Age Verification Mandates Would Undermine Anonymity Online

Age verification systems are surveillance systems. Mandatory age verification, and with it, mandatory identity verification, is the wrong approach to protecting young people online. It would force websites to require visitors to prove their age by submitting information such as government-issued identification. This scheme would lead us further towards an internet where our private data is collected and sold by default. The tens of millions of Americans who do not have government-issued identification may lose access to much of the internet. And anonymous access to the web could cease to exist. 

Why We Are Against Age Verification Mandates

Age verification laws don’t just impact young people. It’s necessary to confirm the age of all website visitors, in order to keep out one select age group. 

Once information is shared to verify age, there’s no way for a website visitor to be certain that the data they’re handing over is not going to be retained and used by the website, or further shared or even sold. While some age verification mandates have limits on retention and disclosure of this data, significant risk remains. Users are forced to trust that the website they visit, or its third-party verification service, both of which could be fly-by-night companies with no published privacy standards, are following these rules. 

Further, there is risk that website employees will misuse the data, or that thieves will steal it. The more information a website collects, the more chances there are for it to get into the hands of a marketing company, a bad actor, or someone who has filed a subpoena for it. This would inevitably lead to further data breaches, because these laws won’t just affect companies that are big enough to have robust data protection. If a website misuses or mishandles the data, the visitor might never find out. And if they do, they might lack an adequate enforcement mechanism. For example, one recent age verification law requires a user to prove  “damages resulting from” the unlawful retention of data, in order to hold the website accountable in court—a difficult bar to reach. 

These mandates wouldn’t just kick

[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.

This article has been indexed from Deeplinks

Read the original article: