KOSA and Age Verification: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
KOSA doesn’t mandate age verification—but it all but guarantees more data collection. This deep dive explains how S.1748 incentivizes surveillance, threatens anonymity, and why the real privacy risks aren’t in the fine print but in compliance behavior.
KOSA (S.1748) does not explicitly mandate age verification, but in practice it strongly incentivizes platforms to identify users’ ages—creating serious privacy and security risks. The biggest danger is not what the bill says outright, but what companies will do to avoid liability.
The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is back—again—and closer to becoming law than many privacy advocates expected. With S.1748 reintroduced in the 119th Congress, the debate has shifted from whether Congress will regulate online platforms for minors to how that regulation will reshape privacy, anonymity, and security for everyone.
Prefer listening? Click play below, or listen to this episode on RedCircle.
Does KOSA actually require age verification?
On paper, no—KOSA does not contain a single line that says “platforms must verify users’ ages with ID.” That’s the good news.
The bad news is that KOSA repeatedly applies obligations when a platform “knows or reasonably should know” that a user is a minor. That standard matters far more than the absence of the words “age verification.”
From a compliance perspective, “reasonably should know” creates legal risk. Platforms facing FTC enforcement and state lawsuits will not gamble on ignorance. Historically, when lawmakers impose age-based duties without prescribing a method, companies respond with over-collection.
That’s how age verification enters through the back door.
Why does “knows or should know” push companies toward surveillance?
If you’re running a large platform, KOSA gives you two choices:
- Collect more data to confidently determine age
- Restrict features for everyone to avoid liability
Most companies will choose the first option because it preserves engagement metrics and revenue.
Here’s the critical step-by-step logic companies will follow:
- KOSA imposes a duty of care toward minors tied to design features and algorithms
- Liability applies if harms are “reasonably foreseeable”
- Regulators can argue a platform should have known minors were present
- To prove compliance, platforms must demonstrate how they assessed age
- The safest proof is age verification or persistent age inference
This is not speculation. We saw the same pattern after FOSTA-SESTA, when platforms over-censored to reduce risk. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has explicitly warned that KOSA repeats this dynamic with privacy consequences:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/kids-online-safety-act-will-make-internet-worse-everyone
Protect your digital life—subscribe for trusted privacy and security insights.
Is KOSA compatible with privacy-by-design principles?
Only partially—and this is where outdated advice keeps circulating.
Supporters often point to KOSA’s language stating that platforms are not required to disclose minors’ browsing history or private messages. That sounds reassuring, but it misses the real issue: data creation, not data disclosure.
Privacy-by-design emphasizes:
- Data minimization
- Purpose limitation
- Avoiding centralized identity databases
KOSA undermines all three by encouraging platforms to establish age knowledge in the first place. Once age becomes a regulated attribute, it becomes a data point worth collecting, storing, and securing—or failing to secure.
This is where advice like “don’t worry, KOSA bans ID checks” becomes dangerously misleading.
What happens to anonymity if KOSA passes?
Anonymity doesn’t disappear overnight—but it erodes.
Under KOSA:
- Anonymous users are harder to classify by age
- Harder-to-classify users represent higher legal risk
- Higher-risk users face feature limits, throttling, or exclusion
That creates a soft pressure system. Platforms don’t ban anonymity outright; they make anonymous use worse.
We already see this logic in states experimenting with age-gating for adult content. The Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down broad age-verification laws for speech, but companies don’t wait for final rulings—they preemptively comply.
For a recent example of this chilling effect, see reporting from The Verge on age-verification fallout:
https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/31/24056136/congress-child-safety-hearing-kosa-meta-x-discord-snap-tiktok
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music, RSS
Which products are likely to be affected first?
