Federal Government releases report into age verification trials

On 31 August 2025, the Australian Government published the Final Report (Report) on the Age Assurance Technology Trial (Trial).  Conducted by the independent Age Check Certification Scheme (ACCS), the Trial offers insights into the technical feasibility, privacy implications, and operational deployment capabilities of various age assurance technologies.  While the Report explicitly states it is neutral on policy matters and does not provide regulatory recommendations, its observations are intended to inform policymakers and industry stakeholders, particularly as new social media minimum age limit laws are set to come into effect by 10 December 2025.

Overview of the Trial

The Trial assessed more than sixty (60) technologies from forty-eight (48) age assurance vendors, and spanned a range of approaches, including:

• age verification – matching users with provided documentation;
• age estimation – including based on physical features and hand movements;
• age inference – using existing information to infer the user’s age;
• successive validation – combining two or more age assurance methods;
• parental control – tools that allow parents to manage a child’s access to digital content; and
• parental consent solutions – where a parent confirms a child’s access to age-restricted goods, services or content.

Overview of the Report findings

The Report evaluated age assurance technologies, assessing their performance against a wide range of internationally recognised criteria, including accuracy, interoperability, reliability, ease of use, minimisation of bias, protection of privacy and data security and readiness for deployment.

The 1,150-page Report provided twelve (12) key findings, as follows:

• Age assurance can be done in Australia privately, efficiently, and effectively.
• There are no substantial technological limitations preventing its implementation to meet policy goals.
• Provider claims have been independently validated against the project’s evaluation criteria.
• A wide range of approaches exist, but there is no one-size-fits-all solution for all contexts.
• The age assurance service sector is dynamic, innovative, and evolving.
• Robust, appropriate, and secure data handling practices were observed.
• There is scope to enhance usability, risk management, and system interoperability.
• Parental control tools can be effective but may constrain children’s digital participation and evolving autonomy.
• Systems performed broadly consistently across demographic groups, including Indigenous populations.
• Systems generally align with cybersecurity best practice, though vigilance is required.
• Some unnecessary data retention may occur in apparent anticipation of future regulatory needs.
• Providers are aligning with emerging international standards around age assurance.

Implications

The Report’s findings will influence what the eSafety Commissioner considers to be “reasonable steps” required by digital service providers to meet their impending legal obligations for age verification.  The findings offer guidance to online stakeholders such as hosting services, internet carriage services and search engine services such as Google who will be required to verify the age of users before allowing access to content deemed harmful or age inappropriate. 

On 10 December 2025, digital service providers will be required to implement age assurance mechanisms to prevent children under sixteen (16) accessing social media through accounts.[1]  On 9 March 2025, platforms that host restricted “adult” content, depicting violence, drugs, self-harm or pornographic material, will need to verify users’ ages to prevent access for children under eighteen (18).[2]  Despite these stricter obligations, service providers are still required to minimise handling of personal information and comply full with the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).  For further information, see our article on the potential age verification mechanisms to be implemented in Australia.

The various age assurance methods assessed in the Report offer different levels of assurance and privacy, enabling platforms to choose appropriate and proportionate solutions.

Links and further references

Legislation

Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)

Age Assurance Technology Trial— Final Report

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part A – Main report

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part B – Methodology and ethics

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part C – Age verification

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part D – Age estimation

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part E – Age inference

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part F – Successive validation

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part G – Parental control

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part H – Parental consent

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part J – Tech stack

Age Assurance Technology Trial – Part K – Glossary, bibliography and literature review

Further information about age verification compliance

If you need advice on ensuring your business can comply with the pending age verification requirements, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:

Disclaimer

This article contains general commentary only.  You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice.  Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstance

[1] eSafety Commissioner, ‘Social Media Age Restrictions’ (Web Page, 2025) https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions.

[2] eSafety Commissioner, ‘New Industry Codes Seek to Take on AI Chatbots That Encourage Suicide and Engage in Sexually Explicit Conversations with Aussie Kids’ (Media Release, 11 September 2025) https://www.esafety.gov.au/newsroom/media-releases/new-industry-codes-seek-to-take-on-ai-chatbots-that-encourage-suicide-and-engage-in-sexually-explicit-conversations-with-aussie-kids.

---

Recent articles about technology law