digital id – Hellbound and Down

From eBay To Vinted, UK’s “Age Verification” Rules Spreading Already

The UK’s so-called “social media ban” hasn’t even come into force yet, and already its remit is set to spread beyond social media.

We previously reported that OfCom – the UK’s official censorship office – have announced that facial scans aren’t accurate enough to enforce the ban, and adults hoping to prove they are over 16 may need to use their photo ID.

Well now Lisa Nandy, the UK’s “Culture Secretary” – named in the ironic tradition of Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth” – has told the media that the government is going to include non-social media sites in the ban.

The BBC reports:

Government ‘looking seriously’ at banning under-16s from Vinted and eBay

The concern is that – allegedly – the direct messaging available between sellers and customers on second-hand selling services is enabling “grooming”.

So the ban for under 16s is going to be extended to those platforms as well.

Of course, just as with the “social media ban”, the more correct description would be “requiring ID verification from everyone”.

This was always going to happen.

Once the “social media ban” is in place to “protect children”, you have a wedge in the door that can widen in two directions – either new “dangers” to children can be discovered, or you can broaden the definition of “social media”.

The UK government has already gone both ways.

Let us not forget what “Culture Secretary” Lisa Nandy said in her speech at the Labour Party conference last month:

“[We] must be a very active interventionist state, policing and regulating the online space so that people are safe.”

We’re well on our way there.

The social media ban already exists alongside other new regulations limiting online chats in multiplayer games (unless you verify your ID), “digital curfews” for 16 or 17 year-olds, age gating pornography, or suggested measures like device-level “nudity detection” – which would be, in reality, mandatory software scanning every image you look at and every photo you take, or even TRY to take, in real time.

The number of digital services, shops or websites for which all British citizens will be required to supply their ID is growing.

We’re now adding eBay, Vinted, DePop and Facebook Marketplace to that list.

From there it will be Amazon, or Etsy, or Temu. Then Deliveroo, JustEat, UberEats or any online shopping at all.

Then any online activity.

Then internet access in general.

…unless you sign up to the government’s new app to verify your age.

The digital ID beast is slouching toward Bethlehem, to be born.

Keep reading

Ofcom lists four age checks many adults may face to stay on social media

Ofcom, the United Kingdom’s communications regulator, on October 29 named four age-check methods it considers “highly effective” at proving a user is 16 or older. Ministers asked for the assessment to inform the regulations for their ban on under-16s using social media.

The four are photo ID matching, bank-based checks, digital ID services and facial age estimation, which The Register reports must be paired with a second check. Credit card, mobile operator and email checks, which Ofcom says work for confirming someone is 18 but not 16, did not make the list. A passport or driving licence is one route; the bank, digital ID and face checks are the others.

The practical effect falls on many adults, not only children, because a platform cannot know who is under 16 without checking. The Register reports that some adults may be spared where a platform can infer their age from past activity.

Dame Melanie Dawes, Ofcom’s chief executive, said the ban “can work if social media firms do highly effective age checks properly.” According to The Register’s report of the assessment, Ofcom concedes that “the risk of circumvention cannot be entirely eliminated.”

Big Brother Watch, the civil liberties group, answered the same day. Its director, Silkie Carlo, called the plan “a national ID system by the back door” and “an Orwellian assault on free speech and privacy,” and called instead for “parental controls that genuinely protect children.”

The ban rests on a new section 214A of the Online Safety Act 2023, inserted by the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026. Ministers intend to lay the regulations before the end of this year, and the ban is expected to start around spring 2027. The assessment was requested in June by the Technology Secretary, Liz Kendall.

Dawes is a career civil servant whom the Ofcom board appointed chief executive in February 2020.

Canada is on the same road. The Safe Social Media Act, Bill C-34, which would set a similar limit for children 16 and under, is at second reading in the House of Commons.

Keep reading

Apple Supports Digital ID Push With Facial Age Estimation

Apple is increasing its support of the digital ID age verification agenda and has released iOS 27.2, bringing a new way for Apple to verify your age: by scanning your face with an “age-estimation model” that will be fed by a selfie.

This is one of the ways in which Apple will check the age of its users, and it applies, as the company’s support page states, “Where required by law.”

The legal requirements that make this necessary in the US apply in Texas, and elsewhere in the world in Australia, Brazil, Singapore, South Korea, and the UK. The iOS update that introduces the new method of age verification was released on October 26.

