Next week, Utah will become the first state in the nation (to our knowledge) to target VPN use to avoid legally mandated age-verification gates.

[eff@mastodon.social]

Next week, Utah will become the first state in the nation (to our knowledge) to target VPN use to avoid legally mandated age-verification gates. They won't create a safer internet, only a significantly less private one. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/utahs-new-law-regulating-vpns-goes-effect-next-week

[matth@techhub.social]

@eff

Is ssh considered a VPN?

[oldgeek@masto.yttrx.com]

@eff So time for a tor browser, relays, spinning up a system in the cloud. Betting there are lots of options. Seems like all the adults won't have a clue but their kids will figure it out.

[numodular@c.im]

@oldgeek Tor is still penalized from 'overt Capitalism' mindset, where profit outperforms efficiency. There are far to few Tor nodes now, let alone an influx of traffic due to #TechBros buying political policy corruption.

[bob_zim@infosec.exchange]

@matth @eff The text of the bill (lines 820-824):

> An individual is considered to be accessing the website from this state if the individual is actually located in the state, regardless of whether the individual is using a virtual private network, proxy server, or other means to disguise or misrepresent the individual's geographic location to make it appear that the individual is accessing a website from a location outside this state.

So any sort of traffic proxy is in scope. Using the proxy doesn’t appear to be prohibited (i.e, the person in Utah doesn’t seem to be violating the law), but if the site accepts the traffic and the user is actually in Utah, the site is violating the law. The uncertainty is the goal.

[lancejz@mastodon.social]

@eff don't forget about the data they take.