First Porn, Now Skin Cream? ‘Age Verification’ Bills Are Out Of Control

from the it-always-gets-worse dept

I’m old enough to remember when age verification bills were pitched as a way to ‘save the kids from porn’ and shield them from other vague dangers lurking in the digital world (like…“the transgender”). We have long cautioned about the dangers of these laws, and pointed out why they are likely to fail. While they may be well-intentioned, the growing proliferation of age verification schemes poses serious risks to all of our digital freedoms.

Fast forward a few years, and these laws have morphed into something else entirely—unfortunately, something we expected. What started as a misguided attempt to protect minors from “explicit” content online has spiraled into a tangled mess of privacy-invasive surveillance schemes affecting skincare products, dating apps, and even diet pills, threatening everyone’s right to privacy.

Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

Age verification laws do far more than ‘protect children online’—they require the  creation of a system that collects vast amounts of personal information from everyone. Instead of making the internet safer for children, these laws force all users—regardless of age—to verify their identity just to access basic content or products. This isn’t a mistake; it’s a deliberate strategy. As one sponsor of age verification bills in Alabama admitted, “I knew the tough nut to crack that social media would be, so I said, ‘Take first one bite at it through pornography, and the next session, once that got passed, then go and work on the social media issue.’” In other words, they recognized that targeting porn would be an easier way to introduce these age verification systems, knowing it would be more emotionally charged and easier to pass. This is just the beginning of a broader surveillance system disguised as a safety measure.

This alarming trend is already clear, with the growing creep of age verification bills filed in the first month of the 2025-2026 state legislative session. Consider these three bills: 

  1. Skincare: AB-728 in California
    Age verification just hit the skincare aisle! California’s AB-728 mandates age verification for anyone purchasing skin care products or cosmetics that contain certain chemicals like Vitamin A or alpha hydroxy acids. On the surface, this may seem harmless—who doesn’t want to ensure that minors are safe from harmful chemicals? But the real issue lies in the invasive surveillance it mandates. A person simply trying to buy face cream could be forced to submit sensitive personal data through “an age verification system,” creating a system of constant tracking and data collection for a product that should be innocuous.
  2. Dating Apps: A3323 in New York
    Match made in heaven? Not without your government-issued ID. New York’s A3323 bill mandates that online dating services verify users’ age, identity, and location before allowing access to their platforms. The bill’s sweeping requirements introduce serious privacy concerns for all users. By forcing users to provide sensitive personal information—such as government-issued IDs and location data—the bill creates significant risks that this data could be misused, sold, or exposed through data breaches. 
  3. Dieting products: SB 5622 in Washington State
    Shed your privacy before you shed those pounds! Washington State’s SB 5622 takes aim at diet pills and dietary supplements by restricting their sale to anyone under 18. While the bill’s intention is to protect young people from potentially harmful dieting products, it misses the mark by overlooking the massive privacy risks associated with the age verification process for everyone else. To enforce this restriction, the bill requires intrusive personal data collection for purchasing diet pills in person or online, opening the door for sensitive information to be exploited.

The Problem with Age Verification: No Solution Is Safe

Let’s be clear: no method of age verification is both privacy-protective and entirely accurate. The methods also don’t fall on a neat spectrum of “more safe” to “less safe.” Instead, every form of age verification is better described as “dangerous in one way” or “dangerous in a different way.” These systems are inherently flawed, and none come without trade-offs. Additionally, they continue to burden adults who just want to browse the internet or buy everyday items without being subjected to mass data collection.

For example, when an age verification system requires users to submit government-issued identification or a scan of their face, it collects a staggering amount of sensitive, often immutable, biometric or other personal data—jeopardizing internet users’ privacy and security. Systems that rely on credit card information, phone numbers, or other third-party material  similarly amass troves of personal data. This data is just as susceptible to being misused as any other data, creating vulnerabilities for identity theft and data breaches. These issues are not just theoretical: age verification companies can be—and already have been—hacked. These are real, ongoing concerns for anyone who values their privacy. 

We must push back against age verification bills that create surveillance systems and undermine our civil liberties, and we must be clear-eyed about the dangers posed by these expanding age verification laws. While the intent to protect children makes sense, the unintended consequence is a massive erosion of privacy, security, and free expression online for everyone. Rather than focusing on restrictive age verification systems, lawmakers should explore better, less invasive ways to protect everyone online—methods that don’t place the entire burden of risk on individuals or threaten their fundamental rights. 

EFF will continue to advocate for digital privacy, security, and free expression. We urge legislators to prioritize solutions that uphold these essential values, ensuring that the internet remains a space for learning, connecting, and creating—without the constant threat of surveillance or censorship. Whether you’re buying a face cream, swiping on a dating app, or browsing for a bottle of diet pills, age verification laws undermine that vision, and we must do better.