Apple will ask for age verification when you create an Apple Account, “update the software on your device, try to change certain safety settings, or try to download or purchase apps with an age rating of 18+.”

In Australia, Brazil, Singapore, and the UK, the selfie option is available, while in other places, Apple will ask for a credit card, a scan of an ID, or look at information associated with an Apple Account.

Apple’s explains that the selfie option works by letting the user “Capture all four angles of your face by moving your head slowly right, left, up, and down.” To increase the likelihood of the scan being successful, the company advises users to “Remove anything that might cover your face, such as masks, hats, or sunglasses” and to “Make sure only your face is in the frame.”

The models that will be used to estimate age from these selfies will run “both on-device and on Private Cloud Compute,” Apple says, referring to a service it provides that “extends the security and privacy of your Apple device into the cloud.” The results will then be “combined on your device.”

Apple promises that the selfie “isn’t accessible to anyone, not even Apple,” and that “Once your age is confirmed, your selfie is deleted and isn’t retained in any form.”

Apple has not revealed the accuracy of the age-estimation model, what happens when it misidentifies an adult as a minor, or what record of the result is kept by the company. Those who are not verified as at least 18 by the model are advised to either try another selfie or use another method.

The other methods Apple will use to determine age are: looking at information associated with the user’s account, such as whether they have a credit card on file or how long they have had their Apple Account; and scanning an ID. The image of the ID is “kept for a short period of time to complete this process, after which it’s deleted,” Apple says, and adds that “Debit cards and gift cards aren’t supported.”

Keep reading

Texas Sues OpenAI Over Lack of Digital ID Age Checks

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is at it again with calls for age verification digital ID checks, this time suing OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman in a district court over the way the company’s chatbot is designed and functions.

The lawsuit, filed in Collin County on Friday, wants the court to issue an injunction that would force OpenAI to implement age verification on ChatGPT users.

According to the petition, OpenAI is accused of “designing, offering, and maintaining a dangerous product that provides content unsuitable for children without requiring any age verification.”

The claims against OpenAI and Altman are made under the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA) and the SCOPE Act.

The petition asks the court to order OpenAI to stop “Offering ChatGPT to minors in Texas” and to stop running the product “without requiring adequate age verification” and “without parental consent.”

Another order Texas wants is to prevent OpenAI from releasing any new model to its users in that state “unless an independent third-party evaluator, approved by the Court, has reviewed its safety guardrails and approved its release.”

Texas also wants a court order stopping OpenAI from selling a product “that functions unreliably while falsely representing that reliability.”

As for monetary compensation, Texas wants $10,000 in civil penalties for each violation, disgorgement of the company’s assets, attorneys’ fees and costs, and is asking for a jury trial.

The petition states that “The free version of ChatGPT has no gatekeeping or age verification mechanism whatsoever.” The paid tier, it continues, “nominally asks users to provide their age” but “there is no mechanism to verify the age of its users.”

According to the filing, ChatGPT has “tens of thousands of users who are under 13 years of age” in Texas, and it cites a Common Sense Media line that “ChatGPT should be for adults only.”

Keep reading

Florida Wants to Put an Age Gate on the Entire Internet

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has announced a legislative proposal that would bring age verification to the app store, the operating system, and AI chatbots.

The announcement was made at Polk State College in Winter Haven, and Uthmeier was joined by Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd and education leaders.

Under the proposal, app stores and similar marketplaces would have to “determine the user’s age, link minors to a parent’s account, and obtain parental consent before a minor downloads or buys an app from a covered platform.”

In addition, the operating systems would have to “apply age-appropriate restrictions at the device level based on the user’s age,” while AI chatbot operators and platforms “must determine account holder’s age.”

The proposal, that has not yet been turned into a bill, is full of invasive promises, including that “all age determination must use commercially reasonable, privacy-protective methods,” as if that’s possible.

However, no method is named, and this is the same promise made with most age-check laws, while reports of identity document leaks keep showing that the promise is not being kept. As Reclaim The Net reported in April, Discord’s earlier experiment with government ID age checks ended in a massive breach that exposed over 70,000 government-issued IDs.

Other provisions of the proposal include forcing social media accounts of those aged 14 to 17 to have a “quiet mode” that blocks access from 11 pm to 7 am, and from 8 am to 3 pm on school weekdays. The release says, “Muting notifications is not enough.”

