Which platforms it covers

The lists eSafety keeps

Before the law took effect, eSafety looked at a number of services and, on 21 November 2025, published its view of which would likely be age-restricted and which would not. In March 2026 it checked whether the amended rules changed that view, and confirmed they did not. Being on a list doesn’t mean a service agrees with eSafety.

Both lists are eSafety’s, as published on its page for platforms.

Services that have assessed themselves

Some services have told eSafety they consider themselves age-restricted, and agreed to be named. Services don’t have to notify eSafety, so it says this list is unlikely to be complete.

Of the services named there, Bluesky, Lemon8 and Wizz apply a minimum age of 16 for Australian account holders, while Match’s services (among them Tinder and Hinge), Yubo and BigoLive keep applying the minimum age of 18 they already had. eSafety’s self-assessment list gives each service’s own wording and the date it told eSafety.

The test a service has to meet

A platform is age-restricted if it meets all of these conditions and is not excluded by the rules the Minister made in July 2025 and amended in March 2026:

• letting two or more users interact socially online is its only purpose, or a significant one
• users can link to, or interact with, some or all of the other users
• users can post material on it
• it has a “recommender feature”, a “logged in feature”, or both, as the rules define them
• material on it can be reached by, or is delivered to, users in Australia.

What the rules leave out

The rules exclude services whose sole or primary purpose is:

• messaging, email, voice calling or video calling
• playing online games with other users
• sharing information about products or services
• professional networking or professional development
• supporting the education of users
• supporting the health of users.

Two more exclusions are about communication: services with the sole or a significant purpose of communication between educational institutions and students or their families, and services with a significant purpose of communication between health care providers and the people using their services. The rules themselves are on the Federal Register of Legislation.

Why a service can move

Many platforms have more than one purpose. eSafety gives two examples. A messaging service with social-media style features could be brought in if people come to use those features so much that its primary purpose changes. A game with direct messages, group chats or livestreaming could be brought in if its sole or primary purpose changes.

When eSafety weighs a platform’s purpose, the explanatory statement to the rules points it to the platform’s features and functions, how they shape what users do, and how the platform is actually used, not only what it says it is for. A platform that sees a significant increase in users under 16, or a change in how it is used, must report this to eSafety as part of its self-assessment, and eSafety says it is watching for under-16s moving to other apps.

Who decides

eSafety has no formal role in declaring which services are age-restricted. Unless the Minister makes rules naming a service, whether it is or isn’t age-restricted is a matter for a court. eSafety must believe on reasonable grounds that a service meets the conditions before it can use its powers, such as requiring information about compliance. It is concentrating on the services with the most Australian users under 16, and says it will not consider every service.

Logged out, still visible

The law is about accounts. Under-16s can still see publicly available content that doesn’t need a login. eSafety’s examples are most of YouTube, and some of Facebook, such as the pages of businesses and services that use it as their host.

At school, learning management systems built mainly to support education are excluded, and a teacher can embed public video, such as a YouTube video, that students can watch without logging in, if school policies allow it. Google remains responsible for preventing under-16s from having their own accounts for YouTube, whether or not a school has approved or filtered those accounts.