![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/GettyImages-1159763174-1-e1772469361280.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
A facial scan on Instagram, a video selfie on TikTok, a thumbprint passcode on YouTube, and a ID upload on Facebook. It\u2019s not the scene yet, but collecting our biometrics to post an AI slop meme will just become the norm as Big Social goes through its Big Tobacco moment.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The digital landscape is undergoing a massive upheaval in the wake of social media addiction lawsuits and a frantic regulatory scramble for age verification. As social media platforms face a landmark legal reckoning over the \u201cdopamine reaction\u201d and addictive design choices that harm children, a fundamental technical and ethical crisis has emerged. Countries like Australia are enforcing social media bans for people under age 16, while Meta is currently on trial for claims of intentionally creating an addictive environment for children on their platforms.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In the race to verify a user\u2019s age\u2014the primary tool companies have implemented to curb childhood addiction\u2014 these social media platforms have unveiled a paradox commonly referred to as the \u201cage-verification trap.\u201d Simply, by attempting to enforce age verification rules on its users, these companies are undermining the data privacy of those very users.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Companies like Meta and TikTok are facing federal and state trials that compare their platforms and business models to those of tobacco and opioid markets, alleging the companies directly and deliberately manipulate how the platforms are designed to promote user addiction. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently testified that scientific studies have not proven the link between social media and mental health harms, but experts argue otherwise, saying social media addiction is driven by the very engineering algorithms intended to keep a user online.<\/p>\n
\u201cThese companies aren\u2019t held to a certain standard\u201d that would stop children from accessing their platforms\u2014not least of all, something these companies \u201cbenefit from with kids on their platform. More people, more ads,\u201d said Dr. Debra Boeldt, a clinical psychologist and AI scientist at the family social media company Aura. Boeldt, who leads clinical research at Aura\u2014a company that uses AI to keep tabs on children\u2019s online habits and keep adults\u2019 privacy safe\u2014said children are particularly susceptible to current social media design because their executive function and impulse control are still developing.<\/p>\n
For kids, social media platforms aren\u2019t just apps, but also their primary source of social connection, noting her research showing one in five children age 13 and under spend four hours or more on social media a day, and with that comes higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. Children are savvy, Boeldt said, and so if they are banned from one platform, it\u2019s a game of \u201cwhack-a-mole\u201d where they just move from one to the next.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cKids are super savvy, and so they\u2019ll get around things,\u201d Boeldt told Fortune.<\/em> \u201cThey know how to fly under the radar.\u201d<\/p>\n As social media companies seek to remove underage users from its platforms, or enlist the help of AI to search for censored content, the companies will have a hard time ensuring they can accurately remove access to anyone that is under a certain age (Boeldt even referenced platforms like Instagram and TikTok that monitor language and how children have already found loopholes, using \u201cPDF files\u201d or \u201cunaliving,\u201d and creating new vocabulary that renders those censors useless: Children are savvy, after all).<\/p>\n Still, she cautioned, the adverse effect is even worse, in which only a few users are banned from a social media site instead of the whole. If social media platforms barely make inroads in banning underage users but remove access for a select few at a time, that creates an \u201cisland effect\u201d where, unless a ban is universal, a child cut off from social media is isolated while their friends continue to connect online.<\/p>\n Forget the current lawsuits acting as a litmus test for social media design rules: Current regulation is barely keeping up with how kids are using social media\u2014and the tools that social media companies are using fail to keep users\u2019 privacy safe. In recent months, platforms employing third-party verification software have seen their users\u2019 data hacked and exposed, have had to announce and renounce AI-powered censors, and are fighting against poor public sentiment from an increasingly dissatisfied user base.<\/p>\n This is complicated by growing measures of regulation from countries around the world. Australia passed landmark legislation in 2024 banning minors under 16 from having accounts on social media platforms like Facebook, TikTok and YouTube. Domestically, 32 states have introduced age-verification legislation, and that is only intensified in externalities that are yet to be seen after the Federal Trade Commission announced last week it would exercise \u201cenforcement discretion\u201d regarding the Children\u2019s Online Privacy Protection Rule (COPPA). This would allow social media companies to collect children\u2019s data without parental consent\u2014but solely for age verification purposes.\u00a0<\/p>\n However, this fails to solve the paradoxical issue of adequately collecting data on children and users while also not infringing on users\u2019 privacy rights. The issue becomes intensified when you begin looking into the users on these platforms.