New porn laws will mean Pornhub asks for your name and address
metro.co.uk
metro.co.uk
It seems like another data grab. I’ve not seen the technical specification but presumably porn sites will hold on to a verification token of some sort from the government ID database, which could then be used to correlate your viewing habits (at the porn site end) to your age verification request (and thus ID, at the government end).
I imagine this will drive more and more people to use VPNs. I’ve got to assume someone involved in this has considered that. Maybe this is a prelude to banning VPNs in the UK? (“They’re only used by criminals and people trying to circumvent the age verification system”)?
If it's the latter, I think it will be received very dimly in countries with more-robust internet privacy regulations (or privacy-sensitive public sentiment) than what is currently the norm in the UK.
It's incredible that UK government really thought this was a good idea.
Like the other the comment has suggested VPN's are a very effective way to to such a task...really any proxy system in general, TOR works as well. Hell, just have a friend leave a RaspberryPi in his house would work and tunnel TCP over SSH to it...
I'm going to use too many electrons informing you on the plethora of ways to spoof an IP address.
To me "spoofing" implies packet shaping.
I tried to find a good definitive difference between the two and couldn't find one. So as I said, could definitely be wrong.
In order to connect to a remote machine (in this case, a website) your computer must make a TCP connection to the remote server.
A TCP connection requires a three-way handshake to begin. This requires the sender (you) send a TCP SYN packet. If you "spoof" your IP address, the SYN ACK will never reach your machine, and you will therefore never be able to ACK back (with your "spoofed" IP). Because you never get this SYN ACK back with the servers initial sequence number, you will not be able to ACK back with the correct sequence number to even connect in the first place.
I'm fairly convinced you don't know how basic networking principals work, or at least do not know the difference between spoofing and proxying.
My favourite line so far is: "He has been banned from every farm in Britain". I can't imagine what it looks like without an ad blocker.
UK-wide, with regional variations.
Seems like they are serious when they say "News... but not as you know it".
Step 1. Get the name and address of people who use your service.
Step 2. You get hacked.
Step 3. Everyone now gets to have their identify stolen and possibly blackmailed.
Happening any day now.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingsoc
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nations_of_Nineteen_Eighty-Fou...
You could just have stopped there. They (the Government) don't. They're signalling. I'm sure they don't really care at all.
This is just playing to the gallery. Or, at least, a specific segment of the gallery that generally votes Tory but has flirted with the likes of UKIP etc in the recent past.
It sounds more like something the US did cook up back in the 90s; the Communications Decency Act in 1996 and then after the relevant part of that was struck down the Child Online Protection Act in 1998; similar age verification was widely adopted by adult sites in the US to avoid liability under these acts, in the brief time they were in force. Usually, credit card verification was used.
How convenient. That doesn't prove age at all. In fact, as a kid I'd steal my parent's credit card, but now that I'm an adult I don't own one.
Go figure.
That criticism was noted in a number of media outlets at the time; it probably would have eventually become a legal issue had the laws not been struck down, rendering it moot.
Age verification was never adopted by most of the major US porn sites. I was a teenager at the time, I never once had to age verify or provide a CC to use any of the large sites. The only thing most of those sites have ever required - if anything at all - going back to the 1990s, is a click or equivalent indicating you're over 18. Beyond that there were dozens of large US porn forums back then, facilitating downloading, none of which required age verification at any point either.
Because the relevant parts of the CDA and COPA were struck down by the courts. Doesn't change that the US did concoct laws of this type and try to enforce them.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Internet_Protecti...
Pretty much all boys got their hands on porn when I was a kid, and it seemed to have no bearing on how we grew up. There's porn addiction and all that, but there's a lot that goes into what defines an addiction(and alcohol is legal, so...), and some of the boys I knew who watched the most porn grew up to earn six figures or more in prestigious fields.
A child who is viewing porn online is almost definitely seeking it out, and if that's true, they will circumvent almost any of these truly laughable attempts to shield children on the internet.
At best, you might be able to instantiate laws around porn in advertisements. But good luck preventing kids from watching porn. If anything, age walls will make porn more exciting to watch because it makes it forbidden.
The stupidity of adults never fails to astound me. COPPA made me laugh when I was a kid, and still does.
I don't know why you're being downvoted. It's true that GB accepts far more invasive policies, including mass surveillance that exceeds the United States.
I was a semi geeky teenager. My introduction to sexuality was in part courtesy of the Web. Playboy was pretty lame by comparison, even then it seemed decades out of fit culturally. The Web was a safe, comfortable way to explore what my preferences were.
A fair portion of teenage guys are frightening enough, but the last thing that we need is a bunch of confused horny teens with no safe outlet to explore sexuality. Sure, there is some strange and downright awful stuff out there, but I can only imagine the increase in assaults and pregnancies this form of online control can cause.
Additionally, it reinforces the idea that bodies are inherently sexual in nature and seeing consenting, nude adults should be viewed as "taboo" or "extraordinary."
There's been a fairly strong streak of puritanism in the UK for generations. It wouldn't surprise me if we invented it (we used to be good at that sort of thing).
As to tolerating it. I have no evidence but I'd hazard a guess that only a tiny fraction of people even know. And of those that do, there aren't many groups that would vocally defend our inalienable right to watch porn.
TBH I'd expect that most Brits, if they thought about it, wouldn't expect the Government to be sufficiently competent to actually make this work. It's not a good reason to tolerate it but it wouldn't surprise me if it is one.