For the same age group, screen time would be capped at two hours a day and 60 hours a month, “including messaging and long-form content.” Like counts would be hidden, autoplay and infinite scroll would be off unless a parent turns them on, and cosmetic filters would be disabled. Teen accounts would not be recommended to unconnected adults, who may not message them. Every three days, teens would get a prompt to switch to a non-personalized feed that they cannot dismiss.

Reports of child sexual exploitation would get human review within 48 hours, with a “one-strike” rule for adult offenders.

AI chatbots would not be allowed to offer minors features that “simulate companionship through personification, emotional engagement, user-data retention, unsupervised therapy, sexual content” or ones that “suggest the chatbot is a real human” or “encourage isolation or discourage help from appropriate adults.”

The press release said that knowing or reckless violations would be considered unfair practices under Florida Statutes section 501.1736, and would carry a fine of up to $50,000 per violation. The AG’s office would also be able to “maintain a public website to track incidents.”

Uthmeier said, “Parents deserve real control, and companies must design for safety, not addiction.” He also noted that “Florida already prohibits social media accounts for anyone under 14, and the Eleventh Circuit just upheld that law. The Safe Screens Act goes further.”

“If you invite Florida’s children onto your platform, you have a duty to keep them safe,” he also said.

Judd, meanwhile, praised the proposal, saying, “It takes the power and determination of an Attorney General to keep large social media and gaming companies from exploiting and endangering our children.”

Keep reading

Eleventh Circuit Lets Georgia Social Media Age Checks Proceed

A federal appeals court has given a green light to a controversial part of a Georgia law that requires social media platforms to verify the age of every user, and in the case of those under 16, obtain parental consent.

The ruling came on Thursday, October 15, from a panel composed of Judges Newsom, Luck and Tjoflat, with Judge Kevin Newsom writing the opinion.

The case now goes back to the district court, but the decision did not address whether the law is ultimately constitutional – only that NetChoice went about its lawsuit the wrong way and did not provide enough evidence to prove the law is not constitutional.

Paul Taske, director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said, “While we are disappointed in the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling, the court notably did not hold that SB 351 is constitutional.”

On June 26, 2025, Judge Amy Totenberg of the Northern District of Georgia ruled that the law was too vague, that it was preempted by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), and that it likely violated the First Amendment, and blocked it.

The law’s social media part requires platforms to “make commercially reasonable efforts to verify the age of account holders” and obtain a parent’s consent for anyone under 16. For those under 16, platforms can only use age and location for ad targeting.

According to the court’s own summary, the law “requires platforms within its ambit to verify the ages of all their users.”

If a platform does not verify, it must “apply the special conditions applied to minors under this chapter to all account holders.” The ways a platform can confirm a parent include “Collecting information related to the minor’s parent’s or guardian’s government issued identification or financial or payment card information.”

The attorney general can seek up to $2,500 for each violation.

There is also another section of the law that requires sites that are more than 33.33 percent “harmful to minors” to check every visitor’s age, including by submitting government-issued ID. This part of the law has been in force since July 1, 2025, and was not challenged by NetChoice.

The Eleventh Circuit panel found that NetChoice had standing to sue but did not meet the test set by the Supreme Court in Moody v. NetChoice to prove the law was unconstitutional in a facial challenge – that is, across the full range of its application. The group had to show that the law was unconstitutional across the board, and it did not.

“NetChoice hasn’t provided even a full list of its own members to which SB 351 applies,” Judge Newsom wrote.

“We’ve learned the facial-challenge lesson the hard way,” the ruling states. “We needn’t address the merits of its First Amendment claim,” it continues.

The panel also reversed the lower court’s ruling that said the law was too vague and that it was preempted by Section 230.

Attorney General Chris Carr said, “This is a major win for Georgia families and a huge blow to those who would stand in the way of commonsense solutions to protect our kids.”

Keep reading

Germany Approves EU Digital Identity Wallet Law

Germany is getting its version of the EU Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet, as the country’s parliament (Bundestag) has passed the Digital Identities Act on October 15.

The law serves as the national legal framework for the introduction of the digital ID wallet, that the EU’s official digital ID scheme will be implemented with, and that Germany will launch on January 2, 2027, under the name d-you.

What the bill does is make it easier to exchange biometric data between the authorities in charge of passports and ID cards; it lowers the age at which people can use online ID from 16 to 13; and it gives citizens the option to refuse the biometric photo.

