Tag: digital id

Goodbye Jury Trials, Hello Digital ID: 10 “recommendations” from the Crime and Justice Commission

The Times Crime and Justice Commission was established last year, with its mission statement being to…

consider the future of policing and the criminal justice system, in the light of the knife crime crisis, a shoplifting epidemic, the growing threat of cybercrime, concerns about the culture of the police, court backlogs, problems with legal aid and overflowing prisons.

And today is that long-promised glorious golden day where they reveal their findings. The white smoke has gone up and we get to witness the result of their long hours of toil.

How are we going to fix everything?

Let’s take a look at the complete list, with some helpful annotations:

1. Introduce a universal digital ID system to drive down fraud, tackle illegal immigration and reduce identity theft;

Digital ID for everybody! It’s going to solve every problem! We’ve talked this to death, it was always going to be in here.

2. Target persistent offenders and crime hotspots using data to clamp down on shoplifting, robbery and antisocial behaviour;

That’s about surveillance. “Data” means your private data which they will get from social media companies.

3. Roll out live facial recognition and other artificial intelligence tools to drive the efficiency and effectiveness of the police;

Again, FRT was always going to feature. I’m not sure what “other artificial intelligence tools” means, but the vagueness is likely the point. “Efficiency” is the word doing the heavy-lifting in that sentence, intended to capture the pro-MAGA, pro-Musk UK crowd.

4. Create a licence to practise for the police, with revalidation every five years to improve culture and enhance professionalism;

That’s just throwing something out for the “other side”. So far it’s all just more powers for the police and courts, this adds some faux accountability framework into the mix to make it look fair.

5. Set up victim care hubs backed by a unified digital case file to create a seamless source of information and advice;

Same as above, with some extra seasoning for the digital identity sales pitch thrown in.

6. Introduce a new intermediate court with a judge and two magistrates to speed up justice and reduce court delays;

This is about replacing trial by jury, and that’s all it’s about. It’s something they’ve been wanting to do for years and keep making excuses to try.

7. Move to a “common sense” approach to sentencing with greater transparency about jail time, incentives for rehabilitation and expanded use of house arrest;

Not sure what this means in real terms, but any use “common sense” in this kind of document should always raise an eyebrow. As should the idea of “expanded use of house arrest”.

8. Give more autonomy and accountability to prison governors with a greater focus on rehabilitation and create a College of Prison and Probation Officers;

No idea what this means yet. Could be about more prison-based work programs (a la private prisons in the US), could just be fluff between important parts.

9. Restrict social media for under-16s to protect children from criminals and extreme violent or sexual content;

Again, very predictable. And, again, very dishonest. As we’ve said a thousand times, “restricting social media to under-16s” – in practical terms – means everyone on social media has to verify their age. So bye-bye online anonymity.

Keep reading

As Expected, a Hearing on Kids Online Safety Becomes a Blueprint for Digital ID

The latest congressional hearing on “protecting children online” opened as you would expect: the same characters, the same script, a few new buzzwords, and a familiar moral panic to which the answer is mass surveillance and censorship.

The Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade had convened to discuss a set of draft bills packaged as the “Kids Online Safety Package.” The name alone sounded like a software update against civil liberties.

The hearing was called “Legislative Solutions to Protect Children and Teens Online.” Everyone on the dais seemed eager to prove they were on the side of the kids, which meant, as usual, promising to make the internet less free for everyone else.

Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), who chaired the hearing, kicked things off by assuring everyone that the proposed bills were “mindful of the Constitution’s protections for free speech.”

He then reminded the audience that “laws with good intentions have been struck down for violating the First Amendment” and added, with all the solemnity of a man about to make that same mistake again, that “a law that gets struck down in court does not protect a child.”

They know these bills are legally risky, but they’re going to do it anyway.

Bilirakis’s point was echoed later by House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie (R-KY), who claimed the bills had been “curated to withstand constitutional challenges.” That word, curated, was doing a lot of work.

Guthrie went on to insist that “age verification is needed…even before logging in” to trigger privacy protections under COPPA 2.0.

The irony of requiring people to surrender their private information in order to be protected from privacy violations was lost in the shuffle.

Keep reading

Meta Pushes Canada for App Store Age Verification ID Laws

Meta is working to convince the Canadian government to introduce new laws that would make age verification mandatory at the app store level. The company has been lobbying Ottawa for months and says it has received positive feedback from officials drafting online safety legislation.

To support its push, Meta paid Counsel Public Affairs to poll Canadians on what kinds of digital safety measures they want for teens.

The poll found that 83 percent of parents favor requiring app stores to confirm users’ ages before app downloads.