<\/p>\n \u201cHumans are now the minority on the internet; we\u2019ve seen bot to human traffic increase 50 times year over year,\u201d said Johnny Ayers, the CEO of Socure, an AI-powered identity verification software company. Ayers told Fortune<\/em> that thanks to bots, the use of deepfakes has increased nearly 8,000% year over year\u2014rendering plenty of the verification software in the market useless. Instead, one of the digital checks his company employs includes using each cell phone\u2019s gimbal to see if a human is indeed holding the phone when going through identity verification.<\/p>\n Evin McMullen, whose company Billions Network is used for anti-money laundering and Know Your Customer methods, says collecting biometrics is one way platforms confirm your identity, because you can\u2019t change what those say about you.<\/p>\n \u201cIt sounds kind of cheeky, but the idea that you can\u2019t rotate your thumbs, meaning that you can\u2019t change the password or manage the security easily in the same ways,\u201d McMullen told Fortune. <\/em>\u201cIdentities that are based on your biometrics really is about prioritizing ease of use and security around your most vital data,\u201d she said, adding that the current password manager model is \u201cuntenable and no longer secure.\u201d<\/p>\n But the problems arise with children and privacy, again something to be revisited now in light of the FTC\u2019s ruling on COPPA. <\/p>\n \u201cYou can\u2019t collect biometrics on a kid,\u201d Ayers told Fortune<\/em>. \u201cAnd so how do you verify someone is 13 without verifying, without collecting a thing, that they\u2019re 13?\u201d<\/p>\n One way to do so is to collect zero-knowledge proofs (ZKP) that determine a party to verify the veracity of a statement, and therefore, the identity of that person. McMullen, whose clients in the financial industry are looking into non-invasive means of identity verification, is a major advocate for ZKPs, adding they\u2019re particularly helpful in establishing trust between parties.<\/p>\n ZKPs is a method that allows a person\u2014looking to verify themselves\u2014to answer statements in a manner that establishes trust to the verifying party without unveiling personal or secret information. Take, for example, the problem of 4+4=8. This is something the person looking to be verified knows to be true, but the ZKP method relies on trust. Instead of asking is 4+4=8, the verifier asks a series of questions to determine if the person wanting to verified is telling the truth (or in this case, knows that to be true). The verifier can ask is 4+4=7; is the sum of 4+4 an even number, and so on and so forth, and after the series of questions, it can determine the veracity of the person\u2019s claims, thereby identifying them.<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t a common method to prove identity. So far, social media companies have enlisted a number of technologies to verify people\u2019s ages, including using identity-based verification like asking users to upload government-issued IDs; using AI to scan a user\u2019s face; tracking a user\u2019s activity to determine a person\u2019s age; and enlisting parental supervision tools like Instagram, which introduced \u201cTeen Accounts\u201d to alert parents of any harmful online habits.<\/p>\n At the heart of the issue is there is fundamentally no tool that can verify a user\u2019s age without inherently violating a user\u2019s privacy. Any accurate models require extremely invasive measures like biometrics or government IDs\u2014and the IDs are something that even social media companies are hesitant to request because of the ID gap in which 15 million Americans lack any identification, an issue that disproportionally affects Black and Hispanic adults, immigrants, and those with disabilities.<\/p>\n Using AI to scan people\u2019s faces does little to solve for the issue, as experts have found these AI models are less accurate for minority groups and often misclassify adults as minors, while AI itself is unable to discern a synthetic voice or deepfake from a real human. Children, who again are savvy, will also frequently bypass any geographically-based bans using VPNs, like in Florida when VPN usage went up 1,150% after the state banned Pornhub. And least of all, there are major security risks that come with storing identity documents, like a recent breach of Discord\u2019s third-party vendor 5CA that left over 70,000 government IDs exposed online.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Ultimately, the \u201cage verification trap\u201d is what happens when regulators treat age enforcement as mandatory and delineate privacy to an optional status. Until methods like ZKPs or device-based verification, these experts warn, becomes the norm, the digital age will continue down the rabbit hole of trying to prove a person\u2019s identity while trying not to infringe on their privacy rights.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n #Social #media #companies #fighting #age #verification #trap<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A facial scan on Instagram, a … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":26207,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[2],"tags":[10685,9399,648,3238,716,1034,930,4489,14275],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26206"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=26206"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26206\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/26207"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=26206"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=26206"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=26206"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}The regulation is barely keeping up with the use<\/h2>\n
The tools are no longer useful<\/h2>\n