Disaster Utah’s New Law Targeting VPNs Goes Into Effect Next Week

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Utah’s New Law Targeting VPNs Goes Into Effect Next Week​

By Rindala Alajaji
April 30, 2026





For the last couple of years, we’ve watched the same predictable cycle play out across the globe: a state (or country) passes a clunky age-verification mandate, and, without fail, Virtual Private Network (VPN) usage surges as residents scramble to maintain their privacy and anonymity. We've seen this everywhere—from states like Florida, Missouri, Texas, and Utah, to countries like the United Kingdom, Australia, and Indonesia.

Instead of realizing that mass surveillance and age gates aren't exactly crowd favorites, Utah lawmakers have decided that VPNs themselves are the real issue.

Next week, on May 6, 2026, Utah will become, to EFF’s knowledge, the first state in the nation to target the use of VPNs to avoid legally mandated age-verification gates. While advocates in states like Wisconsin successfully forced the removal of similar provisions due to constitutional and technical concerns, Utah is proceeding with a mandate that threatens to significantly undermine digital privacy rights.

What the Bill Does

Formally known as the “Online Age Verification Amendments,” Senate Bill 73 (SB 73) was signed by Governor Spencer Cox on March 19, 2026. While the majority of the bill consists of provisions related to a 2% tax on revenues from online adult content that is set to take effect in October, one of the more immediate concerns for EFF is the section regulating VPN access, which goes into effect this coming Wednesday.

The VPN Provisions​

The new law explicitly addresses VPN use in Section 14, which amends Section 78B-3-1002 of existing Utah statutes in two primary ways:

  1. Regulation based on physical location: Under the law, an individual is considered to be accessing a website from Utah if they are physically located there, regardless of whether they use a VPN, proxy server, or other means to disguise their geographic location.
  2. Ban on sharing VPN instructions: Commercial entities that host "a substantial portion of material harmful to minors" are now prohibited from facilitating or encouraging the use of a VPN to bypass age checks. This includes providing instructions on how to use a VPN or providing the means to circumvent geofencing.
By holding companies liable for verifying the age of anyone physically in Utah, even those using a VPN, the law creates a massive "liability trap." Just like we argued in the case of the Wisconsin bill, if a website cannot reliably detect a VPN user's true location and the law requires it to do so for all users in a particular state, then the legal risk could push the site to either ban all known VPN IPs, or to mandate age verification for every visitor globally. This would subject millions of users to invasive identity checks or blocks to their VPN use, regardless of where they actually live.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

In practice, SB 73 is different from the Wisconsin proposal in that it stops short of a total VPN ban. Instead, it discourages using VPNs by imposing the liability described above and by muzzling the websites themselves from sharing information about VPNs. This raises significant First Amendment concerns, as it prevents platforms from providing basic, truthful information about a lawful privacy tool to their users.

Unlike previous drafts seen in other states, SB 73 doesn't explicitly ban the use of a VPN. Under a "don't ask, don't tell" style of enforcement, websites likely only have an obligation to ask for proof of age if they actually learn that a user is physically in Utah and using a VPN. If a site doesn’t know a user is in Utah, their broader obligation to police VPNs remains murky. So, while SB 73 isn’t as extreme as the discarded Wisconsin proposal, it remains a dangerous precedent.

Technical Feasibility

Then there is also the question of technical feasibility: Blocking all known VPN and proxy IP addresses is a technical whack-a-mole that likely no company can win. Providers add new IP addresses constantly, and no comprehensive blocklist exists. Complying with Utah’s requirements would require impossible technical feats.

The internet is built to, and will always, route around censorship. If Utah successfully hampers commercial VPN providers, motivated users will transition to non-commercial proxies, private tunnels through cloud services like AWS, or residential proxies that are virtually indistinguishable from standard home traffic. These workarounds will emerge within hours of the law taking effect. Meanwhile, the collateral damage will fall on businesses, journalists, and survivors of abuse who rely on commercial VPNs for essential data security.

These provisions won't stop a tech-savvy teenager, but they certainly will impact the privacy of every regular Utah resident who just wants to keep their data out of the hands of brokers or malicious actors.

Uncharted Territory

Lawmakers have watched age-verification mandates fail and, instead of reconsidering the approach, have decided to wage war on privacy itself. As the Cato Institute states:

“The point is that when an internet policy can be avoided by a relatively common technology that often provides significant privacy and security benefits, maybe the policy is the problem. Age verification regimes do plenty of damage to online speech and privacy, but attacking VPNs to try to keep them from being circumvented is doubling down on this damaging approach."
Attacks on VPNs are, at their core, attacks on the tools that enable digital privacy. Utah is setting a precedent that prioritizes government control over the fundamental architecture of a private and secure internet, and it won’t stop at the state’s borders. Regulators in countries outside the U.S. are still eyeing VPN restrictions, with the UK Children’s Commissioner calling VPNs a “loophole that needs closing” and the French Minister Delegate for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Affairs saying VPNs are “the next topic on my list” after the country enacted a ban on social media for kids under 15.

