Australia’s world-first social media ban: Why the ban might be even worse for privacy

Australia has implemented the first nationwide social-media ban(nowe okno) targeting anyone under the age of 16. As of midnight on December 9, 2025, major platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, Twitch, and X must prevent anyone under the age of 16 from logging in — or face massive fines.

Australian lawmakers from every state and territory backed the bill(nowe okno), and political consensus helped it pass swiftly.

But as the ban goes live, early evidence shows enforcement is bumping into reality(nowe okno) with verification failures, widespread attempts to circumvent the rules, and rising privacy concerns.

Teens are already finding workarounds

Some teens told reporters(nowe okno) they plan to log in using their parents’ Face ID. Others are creating new accounts under older siblings or fake ages(nowe okno).

The Guardian reported that some under-16 users began publicly posting their phone numbers(nowe okno) as the ban approached — an unintended consequence of losing their usual channels to stay in touch. One teen even claimed to pass an age-verification selfie check with a photo of a dog(nowe okno).

Meanwhile, platforms are preparing to block more than a million accounts(nowe okno), a shift that’s pushing many teens to find alternative ways to stay connected. These developments suggest the law may simply redistribute online activity, rather than eliminate it.

Age checks at scale expose major flaws

The law leaves it up to platforms to show “reasonable steps(nowe okno)” for age checks. That has led to biometric facial-age estimation, live video selfies, AI-based behavioral age inference, document uploads, and other verification experiments.

One of the age-assurance services in use claims to have processed hundreds of thousands of checks recently(nowe okno). But even before widespread enforcement began, errors emerged(nowe okno). Reports show under-16s erroneously verified as adults — or minors incorrectly blocked.

Experts widely signed an open letter criticizing the ban’s approach(nowe okno) as “too blunt,” warning that large-scale identity verification could backfire. Additionally, at least one teen has filed a lawsuit(nowe okno) arguing the ban will drive minors into more dangerous corners of the internet.

Enforcing the ban requires sensitive data

Enforcing age limits inevitably requires platforms to collect far more personal data than before. Users may need to provide biometric facial-geometry data(nowe okno) via live selfies. They may also be asked for government-issued identity documents, real-name phone numbers, or behavioral data used to infer age(nowe okno).

That level of collection raises a new concern: platforms risk becoming de facto identity-arbiters, responsible for storing, processing, and securing millions of sensitive documents and biometric signatures. A Curtin University professor warned this represents “the worst possible outcome,”(nowe okno) given the poor track record of many tech firms when it comes to data security.

The UK’s experience shows how difficult national age-verification schemes are to implement. The government spent years trying to introduce a system that would require users to prove their age to access online pornography, but the effort collapsed after repeated technical failures, privacy concerns, and the discovery that at least one verification system could be bypassed in minutes(nowe okno), The plan was ultimately abandoned in 2019 because regulators concluded the system wasn’t reliable enough to enforce and carried unacceptable risks for user data.

Parental support is high, but the trade-offs are significant

Many parents support Australia’s ban because the underlying concerns are real. Research commissioned by the government found that 96% of children aged 10–15 use social media and that large numbers had been exposed to harmful content(nowe okno), including misogynistic or violent material, eating disorder content, and even grooming attempts.

Parents aren’t imagining the risks. Social platforms use design patterns engineered to keep people — especially young people — online for longer. That can amplify anxiety, create unhealthy comparisons, expose teens to predatory behavior, and erode their sense of self. It’s no surprise that many parents see any effort to put guardrails in place as overdue.

But how the policy is enforced matters. Age-verification systems depend on biometric scans, identity documents, behavioral analysis, and the retention of sensitive data. That turns mainstream social platforms into identity-verified spaces rather than places where you can participate without handing over personal information. And those changes affect everybody, not just children.

Many parents say navigating the internet with their kids feels overwhelming, especially when platforms are designed to keep young people online. That’s why Proton has built resources — like our parent’s guide to keeping kids safe online — to help parents understand harmful design patterns, set healthy boundaries, and protect their family’s data. The goal isn’t to lock the internet down, but to empower families with the knowledge and tools they need to navigate it.

Efforts to protect children deserve serious attention, but they also require a careful balance. Safety shouldn’t come at the cost of normalizing mass identity checks or expanding the amount of sensitive data platforms must collect to function.

What Australia’s ban means for the rest of the world

Australia’s online-safety authority has said it will monitor not only compliance, but also unintended consequences: whether teens migrate to lesser-regulated services or darker corners of the internet; whether circumvention rises; whether verification errors lead to social exclusion; and how mental health, behavior, and community engagement change over time. The government has also contracted external researchers at Stanford University(nowe okno) to study outcomes over the coming years.

Other countries are already taking notes. Reuters notes governments in Denmark, Malaysia, and elsewhere are exploring similar bans(nowe okno) if Australia’s rollout goes smoothly.

But what the early evidence shows is that implementing age-based bans at national scale does more than limit teenage access — it redefines what social media is. Instead of a place for casual, pseudonymous connection, platforms become identity-verified services. That shift carries deep implications for privacy, anonymity, free expression, and data risk.

At Proton, our conviction is clear: instead of building systems that treat identity as the price of entry, we should build systems that minimize the amount of data collected, maximize user control, and preserve privacy.

Especially for young people.

As other nations consider similar policies, Australia’s experiment may serve as a warning more than a blueprint.