a way to circumvent any restrictions you (and the government) put in place.

      Welcome to reality.

    2. Avatar photo anon says:

      this is a ridiculous comment. You expect to sit there and watch 100% of the websites that your child visits? no, you’re going to implement filters with adblock are you? ok and you’re going to restrict what applications can be loaded on to your child’s phone like say a free VPN? ah you’ve got google family link ok .. you going to watch what apps your child can sideload on to the phone?

      oh your kids are different are they? all you have to do is tell them don’t do it and then that’s it , they won’t do it? LOL.

      yeah you didn’t think this through at all

  5. Avatar photo Darren says:

    We really ar doomed aren’t we. How stupid.

  6. Avatar photo anonymous says:

    Welcome to state control of everyone’s life. Sponsored by Ofcom.

    1. Avatar photo anonymous says:

      yes requiring people to verify they’re not a child before consuming something meant for 18+ year olds is total state control isn’t it.
      like . um . when you buy booze or cigarettes.
      get a grip

    2. Avatar photo john says:

      It’s not remotely the same thing. In fact, unless you’re a very young adult you rarely ever have to produce ID to buy age restricted products. And even when you do it is just one person looking at it for a few seconds. No copies are taken, no records are made. There’s little to no risk of ID theft. You can see in front of you exactly what has happened to your data.

    3. Avatar photo Blue Shirt Guy says:

      “yes requiring people to verify they’re not a child before consuming something meant for 18”

      Ummm, you’ve completely failed to grasp what’s happening. It’s like requiring everyone to prove they’re over 18 before they can enter Tesco to buy a sandwich because Tesco also sells alcohol. That means either children will have to stop buying sandwiches at Tesco and go to the dodgy kebab van down the road which food standards don’t know exists, or Tesco will have to stop selling alcohol to adults.

    4. Avatar photo anon says:

      John, you’ve either

      a) Not understood the scope of this new process
      b) Are being wilfully disingenous
      c) Are saying it’s not alike, when in fact it is and most people would see it that way.

      I see people being ID’d regualrly for alcohol. People are regularly ID’d for entry to clubs. The fact you think this rarely happens leads me to believe it’s option b) you’re going for here. Nobody needs to store copies of anything and verification can take place with many different methods. For example many mobile companies use a selfie which is not stored. People give their IDs to lots of people, you just don’t want it being associated with degenerate online content.

    5. Avatar photo john says:

      @anon I excluded very young adults because of Challenge 25. Most adults are rarely ID’d. But you are missing the point. Being ID’d for alcohol or whatever does not link your identity with that purchase.

      “you just don’t want it being associated with degenerate online content.”

      That’s exactly right and nor should I have to. If I went to an IRL adult shop and bought a DVD there would be no association whatsoever. Why should we have to give up this privacy just because it’s on the internet?

      The burden should be on parents to talk about these things with their kids and secure their devices not on everyone else to give up their right to privacy for the convenience of lazy parents. There are very good tools parents can use to control access. And, yes, yes, some kids are gonna work around the parental controls and access what they want anyway. But those same kids are gonna work around these age checks and far more easily, actually. One more thing to consider: when a kid works around parental controls they are defying their parents. When they work around the government censor – nobody cares. Which would give them pause for thought?

  7. Avatar photo John says:

    VPN solves this

    The way this communist government is using censorship to go after regular people is insidious. “Harmful content” now includes arresting a man who shared a certain Welsh council advertising video to “refugees” by using little girls. He didn’t even edit, he just pointed out the then public video

    1. Avatar photo john says:

      All these laws were passed by the last government. Not that it matters Labour would’ve passed them as well had they been in power at the time. The instinct to track and control everyone and everything is strong amongst the British establishment.

  8. Avatar photo john says:

    I wonder if PornHub will withdraw from the UK market in protest as it has done in some US states due to similarly bad laws there.

    I must admit email based age verification took me by surprise. Apparently there are companies that can take your email address and see if it has been used for bank accounts or mortgages and so on and thereby determine if you are over 18. This seems highly sus given GDPR!

  9. Avatar photo E says:

    What an embarrassment. They should all block the UK with a splash screen saying to contact their MP. Maybe losing access to half of their favourite sites will motivate the citizens to actually care about their constantly eroding freedom.

    1. Avatar photo Jamie says:

      Dear MP,

      I’m trying to flick one off but all I get is this block screen. Please help.

      Regards,

      Constituent

  10. Avatar photo Lycaerix says:

    Stupidity at its finest. They clearly think that the entirety of the internet is based in the UK and subject to the nannying of British politicians.

