This site works best with JavaScript enabled.

The 12 key findings of the age assurance technology trial
  1. Age assurance can be done.
  2. There are no substantial technological limitations to prevent age assurance systems being used to address age-related eligibility requirements.
  3. The trial independently validated the information provided by age assurance providers about capabilities of their products, processes and services.
  4. There is no one-size-fits-all approach to age assurance that can suit all use contexts.
  5. Age assurance services are evolving, with both technologically advanced options and a pipeline of new services under development.
  6. Providers had a robust understanding of privacy policies, with a strong commitment to privacy by design principles for secure data handling.
  7. The systems performed broadly consistently across demographic groups, but with an acknowledged deficit of data on Indigenous populations.
  8. There is scope for technological improvement, including enhancing ease of use for the average person and enhancing the management of risk in age assurance.
  9. While parental control and consent systems can be used, there are limitations, particularly as they may fail to adapt to children’s evolving capacities as they mature, particularly through adolescence.
  10. The systems were generally secure, but cannot be considered infallible, given the rapidly evolving cybersecurity threat environment.
  11. There was concerning evidence that some providers were building tools to enable (for example) regulators and law enforcement to trace users’ actions to verify their age, which could lead to privacy breaches due to unnecessary and disproportionate collection and retention of data.
  12. The standards-based approach used in the trial provides a solid basis for development of a conformity accreditation process for age assurance providers in Australia.