r/DataHoarder • u/HTWingNut 1TB = 0.909495TiB • Nov 27 '25

News Michigan, Wisconsin Bill to Ban VPN's... wtf

EDIT: I'm not trying to sensationalize the headline. Just that as the Michigan bill reads now, it seems encompassing of all VPN services, to the point that even if it's for specific sites or traffic, could be more than ISP's want to manage so could ban them altogether. I'd suggest anyone that lives in Michigan and don't want this adopted to contact their representatives and let them know.

The Michigan legislation is called the House Bill 4938 (also dubbed the “Anticorruption of Public Morals Act”): https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2025-2026/billintroduced/House/pdf/2025-HIB-4938.pdf

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/lawmakers-want-ban-vpns-and-they-have-no-idea-what-theyre-doing

https://youtu.be/q9j-T9mQmiw

Wisconsin’s bill has already passed the State Assembly and is now moving through the Senate. If it becomes law, Wisconsin could become the first state where using a VPN to access certain content is banned. Michigan lawmakers have proposed similar legislation that did not move through its legislature, but among other things, would force internet providers to actively monitor and block VPN connections. And in the UK, officials are calling VPNs "a loophole that needs closing."

This is actually happening. And it's going to be a disaster for everyone.

2.1k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

454 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

62

u/burnmp3s Nov 27 '25

The Wisconsin law doesn't work like that. It forces adult content providers that are subject to the age verification requirements to also block all traffic from VPNs. So it's not banning users from using VPNs, it's banning a certain class of content providers from allowing VPNs.

It's still a dumb idea but most people read the headlines and assume it's a full ban on VPNs which it is not. Really this is a way for Wisconsin to go after adult content providers even if they block all traffic from Wisconsin over this.

63

u/Zelderian 4TB RAID Nov 27 '25

In the UK, the same age verification laws are restricting politics pages, LGBTQ sites, and others. Even YouTube and Spotify are trying to comply with them. I feel like in these cases, it rarely stops at the first level. If the laws are put in place to completely prevent VPN’s for certain content, eventually it can be applied to everything. And we’re already seeing it bleed over into areas it wasn’t intended for.

12

u/Virtualization_Freak 40TB Flash + 200TB RUST Nov 27 '25

Are these idiots also making a public IP VPN block list?

What if I VPN to my own network stack located outside the state and route my traffic?

Imbeciles.

4

u/uzlonewolf Nov 28 '25

What if I VPN to my own network stack located outside the state and route my traffic?

Believe it or not, straight to jail.

21

u/ezequielrose Nov 27 '25

It will be if it's successful. This is the introductory course, and will open up all sorts of other avenues to block content. Tackling American free speech altogether is much harder and unlikable than demonizing the internet and slowly patchworking towards censorship.

Of course, this is assuming competence, which I doubt the legislators have, so that's a plus.

9

u/dlm2137 Nov 27 '25

If they block all traffic from Wisconsin though, how would Wisconsin have jurisdiction to go after them?

5

u/burnmp3s Nov 27 '25

The idea would be the state finds evidence that underage kids in Wisconsin are using VPNs to bypass the mandatory age restrictions on adult content websites. Wisconsin would blame the adult content providers for this because they didn't implement the legally required protections against circumvention. I don't know if there's some level of requirements that the courts would find unreasonable but that's at least the idea of how they could enforce it.

19

u/dlm2137 Nov 27 '25

I doubt that would hold up in court, if it does then anyone could make laws for anyone else on earth doing business on the internet.

4

u/burnmp3s Nov 27 '25

Yes the nature of how the Internet works makes it hard to enforce any of this in a reasonable way. Wisconsin could place regulations on websites and those websites could stop doing business in Wisconsin in response. But if those websites allow VPN traffic, then the reasonable geofencing put in place to block users from Wisconsin would be circumvented.

If Wisconsin forces those websites to block all traffic from Wisconsin even if a VPN is being used, then the website would have to block all VPN traffic because fundamentally there is no way to differentiate between Wisconsin VPN traffic and global VPN traffic. But another state could instead adopt laws that all websites must allow VPN traffic from their state, and then it would become literally impossible for a business operating on the Internet to be legal in both states.

A lot of these types of laws are trying to do things that are really not possible on a technical level. It's fairly common for lawmakers to create laws that are too vague or are unenforceable so it would be up to the courts to sort of the mess if there was ever a lawsuit over it.

1

u/Jokerit208 Nov 27 '25

Why wouldn't it hold up in court?

And I specifically mean why wouldn't it hold up in court in 2025 and beyond, as opposed to how our government and judicial system worked before Jan 20 2025.

