UK Age Checks: How They Won’t Work

I’m not happy with the UK following the failed path of mandatory age verification for adult content. Let’s be honest: it won’t work, and it poses serious risks.

Right now, most adult content is already blocked by default by internet service providers (ISPs). You have to opt in to access it, something I recently had to do on my mobile network, and it was easy to miss. So barriers already exist. A smarter approach would be to let sites declare themselves as 18+ and allow ISPs to handle access using existing infrastructure. The internet is global, and enforcement across borders is practically impossible. Even under current rules, plenty of sites already ignore data protection laws. Expecting every platform to comply with 140+ national rules is something only the biggest players can afford.

Under the current UK law, platforms must perform age verification, not just ask a question. This often means uploading a government ID or selfie for biometric checks. That’s a privacy nightmare. We’re told, “Don’t worry, your data won’t be stored or sold.” I don’t buy it. Promises change, companies get bought out, and leaks happen. My data has been mishandled so many times I’ve lost track. When I walk into a physical adult store, I show ID, and that’s it. My data isn’t stored. Why should online be different?

Verification services need to make money somehow. If they’re free to use, then you, or more specifically your data, are the product. The risk is obvious: if one of these providers gets hacked, it becomes a goldmine for abuse. Worse, if a stolen selfie is scraped from the internet, you may be forced to upload more sensitive documents just to recover your identity. Look at Reddit. They use the same verification provider as LinkedIn, and people have horror stories of being locked out with no way to get back in.

The law is also vague. It essentially says, “You figure it out,” shifting responsibility onto platforms. But even pubs, staffed with trained employees, still serve underage drinkers. These checks are flawed by design, and people will find ways around them. Sites that comply could see traffic drop, while rivals who don’t will benefit. Some platforms may simply block UK users entirely to avoid the legal and technical hassle. If the UK makes up just 2% of your audience, why take the risk?

Some forums have already shut down rather than deal with the costs and liabilities. Worse, anyone with basic tech knowledge can use a VPN to mask their location and bypass these controls. This will only spark a game of cat and mouse, with VPNs, region blocks, countermeasures, and workarounds, pushing people toward darker, more dangerous parts of the internet.

That’s the irony: streaming services succeed because they reduce friction. The harder you make something to access, the more people go elsewhere. In economics, this is known as friction  anything that adds time, effort, or cost to a transaction. The more friction you add, the more likely people are to abandon it or seek out easier alternatives. We’ve known this for years.

We already know how this ends. People will shift to unregulated foreign platforms. The UK has strong legal protections, and we should be focusing on exporting better standards a safer, more ethical porn industry, mandatory and inclusive sex education, and honest conversations about sex work, consent, and safety. Help sex workers access banking. Destigmatise. Set a better example.

A more realistic solution would be to allow domains to register as 18+, block them by default via ISP filters, and let users opt in if they choose. Mixed-content sites could use separate domains for age-gated material. Yes, it’s not perfect  having dozens of subdomains isn’t ideal  but it builds on existing systems and avoids invasive ID checks. If platforms are forced to create different versions of their site for every jurisdiction, the easier option is just to block access altogether.

Instead, politicians have gone for the flashy “ban it” approach, performative politics with real-world consequences. Why? Because it looks like action, even when it isn’t. The real problem is content moderation, and that’s being ignored. Harmful material spreads not because it exists, but because algorithms push it. Whether it’s porn or pro-anorexia content, the issue is recommendation systems driven by engagement, not simple access.

A better system would give users tools to filter content based on accurate, standardised tags. You can’t childproof the internet, but you can adult-proof it by letting users control what appears on their feed. Tagging and filtering would do far more good than ID-gating ever will.

My concern isn’t really about the children. It’s about censorship creeping in through the back door. Systems like this are always expanded to cover any content people find uncomfortable. That’s the wedge, and it’s already being hammered in.

If I were a lawmaker, I wouldn’t waste time on unworkable solutions. I’d focus on meaningful reform: better education, stronger tech standards, and a cultural shift in how we view sex, porn, and consent. You can’t stop the flood, but you can shape what flows through it.

If we want to protect ourselves, we need to be honest about how the internet works. Not listen to lobbyists. Listen to experts and learn from history, not repeat the same broken systems while pretending they work.