Byron Kaye, Reuters:

Australia’s prime minister vowed on Friday to bullet-proof laws supporting a social ​media ban for under-16s as the government prepares legal action against platforms amid a steady stream of evidence that the ban has had little impact on teen use.

[…]

He did not give further details about what steps the government would take and the regulator declined to comment.

The details matter. In general, though, anything that makes age gating more effective must presumably make accessing age-gated websites more difficult for everyone. Proponents will argue that it is worth the collective sacrifice because it will add a layer of protection for children. I sympathize with that argument, but I think it over-simplifies a complex story and presents a solution with serious problems — for instance, the possibility of data leaks.

Sean Hollister, the Verge:

“We have to do something about it as fast as possible, because people will find this and resell it. It will do damage,” Sammy Azdoufal told me in May.

Azdoufal is the security researcher who used Claude Code to help discover that every DJI Romo robot vacuum cleaner and a million baby monitors and security cameras were embarrassingly easy to hack. This time, he says he discovered over 985,000 photo IDs sitting on the public internet for any half-decent hacker to steal.

These I.D.s included passport scans and driver’s licenses because they have the kind of information you need to buy weed. And this is in-person purchasing at clubs in Spain. I am hopeful that age gating technology vendors are more competent, perhaps destroying their copy of a document and storing only a confirmation token. But without better oversight, we simply have no idea and should have no confidence.

(Via Bruce Schneier who, for whatever reason, links not to Hollister’s report but instead a presumably A.I.-assisted rewrite hosted at the domain previously associated with — no joke — Cambridge Analytica.)