    What a monumental waste of taxpayer money and governmental resources for the sake of a superficial, virtue-signalling vanity project.

    Try homeopathy. It’s precisely as effective.

    1. Avatar photo tonyp says:

      Welcome to the “Great British Firewall”, designed sponsored and built by by China, Iran, North Korea, et.al. By contrast uncontrolled social media! Does it work?

      Remember ‘The National Viewers and Listeners’ association? Theatre showing of ‘Romans in Britain’?
      (Mary Whitehouse and Lord Longford)

      Do you want your wives and servants reading ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’? (Judges summing up at trial succeeding in breaching the Obscene Publications Act.

      Sigh!

  11. Avatar photo Ad47uk says:

    And when I say we are becoming if not already a nanny state, people say, no, we are not.

    YES WE ARE.

  12. Avatar photo Gareth Hart says:

    This is going to be a mess to implement. It looks as if every website not “safe for kids” is going to need to verify age and identity in order to allow one time access to a website. And then there’s the practicality of accessing web based or age restricted content on TV and games consoles. I knew this wouldn’t be limited to adult websites but would expand to virtually all sites accessible in the UK. Going to be fun using the Internet come July. If you think the cookie prompts and anti-bot captchas are annoying, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

    1. Avatar photo Anonymous says:

      It’s very likely this is going to end up delayed at the last min, the whole thing is a unworkable mess and no website is going to do this.

  13. Avatar photo MissTuned says:

    “Porn and other harmful materials”, says the Ofcom CEO, implying that porn is inherently a “harmful material”. I’d contest that – it can have harms, people can become addicted, but for the most part adults watch it in moderation for entertainment. The people depicted are adults who have consented to the activity, and are getting paid.

    I’m not sure it’s right for Ofcom as the regulator to assert that completely legal content is “harmful”, unless stage 2 of this is going to be restrictions on this content for all. I’d get rid of the gambling crap everywhere before I started to restrict porn.

    1. Avatar photo tonyp says:

      I doubt if gambling advertising would be struck down since that ‘industry’ gives sizeable bungs to political parties to protect their vested interests – despite the gambleaware sites and many studies into gambling addiction.

    2. Avatar photo Bob says:

      Please read the article. In full.

      Ofcom are not the instigators of this. There was an Act of Parliament passed by the previous government, support by the opposition and signed into law by the monarch. Ofcom, are simply the quango that have responsibility of enacting the guidance for companies for complying with the law.

      These are basic civics. Ignorance is bliss, it seems.

  14. Avatar photo Blake says:

    It’ll be as ineffective as the high court order blocking of torrent sites. If you have a basic knowledge of torrenting, you’ll know how to get around it. Similarly any teenager will be clued up on the workarounds mentioned above, and if not their friends or Google will point them in the right direction.

    What a waste of time and money and inconvenience to everyone. Look what happened with the cookie law, just made it more tedious for everyone when visiting every website.

  15. Avatar photo Serf says:

    Verification will be expanded to cover any topics and subject material considered embarrassing, contradicting, opposing or in conflict with approved political narrative or official policy including political opposition on domestic and foreign policy.

    Verification could also be further developed to be part of CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) and Chinese Style Social Credit System.

  16. Avatar photo Rich says:

    What does this mean for the ISPreview forums? :/

    1. Mark-Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      In terms of the forum (/talk/), in the first instance it’s mostly an incredibly laborious and burdensome reporting requirement (‘Requirement to carry out a children’s access assessment’). Frankly, I’m still not sure myself of the specifics for doing this as the regulator has not offered any templates to assist (the guidance that does exist is pretty vague and overly generalised). Ofcom’s deeper documentation seems more designed for business or lawyer consumption than those of a regular human. So we’ll call this one a work-in-progress.

      From reading between the lines, I don’t think a forum like ours would be strictly required to introduce age checks (no real “adult content”, “harmful content” and certainly no “porn”), which is good because there’s no viable way in which we can currently do this. I’m not a company or have vast development resources, and the technical option simply doesn’t exist. In order to avoid problems with the data protection act and protect user privacy, we don’t even ask for many personal details, so it’s a bit of an awkward one.

      But there are some key things to remember here. Ofcom are mindful that they also have to take action with proportionality in mind, meaning larger services and those where significant abuse occurs remain the real focus. So, while the law may set these things out, the regulator is not really interesting in enforcement for enforcements sake – they want to tackle sites and services where serious abuses take place. Small forums where people chat innocently about broadband and mobile providers are not their concern and are unlikely to ever face a serious request, particularly if we keep the current moderation going.

