Supreme Court Greenlights Online Digital ID Checks

With a landmark ruling that could shape online content regulation for years to come, the US Supreme Court has upheld Texas’s digital ID age-verification law for adult websites and platforms, asserting that the measure lawfully balances the state’s interest in protecting minors with the free speech rights of adults.

The 6-3 decision, issued on June 27, 2025, affirms the constitutionality of House Bill 1181, a statute that requires adult websites to verify the age of users before granting access to sexually explicit material.

Laws like House Bill 1181, framed as necessary safeguards for children, are quietly eroding the rights of adults to access lawful content or speak freely online without fear of surveillance or exposure.

Under such laws, anyone seeking to view legal adult material online (and eventually even those who want to access social media platforms because may contain content “harmful” to minors) is forced to provide official identification, often a government-issued digital ID or even biometric data, to prove their age.

Supporters claim this is a small price to pay to shield minors from harmful content. Yet these measures create permanent records linking individuals to their browsing choices, exposing them to unprecedented risks.

We obtained a copy of the opinion for you here.

Keep reading

COPPA 2.0: The Age Check Trap That Means Surveillance for Everyone

A new Senate bill designed to strengthen online privacy protections for minors could bring about major changes in how age is verified across the internet, prompting platforms to implement broader surveillance measures in an attempt to comply with ambiguous legal standards.

The Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (S.836) (COPPA 2.0), now under review by the Senate Commerce Committee, proposes raising the protected age group from under 13 to under 17. It also introduces a new provision allowing teens aged 13 to 16 to consent to data collection on their own.

The bill has drawn praise from lawmakers across party lines and received backing from several major tech companies.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Supporters frame the bill as a long-overdue update to existing digital privacy laws. But others argue that a subtle change in how platforms are expected to identify underage users may produce outcomes that are more intrusive and far-reaching than anticipated.

Under the current law, platforms must act when they have “actual knowledge” that a user is a child.

The proposed bill replaces that threshold with a broader and less defined expectation: “knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances.” This language introduces uncertainty about what constitutes sufficient awareness, making companies more vulnerable to legal challenges if they fail to identify underage users.

Instead of having to respond only when given explicit information about a user’s age, platforms would be required to interpret behavioral cues, usage patterns, or contextual data. This effectively introduces a negligence standard, compelling platforms to act preemptively to avoid accusations of noncompliance.

As a result, many websites may respond by implementing age verification systems for all users, regardless of whether they cater to minors. These systems would likely require more detailed personal information, including government-issued identification or biometric scans, to confirm users’ ages.

Keep reading

Austria Approves Spyware Law to Infiltrate Encrypted Messaging Platforms

Austria is moving forward with legislation that would authorize law enforcement to infiltrate encrypted communications, marking a pivotal shift in the country’s surveillance powers and stirring a fierce debate over digital privacy.

The federal cabinet’s approval of the plan comes after months of negotiations, with proponents citing national security needs and opponents warning of expansive overreach.

The proposed law targets messaging platforms widely used for private communication, including WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram.

It introduces the use of spyware, formally known as source TKÜ, which would allow authorities to bypass encryption and monitor conversations directly on suspects’ devices. The change represents a major escalation in surveillance capabilities for a country that has traditionally lagged behind its European counterparts in digital interception laws.

Backers of the measure, such as Social Democrat Jörg Leichtfried, who oversees the Directorate for State Security and Intelligence (DSN), framed the move as a preventative strategy. “The aim is to make people planning terrorist attacks in Austria feel less secure; and increase everyone else’s sense of security.”

Leichtfried called the cabinet’s approval an “important milestone.”

Austria’s domestic intelligence services have until now been dependent on international partners, including the UK and the US, to provide warnings of potential threats.

Keep reading

Obama Wants Filters Not Freedom

Barack Obama’s recent appearance at The Connecticut Forum once again revealed a troubling truth: the political establishment is becoming increasingly comfortable with the idea of government-managed speech.

In an extended conversation with historian Heather Cox Richardson, the former president signaled that his tolerance for open discourse ends where his ideological preferences begin.

