Industry and regulators emphasize multi-layered verification as essential to protect at-risk youth while balancing privacy concerns.

The study found initial checks often do not trigger subsequent verification, allowing many under-16 accounts to remain active.

Australia’s national under-16 social media ban is failing at the initial age-check stage, with testers finding no platform requesting age verification for 50 accounts declared as 16 across most platforms.

A 2025 trial by the advisory research team showed platforms did not require age proof for 50 accounts declaring 16 after the law took effect.

Independent software testers found initial age checks ineffective, allowing some under-16 users to access platforms despite the law.

Regulators and eSafety guidance call for escalating to stronger age verification if indicators or reports justify it, but the trial exposes gaps in early screening.

Regulatory scrutiny continues as policymakers wrestle with privacy-friendly, low-friction verification versus effectively restricting under-16 access.

Regulators have warned or pursued action against major platforms, but the core issue highlighted by testers is the sign-up stage rather than allergy to age guessing.

Responses from platforms were mixed: Meta questioned alignment with regulator guidance on escalation to formal verification, while Kick defended needing age proof due to lack of age-guessing data.

eSafety remains confident that platforms can block under-16 accounts with a multi-step verification approach to avoid a single point of failure.

The commissioner reiterates support for a layered system to prevent under-16 access, warning against reliance on a single check.

Tests indicate platforms start with low-friction, self-declared ages and only escalate to formal verification if indicators arise or reports come in, with privacy concerns limiting government-ID use.