The UK’s Online Safety Act, which places legal duties on online platforms to protect children from harmful content starting July 25, is unsafe and fails to achieve its intended purpose. Instead, it creates major cybersecurity breaches and stifles online critical thinking.

Treating everyone like a child

Under the Act, apart from pornographic and other 18+ content, users will face roadblocks when trying to access a wide range of online activities, whether it’s reading world news, listening to music on Spotify, chatting on Discord, playing video games or finding information about quitting smoking.

This broad approach has sparked heavy criticisms from both adults and the minors the law claims to protect. Rather than focusing specifically on safeguarding children, the legislation treats all UK internet users like children, requiring everyone to submit personal information for age verification before accessing certain content.

As a young person based in the UK, I believe the infantilisation of the public hands the government an ability to expand online censorship under the mask of “child safety”. The Act also disregards parental guidance, assuming that the state knows best what children should use.

More harm than good

Per the Act, the users will be required to submit highly sensitive personal data – including face scans, ID cards and passport photos – to verify their age.

In the UK, 16-year-olds can vote in some elections, yet under the Act, they can be denied access to political speech. For example, a parliamentary speech on grooming gangs by MP Katie Lam was age-restricted on X (formerly Twitter). If teenagers can’t access information on issues like war, justice or political scandals, how can they form informed opinions as future voters?

A study from 2023 found that one in five teenagers watch pornography in the UK and the vast majority are boys. While the law is indirectly targeted at teenage boys, the UK government appears unaware that teenage boys are among the most technologically literate persons online.

The unintended consequence is that ordinary adults and casual internet users will face the brunt of the restrictions, despite not being the law’s primary target. This will force them to give out their personal information, thus putting themselves at risk.

The law misses the point

Currently, VPNs are among the top three most downloaded apps on the UK App Store. As more people try to bypass government firewalls, they risk exposing themselves to less regulated, potentially dangerous parts of the internet, where scams and extremist content may be easier to encounter.

The UK government’s position also seems hypocritical. In 2022, during Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, then Prime Minister Boris Johnson told Russian citizens: “All you need is a VPN connection to access independent information from anywhere in the world.”

Just over 18 months later, subsequent Conservative cabinet introduced legislation — which went into force under a Labour government — that resulted with a surge in VPN use in the UK.

Privacy and security risks

The greatest concern is data security. The Act effectively requires adults to hand over personal biometric information to “faceless” regulators and third-party verification services. History shows such data is a prime target for cybercriminals.

Global ransomware attacks rose by 126% in the first quarter of 2025, with North America accounting for 62% of global incidents. Consumer goods, education, government and telecommunications were among the most targeted sectors.

In 2017, hackers breached Dixons Carphone (now Currys), a British retailer, installing malware on over 5,000 tills and exposing 10 million personal records and nearly 6 million payment cards – impacting 14 million customers.

While teenagers need safeguarding online, the UK’s current approach risks data security without fully blocking 18+ content. A better approach is through increasing awareness via sex education and parental guidance.

Finally, we must ask ourselves: should we trade personal freedom for the illusion of safety?