Meta highlighted those results, saying “the Counsel data clearly indicates that parents are seeking consistent, age-appropriate standards that better protect teens and support parents online. And the most effective way to understand this is by obtaining parental approval and verifying age on the app store.”

Rachel Curran, Meta Canada’s director of public policy, described the idea as “by far the most effective, privacy-protective, efficient way to determine a user’s age.”

That phrase may sound privacy-conscious, but in practice, the plan would consolidate control over personal data inside a small circle of corporations such as Meta, Apple, and Google, while forcing users to identify themselves to access basic online services.

Google has criticized Meta’s proposal, calling it an attempt to avoid direct responsibility. “Time and time again, all over the world, you’ve seen them push forward proposals that would have app stores change their practices and do something new without any change by Meta,” said Kareem Ghanem, Google’s senior director of government affairs.

Behind these corporate disputes lies a much bigger question: should anyone be required to verify their identity in order to use the internet?

Keep reading

Congress Pushes for Nationwide Internet Age Verification Plan.

Republican lawmakers are proposing a new way to enforce accountability on tech companies to comply with age verification laws, despite resistance from websites like Pornhub. The App Store Accountability Act (ASA), introduced by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Representative John James (R-MI), proposes a different model: requiring app stores themselves to verify users’ ages and pass that information to apps when they are downloaded.

The bill is part of a broader push in Congress to tighten safeguards for minors online and has earned support from major tech companies, including Facebook parent company Meta, Pinterest, and Snap. Pinterest CEO Bill Ready argues that one standard would simplify the process and reduce the confusion created by a patchwork of state requirements. “The need for a federal standard is urgent,” he said.

“I think most people at most of these companies probably do want to protect kids,” Sen. Lee said, adding that support from tech companies like Pinterest “makes a big difference.”

However, the proposal faces resistance from civil liberties groups and digital rights advocates. Critics warn that compulsory age verification could limit access to lawful online content, raising First Amendment concerns. They also cite significant privacy risks, arguing that systems requiring users to submit sensitive personal information could expose them to data breaches or misuse.

Some major websites have rejected attempts to enforce online age verification. Pornhub has withdrawn its services from states that require government-issued ID or similar credentials for access to adult material. The company argued that these laws push users toward unregulated platforms while forcing supposedly legitimate sites to collect data they would prefer not to hold.

In 2025, the Supreme Court upheld a state age-verification law for explicit content in Texas, with the majority concluding that states may require age checks to prevent minors from viewing harmful material.

Supporters of federal action contend that the ASA would avoid the growing compliance difficulties posed by differing state regulations. Sen. Lee has stated, “I don’t believe that there’s anything unlawful, unconstitutional, or otherwise problematic about this legislation,” arguing that an app-store-centered approach would reduce repeated verification across multiple platforms.

Keep reading

Missouri Locks the Web Behind a “Harmful” Content ID Check

Starting November 30, 2025, people in Missouri will find the digital world reshaped: anyone wishing to visit websites containing “harmful” adult material will need to prove they are at least 18 years old by showing ID.

This new requirement marks Missouri’s entry into the growing group of US states adopting age verification laws for online content. Yet the move does more than restrict access; it raises serious questions about how much personal data people must surrender just to browse freely.

For many, that tradeoff is likely to make privacy tools like VPNs a near necessity rather than a choice.

The law defines its targets broadly. Any site or app where over one-third of the material is classified as “harmful to minors” must block entry until users confirm their age.

Those who do not comply risk penalties that can reach $10,000 a day, with violations categorized as “unfair, deceptive, fraudulent, or otherwise unlawful practices.”

To meet these standards, companies are permitted to check age through digital ID systems, government-issued documents such as driver’s licenses or passports, or existing transactional data that proves a person’s age.

Keep reading

Substack Introduces ID Checks to Comply with UK Censorship Law

By now, you’ve probably realized the internet is being slowly fitted into a digital checkpoint.

Everything is being scrubbed down, sanitized, and locked behind a digital turnstile with a flashing sign that says: Show us your ID.

Substack, that cozy digital home where newsletter authors rant, muse, and argue about everything from politics to fan fiction of 19th-century philosophers, is the latest to be roped into the bureaucratic puppet show known as the UK’s Online Safety Act.

And the British government has decided that if you’re reading a mildly spicy newsletter, you must first present identification. No, really.

To access some of the platform’s content, you may soon have to upload a selfie and a government-issued ID.

What this means for readers in the UK is simple: prepare to be interrupted. You’re sitting down to read your favorite newsletter. Maybe it’s political commentary, maybe it’s a writer who occasionally uses words like “orgasmic” while referring to cake.

Either way, you click. And boom. Content blurred, comment section blocked, and your feed now behind a velvet rope manned by an algorithm with a clipboard.

