UK VPN age verification

[D31TO 0]

Hi there, it seems in the UK it is looking more and more likely that VPN's will need to be age verified to be used. Information on this can be found here.

Does AirVPN plan on following this guidance and adding age verification? Also, has there been any consideration towards this by the AirVPN team?

I am aware the bill has not yet fully made it through government, but I am curious at what actions AirVPN will take to either comply or not-comply with the possible demands.

I am not all that worried about this, just really curious on what other people's takes are, and if AirVPN has any plans towards this.

Thanks for reading

[Quicky82 3]

I would be really keen to hear AirVPN's position on this too. It seems to me that the UK would be unable to enforce any fines on a non-UK company for not complying with age verification.

Presumably they'd be able to force UK ISPs to block VPN companies websites, but beyond that I don't see what else is in their power to do.

[4ShTjzUBHiJ5 0]

I'm not sure that age verification handling is in the best interest of the service as a whole.

[ASiC666 2]

[YLwpLUbcf77U 32]

On 1/29/2026 at 11:45 PM, Quicky82 said:

I would be really keen to hear AirVPN's position on this too. It seems to me that the UK would be unable to enforce any fines on a non-UK company for not complying with age verification.

Presumably they'd be able to force UK ISPs to block VPN companies websites, but beyond that I don't see what else is in their power to do.

OSA I am very familiar with (I read the entire 50 page guide for starters and work with companies that have to comply with it) and it's actually quite reasonable for companies/entities "in scope" to comply with age verification.
That VPNs were the loophole and that it is more than obvious that sooner or later Ofcom will plug it by making VPN providers that service UK "in scope" and yes, this includes AirVPN and all other ones of note.
(it's possible for a company to be of an "in scope" industry but not have qualified UK users, but unless it's a site entirely in a foreign language and clearly targeted for a specific country, the company is otherwise out of luck)

It would not be difficult for Air or any other VPN to add in age assurance for users geolocating* in the UK.
*Theoretically a user in the UK can use a VPN/Tor/proxy to make a paid VPN account and pay by crypto without having to verify their age but in reality this is maybe 0.1% of the userbase so let's stay real.

However (and I expect to be flamed), since AirVPN promises the "air to breathe the real internet", a big issue is be it Air or any other of the big "we don't log" VPN companies, the majority of users use the service to pirate and thus don't want to be caught.  A VPN provider could easily restrict ports/have a more robust policy responding to DMCA's/etc and thus gain access to wider pool of hosting companies, but their userbase uses VPNs for a certain reason that makes this not a financially effective strategy (I only know of one VPN provider that offers "clean" IPs and they do have stricter rules for them).  While verifying ages for a paid service like Air won't break the bank (trust me, it won't, it's negligible for in scope paid-only companies I have worked with), very few users would want to do it.

"But how can Ofcom/UK enforce this?"
Easy.  They can just make accounts on all the big VPN providers and periodically get entry/exit IPs of all the servers and have local ISPs block access to them if the VPN service does not comply.

[fsy 40]

5 hours ago, YLwpLUbcf77U said:

"But how can Ofcom/UK enforce this?"
Easy.  They can just make accounts on all the big VPN providers and periodically get entry/exit IPs of all the servers and have local ISPs block access to them if the VPN service does not comply.

Sure, in order to protect kids China / Iran / Russia style enforcement is required. 🙄
Because nothing screams “online safety” like forcing teenagers roam the internet without a VPN. What could possibly go wrong? It’s not like tracking, data harvesting, or privacy breaches are a thing.

 

[Quicky82 3]

Thanks for the detailed reply. Lots of interesting points.

It seems to me that people using VPNs are interested in privacy and anonymity, which conflicts with the government's ideas about age verification in order to use VPNs, regardless of what people are actually using the VPN service to do.

I would also imagine VPN companies with a strong privacy focus would be opposed on principle. I would be interested to hear what AirVPNs official position is regarding the UK's proposals here, and what they plan to do.
 