One of the issues was the age at which children can start using the digital ID, with the Left rejecting the lowering of the age to 13, “because it ultimately amounts to preparation for introducing a social media ban for young people, which it also rejects.”

EU rules say that very large online platforms are under obligation to accept the wallet, while the committee report said that the German law “extends the acceptance obligations” to situations with no cross-border element.

Reclaim The Net has previously reported about the plan of the Social Democrats (SPD) to make verification with the EUDI Wallet mandatory for social media users aged 16 and above. SPD Secretary General Tim Klüssendorf has been quoted as saying that “We are currently not meeting the state’s obligation to protect” and that workarounds “such as via a VPN tunnel” should not be possible.

The EU, however, says that the wallet will be voluntary.

Keep reading

Florida Seeks Meta ID Checks For All Users

Florida’s attorney general is asking a court to make sure Meta (Facebook and Instagram) puts in place a system to check the age of all its users in that state.

If the court grants the motion, every user in Florida will have to surrender their privacy and will have to verify their age to access speech and, if they are under 14, Meta will have to remove them from the platforms. And if Meta can’t do that within 30 days, it will have to cut off every user under 18 until it implements the age-checking system.

In the meantime, the court is asked to order Meta to set limits on the use of its platforms by teenagers, including hours when they can use them, and features they can access.

“Request proof of age for Instagram and Facebook accounts belonging to users that Meta’s systems know or predict to be under the age of 14, and mark for deletion the accounts of those who do not verify their age within 30 days,” the filing says.

It also wants Meta to “Adopt and apply an age assurance framework to every Teen User.”

It asks Meta to “Treat users who Meta has reason to believe are under 14 or under 18 years of age as under those respective ages unless the users age verify.”

The motion spells it out: “If within 30 days of the entry of this injunction, Meta cannot implement the measures for user-age verification and removal in this and the prior sections, Meta must cease to allow any Young Users access to its Platforms in Florida until these measures are implemented.” Young Users means users under 18.

The default mode for teens should be “quiet mode from 9 p.m. to 8 a.m. year-round, and from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. on academic-year weekdays”, the filing says. It also wants Meta to hide “like” counts from teenagers by default, disable autoplay and infinite scroll unless a parent turns them on, and limit the time spent on the platforms to “not more than 60 hours per month.”

The motion mentions internal Meta communications, including one that says “IG is a drug” and another that reads, “We’re basically pushers.”

Another employee is quoted as saying about hiding “like” counts, “It’s a social comparison app, fucking get used to it.”

The court is yet to rule on the motion, but Attorney General James Uthmeier announced the filing on X, saying, “We just asked a Florida court to order Meta to turn off the features that addict teenagers and to leave Florida kids alone when they’re in school or sleeping.”

Uthmeier also revealed that Meta tried to get Florida to accept a settlement, but was rebuffed. “Meta tried to get us to take their low-ball settlement, but we wont sell out our kids,” he wrote.

The attorney general’s motion calls the national settlement a “mere slap on the wrist” for a company that is valued at “roughly $1.86 trillion.”

Keep reading

Danish Population Register Breached, Leaking Data of Nearly Nine Million People

Hackers are suspected of having cracked the Danish government’s national database containing the personal information of nearly nine million people, potentially exposing them to fraud or identity theft.

Copenhagen’s Ministry of Research, Education and Digitalisation said on Monday that the Central Register of Persons (CPR), the national civil registration database containing personal information for millions of citizens, has been compromised.

In Denmark, all legal residents have a unique 10-digit civil registration number, used to access public services, healthcare, banking, and taxes, and to store information on each citizen, including name, date of birth, address, marital status, citizenship, religious affiliation, and parentage.

The government said on Monday that unidentified people used a Danish business’s access to the system to wrongfully obtain the CPR numbers, names, and addresses of around 8.8 million people, the public Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR) reported.

In a briefing on Monday, government minister Christina Egelund said that it was too early to tell whether it was a cyber attack or whether foreign state actors were involved in the leak.

“We are not ruling out any clues in the ongoing investigation. Nor that it may have an international character,” she said.

Egelund added that the government will review the entire CPR system and implement “adjustments and transformations” to re-establish security.

Keep reading

	freemattpodcast on The BBC Once Again Misleads Re…
	Galloway's Rose… on Scott Galloway’s Unhinge…
	Bigus Macus on Education Department Calls For…
	freemattpodcast on Trump Admin Weighs Emergency P…
	freemattpodcast on Muslim-Majority Turkey Detains…