Why the EU’s war on VPNs is a technical dead end

The European Parliamentary Research Service recently labeled VPNs a "loophole that needs closing" in the context of age verification. If you’ve spent any time in network security, you know exactly how absurd that sounds. Regulators are attempting to legislate away the fundamental mechanics of how the internet routes traffic, and they are doing so while ignoring the massive privacy trade-offs involved.

Here is the reality: VPNs are not a "loophole." They are a standard tool for encryption and traffic obfuscation. When you try to force a user to prove their age before they can even establish a secure connection, you aren't just breaking a specific app; you are fundamentally undermining the privacy of every legitimate user.

The failure of identity-based gatekeeping

Most legislative attempts to mandate age verification rely on the assumption that we can reliably tie a digital identity to a physical human without creating a honeypot for hackers. We have already seen this fail. Look at the recent security flaws in the European Commission’s own age-verification app, which leaked biometric data because it was stored in unencrypted locations.

When you force VPN providers to verify user identities, you create a massive, centralized database of sensitive information. This is a goldmine for bad actors. If you want to understand why this is a dangerous path, read our deep dive on the risks of digital identity mandates.

Why the "loophole" cannot be closed

Regulators are currently looking at ways to force VPNs to restrict access or report user locations. However, this ignores the technical reality of how these tools function. If a government mandates that a VPN must verify age, they are essentially demanding that the provider stop being a privacy tool and start being a surveillance node.

Here is where most people get tripped up: they think this is just about blocking a few apps. In reality, it’s about the following:

1. Protocol obfuscation: If you block standard VPN protocols, users will simply switch to shadowsocks, V2Ray, or custom encrypted tunnels that are nearly impossible to detect.
2. Jurisdictional arbitrage: If the EU forces a provider to comply, that provider will simply move their servers to a jurisdiction that respects privacy, leaving the EU with no control.
3. Collateral damage: Legitimate businesses, journalists, and activists who rely on VPNs for secure communication will be the ones who suffer, while those intent on bypassing the rules will always find a way around.

The path forward for online safety

Instead of chasing the impossible dream of banning privacy tools, regulators should focus on the platforms themselves. If the goal is to protect minors, the burden should be on the content providers to implement robust, privacy-preserving age estimation—not on the infrastructure that connects us to the web.

The "loophole" isn't the VPN; it's the reliance on outdated, centralized verification models that fail the moment they meet a determined user. We need to stop treating the internet like a physical space where you can simply lock the door. It’s a distributed network, and it will always route around damage.

If you are concerned about how these regulations will impact your digital footprint, start by auditing your current security stack. The best way to stay safe is to rely on tools that don't require you to hand over your identity to a third party. Pass this to someone who thinks the EU’s war on VPNs is actually going to work.