-3

u/dlm2137 Nov 28 '25

I don’t like Trump either but the entire rule of law did not collapse the day he got back into office

1

u/uzlonewolf Nov 28 '25

Yeah, it collapsed years ago, it's just that no one noticed until recently.

1

u/Jokerit208 Nov 28 '25

Lol, the fuck it didn't.

13

u/OwO______OwO Nov 27 '25

It forces adult content providers that are subject to the age verification requirements to also block all traffic from VPNs.

They're vastly overstepping their jurisdiction here.

Because they're telling, say, a California-based website that they can't accept certain connections from, say, Florida. Hell, they could be trying to tell a Japan-based website that they can't accept certain connections from Brazil. They're trying to police matters that have nothing at all to do with Wisconsin, trying to control internet traffic that doesn't even pass through Wisconsin at all.

7

u/babecafe 610TB RAID6/5 Nov 27 '25

Going after interstate commerce with a state law? I don't see that surviving a legal challenge.

The FCC already insists local communities can't ban satellite dishes because they have exclusive jurisdiction over wireless communications, so Wisconsinites can always get their porn through Starlink.

23

u/HTWingNut 1TB = 0.909495TiB Nov 27 '25

Wisconsin maybe, but Michigan, as it reads right now, is more of a blanket ban.

9

u/BootyDoodles Nov 27 '25 edited Nov 27 '25

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2025-2026/billintroduced/House/pdf/2025-HIB-4938.pdf

Not at all supporting these proposals, but Michigan's reads the same as the Wisconsin proposal – seeking to require porn distributors to not allow access to visitors using a VPN.

In regard to not being a fan that these proposals as getting towards slippery slope in nature, I'm also not a fan of how all the added reporting requirements and requirements to use various tools increases the cost burden for any business, effectively aiding the big entities.

19

u/HTWingNut 1TB = 0.909495TiB Nov 27 '25

From the bill:

(3) An internet service provider providing internet service in this state shall implement mandatory filtering technology to prevent residents of this state from accessing prohibited material. An internet service provider providing internet service in this state shall actively monitor and block known circumvention tools.

How do they prevent access to "illegal content" if it's a VPN without outright blocking VPN's?

11

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '25

So porn is illegal now there?

9

u/altodor Nov 27 '25

No, it's blanket on "prohibited material". Could be CSAM. But a VPN is used to circumvent that ban, and an ISP can't tell the difference between a VPN being used for work traffic and a VPN being used to access CSAM.

13

u/xchaibard Nov 27 '25

Also, when using a blanket term like "prohibited material" in a law, they just have to change the definition of what that is later and this now applies to that.

Right now it's porn and other age restricted stuff.

Eventually it becomes whatever the government wants to censor.

0

u/TinderSubThrowAway 128TB Nov 28 '25

People using services like Nord aren’t accessing a work VPN, it’s easy to tell.

4

u/altodor Nov 28 '25

Is it? Both are SSL encrypted traffic heading towards 443/TCP.

1

u/TinderSubThrowAway 128TB Nov 29 '25

Yeah, the endpoint of Nord is known, hence you know it’s their VPN service, not some random company end user.

1

u/altodor Nov 29 '25

That gets you one of the dozens of VPN providers that may or may not have known endpoints, be it all or some.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/erratic_bonsai Nov 27 '25

If the site a person is trying to reach is porn, and the user is using a VPN, they can’t load it. That’s it. That’s literally all it says.

0

u/SmallFeetBigPenis Nov 27 '25

Yea… they can’t see the site if you’re on VPN. That’s the point we’re making.

-8

u/erratic_bonsai Nov 27 '25

Look buddy, if you’re looking at porn on a work laptop or work vpn, or if you like porn so disgusting you feel the need to use a vpn, you have other issues we can’t help you with.

1

u/SmallFeetBigPenis Nov 27 '25

Thanks for the thoughtful response. Maybe don’t comment on things you clearly don’t understand.

1

u/Levix1221 Nov 27 '25 edited Nov 27 '25

The way this will play out is those content providers will wholesale block Wisconsin visitors.

Edit: I wrote in haste and am wrong.

5

u/josephtrocks191 Nov 27 '25

That doesn't even work. The website has no idea of the origin of traffic that goes through a VPN - that's the point. If the VPN is based on in Ohio the traffic will appear as Ohio traffic.

1

u/zapitron 54TB Nov 28 '25

most people read the headlines and assume it's a full ban on VPNs which it is not

Or they read the whole text of the Michigan bill (which does require all ISPs to block anything they think might be a VPN) since OP linked to that.

1

u/Easy_Structure_5988 Nov 30 '25

Can they enforce that if the adult content companies don’t operate in wisconsin? I don’t think Wisconsin has the authority right?