6 hours ago, YLwpLUbcf77U said:

"But how can Ofcom/UK enforce this?"
Easy.  They can just make accounts on all the big VPN providers and periodically get entry/exit IPs of all the servers and have local ISPs block access to them if the VPN service does not comply.

Interesting point, I hadn't considered this. Would this not entail an on-going cat-and-mouse effort with the government legally pressuring ISPs to block IPs? Sounds like a lot of work and expense. I wonder if anyone in government is thinking in this much detail and clarity, I had assumed they probably don't understand the technical side very well.

[ASiC666 2]

If we are "staying real" let's think back of when we were children ourselves:
When did ANYTHING that was impose by parents/etc on you worked?
Children will always find ways around the the forbidden thing usually way riskier and dangerous than the thing supposed to be protected from.

This "protect the children" pish is just gas lighting from the government to monitor who does what.
Governments cannot stand that they don't control the narrative anymore and that people use the internet to bypass them, no matter on which side of the politics spectrum you are.  

The burden is with the parents to protect their children, not daddy government.
Parents who support it, need to stop relying on the internet to babysit and raise their children.
 

[Staff 10436]

1 hour ago, Quicky82 said:

I would be interested to hear what AirVPNs official position is regarding the UK's proposals here

Hello!

Interesting thread indeed, thank you. Our position is close to the EFF position you can read here:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online
 

Quote

what they plan to do.

We will keep you informed. So far, you probably know well our approach with similar, lower or higher requests from Russia, China and a few other countries, and there's no plan at the moment to change our position.

In general, we think that it is impossible that those persons who advance, propose or defend such dangerous laws in so called democracies are in good faith (except in peculiar cases where they suffer from some mental illness or carry a neurological deficit). They have an hidden agenda developed on the myth of pervasive control but more importantly fueled by monetary reward.
 

Quote

Governments cannot stand that they don't control the narrative anymore and that people use the internet to bypass them, no matter on which side of the politics spectrum you are.  

Yes, that's a motivational reason, maybe almost as strong as monetary reward and votes. Moreover, there is a real possibility that such laws lead on the short run to an increase in support (and therefore votes) which, net of dissent, is positive, even though by tiny tenths of percentage which are anyway not negligible for an embarrassingly inept ruling class that's incapable of developing serious strategies to improve the life of teenagers and children. Their total failure is proven by the official data (England and Whales police records in this case) that show a dramatic rise of sexual offenses against children in the UK in the last 5 years in spite of (and someone could even argue because of) more and more laws allegedly thought to protect children.
 

7 hours ago, YLwpLUbcf77U said:

*Theoretically a user in the UK can use a VPN/Tor/proxy to make a paid VPN account and pay by crypto without having to verify their age but in reality this is maybe 0.1% of the userbase so let's stay real.

Where does this 0.1% come from? If you want to stay real please adjust this quota (since 2025, start multiplying that percentage by 250 to begin with).
Furthermore, there's no money involved to use Tor, its usage is totally free and well beyond Ofcom abilities to control it. However, it's true that people may find it boring because it's like 10 times slower than a VPN with a decent infrastructure.
 

1 hour ago, Quicky82 said:

Would this not entail an on-going cat-and-mouse effort with the government legally pressuring ISPs to block IPs? Sounds like a lot of work and expense.

It would indeed. However, we seriously doubt that the ramshackle British institutions, always short of funds, can surpass the GFW designers and maintainers in efficiency, competence and grandeur of operation. And note that the GFW is routinely bypassed nowadays by the most and least skilled to connect to a wide range of VPNs.
 

Quote

VPN companies, the majority of users use the service to pirate and thus don't want to be caught.

Our aggregate data show that this claim is deeply incorrect, at least for AirVPN, if we consider p2p improper usage quantified by DMCA and other warnings. It's not the majority, on the contrary it is a tiny minority. Where does this assumption come from? We would like to assess official stats to compare them with what we gather on the field.

Kind regards
 

[Quicky82 3]

Thanks for the clarification @Staff!