KOSA applies to “covered platforms” broadly, including social networks, messaging apps, and online games used by minors. In practice, three categories face immediate pressure:
Discord
https://discord.com
Pros: Strong community moderation tools, optional privacy controls
Risks: Heavy teen usage makes Discord a prime enforcement target; expect stricter age inference and logging
Tradeoff: Safer defaults may come at the cost of pseudonymous communities
TikTok
https://www.tiktok.com
Pros: Already offers teen safety modes and algorithm controls
Risks: Algorithmic recommendation systems are directly targeted by KOSA’s duty-of-care rules
Tradeoff: Likely expansion of biometric or behavioral age estimation
Roblox
https://www.roblox.com
Pros: Granular parental controls, youth-focused design
Risks: Games with user-generated content blur the line between platform and publisher
Tradeoff: Increased data collection to justify design decisions
None of these outcomes require explicit ID mandates. Incentives are enough.
Is enforcement really limited to the FTC now?
This is one of KOSA’s genuine improvements.
Earlier versions allowed state attorneys general to enforce the duty of care directly, raising fears of politicized content regulation. The current version shifts primary enforcement to the FTC, while states retain authority over other provisions.
That reduces—but does not eliminate—risk. The FTC still evaluates whether harms were foreseeable, which loops back to age knowledge. And future changes in FTC leadership could dramatically alter enforcement priorities.
For background on this enforcement shift, see AP News’ reporting:
https://apnews.com/article/congress-social-media-kosa-kids-online-safety-act-parents-ead646422cf84cef0d0573c3c841eb6d
To set The Privacy Report as a Preferred Source in your Google searches, you can click this link and check the box to the right.
How does KOSA compare to COPPA on age data?
| Law | Age Threshold | Core Mechanism | Privacy Risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| COPPA | Under 13 | Parental consent | Moderate, well-defined |
| KOSA | Under 17 | Duty of care | High, ambiguous |
COPPA tells companies exactly when and how to collect data. KOSA tells them they’re responsible without telling them how to know who qualifies.
Ambiguity is not neutral in compliance law—it favors maximal data collection.
Why do people misunderstand KOSA’s privacy impact?
Three common errors keep showing up in coverage:
- Focusing on intent instead of incentives
- Assuming platforms will choose minimal compliance
- Treating age verification as binary rather than behavioral
Age inference can include device fingerprints, activity patterns, social graphs, and biometric signals. None of that requires a driver’s license—and all of it is worse for privacy. This is where older “just use parental controls” advice collapses. Controls require identification first.
You can read more about the privacy risks behind KOSA
KOSA doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Its biggest privacy risks come from how platforms infer identity, collect behavioral data, and quietly erode anonymity in the name of compliance.
When platforms try to determine a user’s age without explicit verification, they often rely on device characteristics and behavioral signals rather than IDs. This is where browser fingerprinting becomes especially relevant.
Browser Fingerprinting: The Silent Identifier
Much of the harm created by age inference doesn’t come from reading messages or posts, but from analyzing metadata—when you’re online, how long you stay, and how you interact. Even without storing content, platforms can infer age and vulnerability.
Metadata: The Invisible Trail You Always Leave
As anonymity becomes a liability under laws like KOSA, some users will look toward decentralized platforms as a safer alternative. But decentralization alone doesn’t eliminate regulatory pressure or surveillance incentives.
Decentralized Social Networks: Privacy or Illusion?
Finally, it’s important to contrast KOSA’s platform-level surveillance model with privacy-preserving ways families can actually reduce risk. Network-level controls give parents tools without forcing companies to collect more personal data.
Protect Your Kids Online with Smart Home Network Controls
FAQs
Does KOSA ban encryption?
No. But increased age inference can pressure platforms to weaken anonymous or encrypted features.
Will adults need to verify their age?
Indirectly, yes—many platforms may apply age checks universally to reduce risk.
Is age estimation better than ID checks?
From a privacy standpoint, no. Behavioral estimation often collects more sensitive data.
Does KOSA affect self-hosted platforms?
Mostly no, unless they qualify as covered platforms used by minors.
Could courts strike KOSA down?
Possibly. Similar state laws have failed First Amendment challenges.
What should you do next?
Read the actual bill text—especially the definitions and duty-of-care sections—before trusting any summary or political talking point. S.1748 - Kids Online Safety Act.
This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It was written with the assistance of AI and reflects analysis and opinion, not legal guidance.