Reposted from the EFF’s Deeplinks blog.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “First Porn, Now Skin Cream? ‘Age Verification’ Bills Are Out Of Control”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
26 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Saw this one on EFF’s site. Predictable and ridiculous, these bills.

Our best hope of stopping them is the outcome of the FSC v. Paxton case, and even in the best scenario there, the rest of the world’s still trying their damndest to introduce anti-privacy laws disguised as anti-porn laws. I’m not sure how and when that trend’s going to finally end, if ever.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Nobody can, but there’s also no certainty they won’t side with them (despite what news media may want you to believe.)

A good portion of law-people who followed the hearing live seem to have cautiously optimisic opinions on it, so it remains to be seen.

I sure hope, though..Otherwise, I’m not sure what can be done to stop these anymore (and no one has yet to explain to me how losing that case won’t be losing the war.)

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Tdestroyer209 says:

I honestly believe a lot of these politicians and “advocacy groups” pushing for age verification have lost their minds.

They keep pushing for age verification despite it being incredibly flawed and could lead to more people including children being in greater risk of having their personal information being leaked on the internet especially when various companies being hacked by shadowy people/groups.

They just want their pain which they caused themselves and their children go away and they don’t care if others are affected as long as they get their warped desire to punish the internet and punish innocent users who had nothing to do with their child or family members injury/death.

They could’ve taught their children how to use the internet and do it safely but in nearly all cases they never did and now they want to punish the internet for their failure of being a parent.

I know some parents do a good job of protecting their children on the internet and because of what they do the kids are at lesser risk of harm on the internet but I’m mainly talking about the ones who refuse to learn and lead to where their child/family member are in greater risk.

Add in the shadowy “advocacy groups” who keep pushing for these and I’ve noticed that the groups claim they are “grassroots” which is total bullshit where the groups have a billionaire or several backing their cause because these billionaires likely have connections to age verification companies that want their flawed verification crap on the internet.

As long as there’s a ignorant parent who lets their kid be exposed to the internet and gets a injury/death that causes the ignorant parent to punish the internet/company and shadowy “advocacy groups” along with their shadowy billionaires pushing for this crap it will keep repeating til it finally succeeds but in most cases a lot of these “think of the children” cases fall flat because of 1st amendment issues.

This “think of the children” bullshit for the age verification bullshit needs to end because in the end it accomplishes nothing but making the ignorant parent feel like they are saving children which is total bullshit and the “advocacy” groups looking for a another ignorant parent to whose stupidity lead to injury/death so they keep pulling age verification bullshit.

Arianity says:

On the surface, this may seem harmless—who doesn’t want to ensure that minors are safe from harmful chemicals?… a product that should be innocuous.

Is it harmful, or innocuous? Kind of need to pick a lane here.

Rather than focusing on restrictive age verification systems, lawmakers should explore better, less invasive ways to protect everyone online—methods that don’t place the entire burden of risk on individuals or threaten their fundamental rights.

While privacy protections are good in their own right, these solutions don’t even attempt to protect anyone from the problems those bills are directed at. If you’re going to (correctly) call out others for not acknowledging tradeoffs, you should hold yourselves to the same standard.

It’s fine to argue that privacy is worth the cost, but you do need to acknowledge the cost.

Anonymous Coward says:

Age verification just hit the skincare aisle! California’s AB-728 mandates age verification for anyone purchasing skin care products or cosmetics that contain certain chemicals like Vitamin A or alpha hydroxy acids.

Which is just stupid. As anyone who’s done the research knows, such products, when made by reputable companies, just don’t contain enough of the active ingredient to have any effect because those are the levels at which they do harm.

bhull242 (profile) says:

California’s AB-728 mandates age verification for anyone purchasing skin care products or cosmetics that contain certain chemicals like Vitamin A or alpha hydroxy acids. On the surface, this may seem harmless—who doesn’t want to ensure that minors are safe from harmful chemicals?

[emphasis added]

I’m sorry, but since when is Vitamin A a harmful chemical? And even alpha hydroxy acids are fairly safe. Sure, if you have too much of either, or if you have some pre-existing condition, then it can cause harm, but that applies to most things!

I even looked it up, and the current consensus seems to be that the doses commonly used are safe for your skin, though alpha hydroxy acids can increase the chance of sunburns while the lotion is still on your skin, though this is reversible by simply not using the product while exposed to direct sunlight that is likely to cause sunburns in the first place. (And, I mean, most people know to use sunscreen—not body lotion or similar skincare products that aren’t specifically meant to prevent sunburns, specifically—when you’re going to be in the sun a lot, and sunscreen doesn’t use AHAs.)

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...