Keep reading

EU Parliament Votes for Mandatory Digital ID and Age Verification, Threatening Online Privacy

The European Parliament has voted to push the European Union closer to a mandatory digital identification system for online activity, approving a non-binding resolution that endorses EU-wide age verification rules for social media, video platforms, and AI chatbots.

Though presented as a child protection measure, the text strongly promotes the infrastructure for universal digital ID, including the planned EU Digital Identity Wallet and an age verification app being developed by the European Commission.

Under the proposal, every user would have to re-identify themselves at least once every three months to continue using major platforms. Children under 13 would be banned entirely, and teenagers between 13 and 16 would require parental approval to participate online.

Keep reading

Thailand orders suspension of iris scans and deletion of data collected from 1.2 million users

Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee has ordered TIDC Worldverse to suspend its iris-scanning services and delete biometric data collected from 1.2 million users, citing non-compliance with Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act.

TIDC Worldverse is part of Sam Altman’s World ID project, which has faced scrutiny over potential links to cryptocurrency scams and unauthorised data use, including cases where people were allegedly hired to scan irises for others.

The National Health Security Office in Thailand has ordered the suspension of iris biometric data collection by TIDC Worldverse and has demanded the deletion of biometric data already collected from approximately 1.2 million Thai citizens.

TIDC Worldverse is the Thai representative of Sam Altman’s Tools for Humanity, which operates the World ID project (formerly Worldcoin) in Thailand. The initiative uses iris-scanning “Orb” devices to provide a digital “proof-of-human” credential.  Participants receive Worldcoin (“WLD”) tokens as an incentive for biometric verification.

Explaining in simple terms what the “Orb” is, Business Insider said, “The Orb is a polished, volleyball-sized metal sphere that scans irises to generate a ‘World ID’ – a kind of digital passport meant to distinguish humans from machines online.”

Keep reading

Escape the Digital Purse Seine

Due to the relatively short lifespan of human beings, it can be difficult to put our own life experiences in perspective with history. This is why we have the saying, “Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.” Combine a lack of historical knowledge with the fact that human nature doesn’t change much, and you have a recipe for human-caused misery, repeated over and over.

In Edgar Allan Poe’s short story “The Cask of Amontillado,” we see an example of human nature gone awry, with lethal results. From the first, the reader is privy to Montresor’s disgust toward Fortunato and his desire to exact revenge for a perceived insult. As the story progresses, it should be evident to Fortunato that Montresor has ill intent, but Fortunato cannot imagine the evil, so he continues into the depths of the catacomb, willingly walking toward his own demise while being plied with wine and called “friend.”

Even as Montresor is about to place the last stone that will seal Fortunato’s death in chains behind the brick wall, Fortunato calls it a good joke that they will laugh about later. Montresor agrees, drops his torch into the opening, places the final brick, and piles old bones of his ancestors in front, where half a century later “no mortal has disturbed them.”

There are analyses interpreting Poe’s story, and its intended message, but surely one lesson is to pay attention when all the signs indicate that you are in a bad situation, even as others try to convince you of their solicitude and concern for your well-being. This is the dire situation of humanity today, in the form of the digital prison that is being formed right before our eyes under the guise of convenience, efficiency, and safety.

Keep reading

Google Softens Planned Android Sideloading Ban but Keeps Developer ID Verification

Google is slightly relaxing its controversial new Android policy on sideloading, but the shift does little to change its overall direction.

The company confirmed that it will still move ahead with mandatory developer identity verification for nearly all apps while introducing a limited “advanced flow” that lets “experienced users” continue installing software from outside the Play Store.

According to Google, the new system will feature multiple security warnings meant to deter casual users from downloading unverified apps.

“It will include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands,” the company said.

The process is still being developed, with feedback now underway before finalization in the coming months.

The adjustment follows backlash from developers and Android fans who criticized Google’s original plan to block apps created by unverified developers starting next year.

The community argued that the move would effectively close off Android’s long-standing openness by removing the ability to install software freely.

Despite the new language, Google’s latest policy maintains the same structure.

Developer ID verification will still be required for nearly all app distribution.

Only students and hobbyists will be allowed to share apps with a limited number of devices without providing identification, and businesses deploying internal software will remain exempt.

For everyone else, verification and a $25 registration fee will be mandatory, including for apps distributed outside Google Play. Previously, there was no charge for independent distribution.

The rollout schedule remains the same. Developers who distribute apps outside the Play Store began receiving early-access invitations on November 3, while Play Store developers will get theirs starting November 25.

The early-access period runs through March 2026, after which the verification program will open to all developers. The rules take effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand in September 2026, and globally in 2027.

Google maintains that the new requirements are about security, not control.

Keep reading