Legislative Threats: KOSA, Youth AI Act, & NY Crawler Ban Jeopardize Online Privacy

Featured image: Photo by Miguel Á. Padriñán on Pexels.

The digital landscape is constantly evolving, bringing with it both innovation and complex challenges, particularly concerning online privacy and free expression. In an attempt to address perceived harms, legislators are increasingly proposing bills that, while often well-intentioned, could inadvertently undermine the very principles they seek to protect. Recent legislative efforts, including the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), the Youth AI Privacy Act, and New York’s Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act, exemplify this paradox. Each of these proposals, in its unique way, presents significant threats to user privacy, the freedom to access information, and the foundational architecture of the open internet for everyone, not just specific demographics.

KOSA: The Push for Age Verification and Censorship

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) has been presented as a measure to protect young people online by imposing a “duty of care” on online services. This duty would require platforms, including social media, to mitigate exposure to material deemed harmful to minors. However, the practical implications of such a mandate are far-reaching and deeply concerning for privacy advocates [1]. To fulfill this “duty of care,” online services would be pressured to implement robust age verification or age estimation systems. This seemingly protective measure forces platforms to collect more sensitive personal information than ever before. Whether through government IDs, facial analysis, bank records, or other personal data, users would be compelled to hand over sensitive details simply to access lawful online speech and services [1]. This not only creates new privacy problems but also establishes vast databases of personal information that become attractive targets for breaches, misuse, or government demands, thereby increasing privacy risks for all users, not just minors.

Beyond privacy, KOSA also raises significant concerns about censorship and free expression. By empowering government officials, particularly elected attorneys general in states across the country, to enforce KOSA, the bill effectively shifts the authority over what constitutes appropriate online content from families to government bureaucrats. This creates a strong incentive for platforms to err on the side of caution, leading to the removal of lawful speech or the shutdown of potentially controversial forums to avoid legal action and liability [1]. The bill’s broad “duty of care” could lead platforms to restrict discussions on topics like anxiety, eating disorders, or substance use, even if those forums are intended to provide support and resources. In an attempt to protect young people, KOSA risks cutting them off from valuable communities and sources of support, demonstrating how well-meaning legislation can have unintended, detrimental effects on the availability of information and community building online [1].

The Youth AI Privacy Act: A Privacy Paradox

Similar to KOSA, the Youth AI Privacy Act aims to protect young people, specifically in the context of artificial intelligence. This bill would mandate that AI companies create “kids-only” privacy rules and implement “safe design features.” While the intention might be to safeguard minors, the approach creates a significant “privacy paradox” [3]. By requiring differentiated protections for minor users, online services are inherently forced to ascertain the age of their users. This leads to the implementation of age gates and, consequently, the collection of more data on everyone to determine who qualifies for these specific protections. A more effective and privacy-preserving approach, as argued by privacy experts, would be to offer the same robust privacy protections to all users, thereby eliminating the need for extensive age-related data collection [3].

Furthermore, the Youth AI Privacy Act includes a problematic and vaguely worded provision that allows AI companies to collect a known minor’s personal data for the purpose of “testing, identifying, and addressing ‘harm to users.'” The lack of clarity around what constitutes “harm” or how this data would be used means services could collect even more information from young people, making them more vulnerable to data theft and identity fraud [3]. While the bill does contain some positive provisions, such as prohibiting the processing of personal information like chat logs for training, profiling, or disclosure to other companies, these limitations are unfortunately restricted to minors. For true privacy protection, these limits should apply universally to all users, not just a select demographic [3]. The bill also mandates the use of “safe design features,” which effectively restrict how online service providers can design their systems, potentially denying teenagers access to features like push alerts and notifications. Such “age appropriate design codes” have faced significant constitutional challenges in federal courts, often being blocked for likely violating the First Amendment rights of both internet users and the online services themselves by interfering with the rights to speak, access speech, and present information online [3].

New York’s Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act: Threatening the Open Web

Shifting focus from youth protection to journalism, New York’s Senate Bill 9934A, the Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act, poses a different yet equally significant threat to online privacy and the open internet. Framed as a measure to protect local journalism, this legislation would require all web crawlers to disclose their identity and explicit purpose. It also grants media outlets unchecked authority to obtain judicial subpoenas to unmask unidentified automated web traffic, even without any showing of misconduct or actual injury [2]. This bill fundamentally harms free expression and establishes a dangerous precedent by effectively deanonymizing and criminalizing automated access to public web data.

Anonymous web crawling is not a malicious activity; it is a vital component of the open web, facilitating a wide array of public-interest work. Investigative journalists, for instance, rely on anonymous crawlers to uncover potentially anti-competitive practices by tech companies, such as Amazon prioritizing its own brands or steering shoppers to more expensive products. Academic researchers use these tools to gather data for critical studies. Cybersecurity professionals employ automated tools to monitor the web for threats and protect against malicious attackers. Even privacy tools, like EFF’s Privacy Badger, utilize anonymous crawling to identify trackers without compromising user privacy [2]. By forcing crawlers to disclose their identity, this bill compromises digital privacy and undermines the foundational architecture of the internet that enables such crucial work. The legislation mistakenly targets anonymity rather than addressing the technical issue of overaggressive crawling that can strain server infrastructure. Unmasking crawlers will not resolve these technical issues but will instead chill vital public-interest research and compromise digital privacy, giving publishers undue veto power over the open web [2].

A Call for Comprehensive Privacy

The legislative efforts surrounding KOSA, the Youth AI Privacy Act, and the New York Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act highlight a critical juncture in how we approach online regulation. While the intent behind these bills may be to create a safer or fairer online environment, their current structures risk eroding fundamental digital rights. They consistently push for more data collection, encourage censorship of lawful speech, and undermine the anonymity crucial for investigative work and privacy tools. Instead of fragmented, age-gated, or industry-specific regulations that inadvertently create more privacy problems and restrict free expression, a more effective path forward involves comprehensive privacy legislation that protects all users universally. Such legislation would safeguard privacy, security, and free expression without compromising the open and innovative nature of the internet.

Key Takeaways

• KOSA risks universal age verification, leading to increased data collection and potential government-mandated censorship of lawful online speech.
• The Youth AI Privacy Act, by creating “kids-only” privacy rules, paradoxically forces more data collection on all users and imposes design restrictions that challenge free expression.
• New York’s Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act threatens the anonymity essential for investigative journalism, research, and cybersecurity, compromising digital privacy and the open web.
• Fragmented legislation targeting specific groups or issues often creates broader privacy and free expression challenges for all internet users.
• Comprehensive privacy legislation that protects everyone, regardless of age or purpose, is needed to avoid undermining fundamental digital rights.

Sources

1. [1] The Senate Should Reject KOSA's Privacy Risks (www.eff.org)
2. [2] EFF Joins 18 Civil Rights Organizations Calling on Governor Hochul to Reject the Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act (www.eff.org)
3. [3] The Youth AI Privacy Act’s Privacy Paradox (www.eff.org)

StealthAnon is a news and analysis site covering cybersecurity, privacy, web analytics, anonymity, and tech tools.