Amid warnings about the spread of “propaganda” and falsehoods online, Obama floated the notion of imposing “government regulatory constraints” on digital platforms.

His rationale? To counter business models that, in his opinion, elevate “the most hateful voices or the most polarizing voices or the most dangerous, in the sense of inciting violence.”

But it doesn’t take much reading between the lines to see what’s really being proposed: a top-down mechanism to filter speech based on government-approved standards of truth.

This wasn’t framed as a direct assault on the First Amendment, of course. Obama was careful to qualify that such regulations would remain “consistent with the First Amendment.”

But that’s little comfort when the very premise involves the government determining which voices deserve a platform. Once the state takes a role in deciding what is true or acceptable, the line between moderation and censorship evaporates.

Obama’s remarks included a reference to a saying he alleges is attributed to Russian intelligence and later adopted by Steve Bannon: “You just have to flood the zone with so much poop…that at some point people don’t believe anything.”

This, he argued, is the tactic used by bad actors to disorient the public. What he failed to acknowledge is that the antidote to this isn’t more control, but more speech. Free people, given access to a full spectrum of views, are capable of discerning fact from fiction without government supervision.

The real danger isn’t “too much speech.” It’s the increasing desire to place speech under bureaucratic management.

Obama’s suggestion that some speech is too “hateful” or “dangerous” to be left unchecked invites a future where those in power decide what the public is allowed to hear, a vision completely incompatible with a free society.

And we’ve already seen how that plays out.

Keep reading

Largest Data Breach in History: *16 Billion* Login Credentials Exposed in Databases

Security researchers have uncovered potentially the largest data breach in history, comprising an astounding 16 billion login credentials, which include Apple accounts.

9to5Mac reports that a team of security researchers has stumbled upon a massive trove of stolen login credentials, exposing an unprecedented 16 billion records, including Apple accounts. The discovery, which researchers describe as “one of the largest data breaches in history,” has sent shockwaves through the cybersecurity community and raised serious concerns about the potential for widespread account takeovers, identity theft, and highly targeted phishing attacks.

The researchers, from the cybersecurity firm Cybernews, initially found a database containing 184 million records sitting unprotected on a web server last month. However, as they delved deeper, they realized that this was just one of many unsecured databases full of private information. Further investigation revealed an additional 29 datasets, each containing tens of millions to over 3.5 billion records. In total, the researchers uncovered a staggering 16 billion records, making this one of the biggest stolen login discoveries of all time.

What sets this breach apart from others is the freshness and organization of the data. The researchers emphasized that these are not just recycled old breaches, but rather “fresh, weaponizable intelligence at scale.” The neatly structured data, which includes URLs, usernames, and passwords, points to infostealers as the likely source. Infostealers are a type of malware specifically designed to collect login credentials in this exact format.

The implications of this breach are far-reaching and deeply concerning. With access to such a vast number of login credentials, cybercriminals can easily carry out account takeovers, steal identities, and launch highly targeted phishing campaigns. Apple accounts, which are among the exposed credentials, are particularly worrisome, as they can be used to access a wide range of sensitive information and services, including iCloud, Apple Pay, and the App Store. Other logins reportedly included in the massive datasets include Google, Facebook, instagram, Amazon, and many other popular web services.

Keep reading

IDF Mandates Pre-Approval for Reporting Missile Strikes, Including on Social Media and Online Platforms

A new set of censorship rules issued by the Israel Defense Forces is raising alarms over media freedom and public transparency.

Brigadier-General Kobi Mandelblit, Israel’s chief censor, declared on Wednesday a mandate requiring prior approval for any reporting on where missiles or drones have struck, no matter the platform or location of publication.

According to the statement, “any person who prints or publishes printed matter or a publication regarding the location of a strike or hit by enemy war materiel, including missiles of any kind and UAVs, in the media or online (including social media, blogs and chats, etc.)” must now submit that material to the military censor for approval before it is released.

This directive applies to both domestic and international reporting, online and offline.