      I’ve seen a lot of smaller forums and blogs that cover entirely innocent topics (like ours) go into panic mode, which I think is premature. The law does technically catch those in its net, but Ofcom itself has no actual designs on those and only wants to tackle the really nasty stuff (they don’t have the resources for anything else either).

    2. Avatar photo Gareth Hart says:

      The vast majority of websites, including this one, have clauses in their terms and conditions staring that children and teenagers are not permitted to use the website or user-to-user service. I guess that would now fall under the purview of the law and that said websites would be required to implement age verification.

  17. Avatar photo greggles says:

    So in the name of excessive wool wrapping, we are throwing privacy out the window, as we will need to start uploading passports etc, to access services. Expect ID fraud to jump up.

  18. Avatar photo Anthony says:

    This stamps the previous topic about VPNs really home to roost. You set it to USA and you don’t pay VAT, you pay in Dollars, not pounds ($30 does not equal £30, Mr Porn Site Biller), and now they want me to send my Passport to the porn site operator. No thanks. I now live in America….

    1. Avatar photo Gareth Hart says:

      From what I understand from reading the Ofcom documents, websites can not block VPN’s (yet) as they’re not covered in the Online Safety Act’s provisions (an amendment to ban them failed) but will require them to prevent VPN’s being used to circumvent age verification. In effect, a VPN ban.

    2. Avatar photo No Name says:

      VPN bans are impossible.

      VPNs are a valid use case for lots of companies to safely do business and protect their own systems from unauthorised access.

    3. Avatar photo anon says:

      @Gareth Hart

      Pretty sure that not true? It does not require them to prevent VPN’s being used to circumvent age verification. Even if it did that would end up in court fast.

  19. Avatar photo anon says:

    Other countries should just disconnect the submarine cables that connect the UK to them.

    The UK wants to live with an Orwellian style Intranet? Let them.

  20. Avatar photo SicOf says:

    Rambling vitrol
    ” or part of their service – is likely to be accessed by children”
    OK so ‘Birdwatch’, gardeners world, the bbc, *.gov.uk, The British Library, every media channel (GB ‘News’ ha ha) and the NHS? Gee the RS and Pukemon owners clubs. So when are they going to stop politacal (miss) marketting, sloganing sources etc? Not to mention mobile phone manufactureres / sellers etc? School projects, e.g. environmental studies – Ofwat?
    All ‘may be’ acessesed by anyone, homework, research..? How does this affect Google search ffs raotnfl.

    Or are we all to have to have a ‘personally identifying internet account’, possibly with biometric ‘security’ (which is a farce as it will get leaked hacked without the users consent, and then what for individual ‘security’) at least a password has to volountarilly be given up, caveat user ( after all right have responsibilties) and can be changed – lack of responsibility leads to … or used over unencrypted ‘internet’. Isnt it about time all email accounts have to use encrypted passwords? Or are we all to dongle inserted at birth retrofitted? Or there a company looking to do this pushing government £ accounts..
    Wow, isn’t this (yet) another incredibly badly thought out ‘solutution’. Or just a plan for the UK at least (to follow the likes of china preventing free speach and user access), block, tor and any form of individual privacy vpns etc. and geofence UK citizens? Right wing totalliarianism ? Legalising the trolling of individuals.

    They could at least tag everyone with 18, then no PID B’date, or is this an excuse to get more…

    OTOH, given Ofcom’s regulation monitoring and policing, they might as well not bother wasting users money.

    A badly aimed mallet for a walnut.

    It would be better benifit for ‘uk’ to fix the greatest world pollutuers in the order of their pollution level top down rather than cruicyfy ourselves for the fragment of world pollution by CO2 the UK produces (including our consumerisim outside of the UK!) ?

    Our political ‘governance’ intelligence really is sick.

  21. Avatar photo I'm old enough says:

    Great idea indeed. Unless you’re 17 then it sucks

    1. Avatar photo Sam ride says:

      What do you mean it’s a rubbish law for everyone

  22. Avatar photo anonymous says:

    Personally, I think this idea is fine. I think it’s degenerate filth and it causes a LOT of issues. My issue is when they say that it affects places that “allow” this filth what about Reddit and Twitter? because they most certainly allow it, now are they going to apply the law evenly and make reddit do age verification or are they going to apply it ineffectively against big names in the industry? Time will tell I suppose of course none of these methods will stop a kid who knows what a VPN is but then the government never understood technology and thinks putting a gate in an empty field will mean everyone will go through the gate

  23. Avatar photo Gavin says:

    I hope they don’t start using the same methods as a well known adult site.