As this law goes into effect next week, we are entering uncharted territory. Lawmakers who can’t distinguish between a security tool and a "loophole" are now writing the rules for one of the most complex infrastructures on Earth. And we can assure that the result won't be a safer internet, only an increasingly less private one.

The Bill: https://le.utah.gov/~2026/bills/static/SB0073.html
 
Not when their own kids literally tell them it's bullshit.

That's the Achilles' heel of all this -- it's completely dependent on people accepting it at face value, and in this country, normies don't trust the government about technology. They trust their nerdy kids.
I remember when we all said this about the COVID mandates, and we all know how that ended.

Give it a few years, digital ID will be the new normal.
 
Toothless faggot shit. Porn sites will just geo block Utahns. They won't be missing much, mountain jews don't spend money, so no loss in revenue.

Instead of posturing, Spencer Cocks should go after the tech companies at the point of the mountain that keep hiring street shitters over local college students.
They already do. This doesn't do anything because it's unenforceable.
 
And guess what? Digital ID internet will go worldwide completely unopposed until it is normalized.

People can cry about it any way they want, but as long as they don't feel that they are under the danger of being dragged off by Third Worlders, Antifas and Neo Nazis into concentration camps to be tortured, gassed and executed, nothing will change.
 
These retards are aware VPNs are used by businesses, right?
Same goes for encryption. But I clearly remember the home secretary of the UK at one point wanted to ban encryption completely. Everyone told her how retarded that would be though.

The layman in me believes (or at least hopes) Tor and the Onion network should work to get around this dogshit whenever it comes to pass on a larger scale. People from fuckin China and Iran use it out of necessity, it's weird that people might have to use it along with next to god damn identity theft just to post online anonymously in countries that should be free.

Everyone who is pushing for laws like this needs to be remembered only for doing so. It needs to be such a massive black stain on their political careers that they should be embarrassed to walk around in public. They should be mocked relentlessly for being such dastardly niggers.
 
These retards are aware VPNs are used by businesses, right?
These retards didn't understand that age-gating porn sites is pointless because 99% of them are content aggregators that don't actually host anything, meaning if you block one an alternative can be spun up in minutes to replace it. It's the same reason blocking the Pirate Bay was retarded and didn't work.

TL;DR They don't know what the fuck they're doing. Total boomer death.
 
"lol" said the scorpion, "lmao".

Russia is currently trying to ban VPNs too, and it's going about as well as you'd expect. They did get most major commercial ones, but barely anyone was using those anyway. The biggest loss was Windscribe, which a lot of people used due to their free 10GB plan.

Right now the way to bypass the blocks is either by getting a VPS and setting up a VLESS or Trojan proxy, or paying some Chinese guy to do it for you. Those fucks figured it all out years ago with the GFW.

The gov, no matter which one, is ontologically retarded. They probably know that it isn't feasible to try and restrict the flow of information (short of cutting yourself off from the global capital-I Internet), because there will always be a way around it. But they're too stubborn to stop. They will tell you they're doing it to "protect children", or "fight terrorism", or "prevent online toxicity", or whatever the fuck else. But at the end of the day, they're simply scared of not being able to control something. That's all there is to it.
They don't care about the <1% of people that will know how to bypass this type of ban.
All they want is to have control over the vast majority,
 
The stupidest thing about these bills is that they always framed it as "protecting the kids" when they never actually do. They'll always find a way around the rules if they're desperate enough.
As a child, being the only person in my household growing up who even knew how to actually use a computer, this, 100%. Children have a lot of free time, generally, but no money. They're the ones incentivized the most to get around this shit, and they WILL find a way. I always did, and I'm not a computer technician or a genius.
 
And guess what? Digital ID internet will go worldwide completely unopposed until it is normalized.

People can cry about it any way they want, but as long as they don't feel that they are under the danger of being dragged off by Third Worlders, Antifas and Neo Nazis into concentration camps to be tortured, gassed and executed, nothing will change.
At this point it's safe to assume TPTB already won. The bad guys always win in real life.
 
Funny how I predicted this exact thing happening. Republicans pushing for the most unpopular and dystopian fucking legislation in existence under the guise of "protecting the heckin children". Vance might as well just give up on 2028 because there is no fucking way anyone who isn't a boomer is voting Republican anymore.
Nigger you didn’t predict anything, this shit has been going on since the 90’s
 
Nigger you didn’t predict anything, this shit has been going on since the 90’s
....and back then it was just as much Democrats pushing shit like this, particularly pushing the Clipper chip and key escrow (which they TOTALLY were never going to use to spy on your supposedly encrypted communications), but also opposing the publication and dissemination of Pretty Good Privacy (aka PGP) because cryptographic systems were considered munitions that required an export license under ITAR (and without that none of us would be having this nice friendly HTTPS-based conversation).

TL;DR The managerial class hates you, and fellating one party of them isn't going to win their favor... it just makes you homosexual.
 
Back
Top Bottom