Keep reading

Musk says he is providing Iran with Starlink as regime restricts internet

Elon Musk signaled late Friday night that he is providing Iranians with Starlink satellite internet after conservative analyst Mark Levin asked him to turn the service on in Iran during Israel‘s conflict with the country.

“The beams are on,” Musk said in a response to Levin’s request on X.

Levin’s initial post argued that if Starlink is turned on in the country, “Musk can put the final nail in the coffin of the Iranian regime.” Starlink is Musk’s satellite internet service.

Iran restricted internet access for millions of people following Israel’s strike on the country. Internet usage in the country heavily declined after the restrictions were issued, according to the internet monitoring group Netblocks. There hasn’t been a complete block of traffic, however, as Levin’s post suggested.

Keep reading

Stripe And Substack Demand Authors’ Financial Details

Financial privacy is a right under the Constitution, as is free speech.  

Under the guise of “credit review,” Stripe is now rolling out a requirement that appears to target conservative or “anti-vax” Substack authors. Stripe is requiring that these authors provide all of their current and historic financial records associated with the bank account into which Stripe deposits Substack subscriber payments (after taking 10% off the top for Substack and 3% for Stripe). Stripe already has information concerning this bank account (including deposits from Stripe), as we have been doing business with Stripe via this account for over two years.

If I or anyone else agree to these new terms, this newly implemented arbitrary, capricious and overreaching requirement will provide Stripe with complete records of all financial transactions associated with this account. Consequently, this will provide Stripe with comprehensive information on all of my customers, patients, and clients, all of my travel (historic and planned), all of my purchases, and any donations (and donor information).

This information from my account and those of any others who comply with this demand can be hacked or sold, provided to the US Government, used to fuel predictive algorithms (AI), used to derive insights into my political orientation, weaponized against me by press or other hostile actors, or used to support future social credit score-based restrictions.

Stripe has a history of financially deplatforming (or debanking) for political reasons, including removing support for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Despite its relatively recent entry into the financial transaction business, Stripe has become a major global financial organization, and processed one $1 trillion in payments during 2023, and is now expanding its credit charge program

Keep reading

Senate Pushes Bill That Could End Private Messaging

Under the pretext of strengthening measures against child exploitation online, a controversial Senate bill is resurfacing with provisions that privacy advocates say would gut critical internet protections and compromise the security and privacy of all citizens.

Known as the STOP CSAM Act of 2025 (S. 1829), the legislation is being criticized for using broad language and vague legal standards that could severely weaken encryption and open the floodgates for content takedowns, including legal content, across a wide range of online services.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The bill’s stated aim is to curb the spread of child sexual abuse material, a crime already strictly prohibited under federal law. Current regulations already compel online platforms to report known instances of such material to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which coordinates with law enforcement.

However, S. 1829 goes well beyond this existing mandate, targeting a wide spectrum of internet platforms with new forms of criminal and civil liability that could penalize even the most privacy-conscious and compliant services.

The scope of the legislation is sweeping. Its provisions apply not only to large social media platforms but also to private messaging apps, cloud storage services, and email providers.

Keep reading

Britain Launches Cross-Border Censorship Hunt Against 4chan

The UK government has taken another aggressive step in its campaign to regulate online speech, launching formal investigations into the message board 4chan and seven file-sharing sites under its far-reaching Online Safety Act.

But this is more than a domestic crackdown; it is a clear attempt to assert British speech laws far beyond its borders, targeting platforms that have no meaningful presence in the UK.

The law, which came into full force in April, gives sweeping powers to Ofcom, the UK’s communications regulator, to demand that websites and apps proactively remove undefined categories of “illegal content.”

Failure to comply can trigger massive fines of up to £18 million ($24M) or 10 percent of global revenue, criminal penalties for company executives, and site-wide bans within the UK.

Now, Ofcom has set its sights on 4chan, a US-hosted imageboard owned by a Japanese national. The site operates under US law and has no physical infrastructure, employees, or legal registration in Britain. Nonetheless, UK regulators have declared it fair game.

“Wherever in the world a service is based if it has ‘links to the UK’, it now has duties to protect UK users,” Ofcom insists.

Keep reading