    I was unable to authenticate my age because they demanded a selfie. Being disabled and having to use oxygen 24/7 I wasn’t able to take the selfie.

    Despite me registering a credit card, and uploading my drivers license when I couldn’t continue with the selfie closing the process means they throw away the licence image too.

    I contacted their customer support suggesting I email my driving licence and a selfie picture with my mask on, only to be told they can’t override the process.

    If they all outsource to those companies am I going to be locked out of anything that requires an age verification?

  24. Avatar photo Blue Shirt Guy says:

    I’m just commenting to say how well Mark has summed this all up. It’s a classic case of “think of the children” while actually making things much much worse for everyone including them.

  25. Avatar photo anon says:

    Blue Shirt Guy, this is the most ridiculous analogy i’ve ever had this misfortune to read.
    Are tesco sandwhiches an over 18 product?
    no they’re not.

    Should people be rightly challenged before being given access to something that is legally for over 18s? yes they should. The average age of a child viewing adult material online is about 10 years old now. I suppose you don’t care about this, probably you don’t have kids and see being verified for access to something for over 18s as “le bad” .

    It is you who has failed to understand this.
    This online “content” is not meant for Children, and it SHOULD require verification.
    You can dislike it all you want, but it isn’t different from requiring ID for alcohol or tobacco
    Your analogy about sandwhiches notwithstanding

    1. Avatar photo Blue Shirt Guy says:

      If you don’t understand the analogy then you don’t understand the issues. The fact that a sandwich is not an over 18 product IS THE WHOLE POINT.

      They want ID checks for normal people doing normal things “just in case” someone does something that is not suitable for children. Having to show my passport to comment on your post is no different to having to show a passport to buy a sandwich.

    2. Avatar photo anon says:

      my god it’s like replying to a child.
      the thing requiring verification is for over 18s
      how do you give something to someone over the internet that is meant for 18 year olds if you don’t verify they are 18

      maybe i can draw it for you with crayons?

  26. Avatar photo Rik says:

    My main concern is that this will force legitimate users to hand over their details and other personal information to even more sites and services before, making it harder to keep your data secure from leaks.

    A few years ago, someone tried taking thousands off me after I put my trust in a lesser known website just to buy something for a fiver.

    I’ll be going over to the VPN side, soon.

  27. Avatar photo kallax says:

    Why are so many of you of the opinion that these ahem websites would be storing your identity?
    I don’t think any of you are fully aware of how 18 year old verification works. I work in the gambling industry and we have to, by law verify users are 18+. The user gets sent to a verification site, and all we get back from them is “APPROVED” or “NOT APPROVED”. We don’t ever see the person’s ID. Never. And also, neither does the verification site. They do the verification and the identity documents used are destroyed afterwards.

    Now I know you tinfoil hat lot won’t believe that, but ask anyone who works for an online financial institute or someone who works for a fintech app like for example revolut. See if they store ID documents or their verification service does

    1. Avatar photo DRÖNA says:

      yea a casino sure i trust them with my id. when im jerkin off in a private tab im not going to give some random porn site’s lowest bidder my passport.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

NOTE: Your comment may not appear instantly (it may take several hours) due to static caching and moderation checks by the anti-spam system. Please be patient. We will reject comments that spam, troll, post via known fake IP/proxy servers or fall foul of our Online Safety and Content Policy.
Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your entries for comment content, display name, IP and email in our database, for as long as the post remains live.

Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
100Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £23.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
Youfibre UK ISP Logo
Youfibre £23.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
NOW UK ISP Logo
NOW £25.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £25.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
New Forum Topics
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
BeFibre UK ISP Logo
BeFibre £19.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
100Mbps
Gift: None
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £19.00
300Mbps
Gift: None
toob UK ISP Logo
toob £22.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £23.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (6164)
  2. BT (3694)
  3. Politics (2781)
  4. Business (2489)
  5. Openreach (2447)
  6. Building Digital UK (2365)
  7. Mobile Broadband (2206)
  8. FTTC (2094)
  9. Statistics (1953)
  10. 4G (1860)
  11. Virgin Media (1814)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1619)
  13. Fibre Optic (1492)
  14. Wireless Internet (1478)
  15. 5G (1457)
Promotion
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact
Mastodon