Uh, that's not going to fly.

We use a VPN to enable remote users to access our internal network for things we don't want exposed to the public at large. And we're not a tech company.

This really sounds like someone who has no fucking clue trying to legislate away all the loopholes to their other shitty legislation.

I wonder if any of the lawmakers asked their IT how they work remotely before drafting any of this..

Perhaps your CEO has less political capital than Meta’s.

Story goes they need proof of humanity for their business (advertising) survive. Pesky things like the continuity of businesses they don’t own, that can be figured out later.

How it works in Russia, if your corporate VPN is blocked by mistake, you can just submit the application to whitelist it, providing all the necessary documentation (we have pretty advanced e-government system so you can submit it online), and with high probability it would be accepted. If your VPN gets accidentally blocked again, all you need is to write to an on-duty officer and it will be unblocked.

Not to defend the bill, but if I read the article right it only applies to websites subject to the state's age verification laws.

Dont they just pass a bill saying you can use the state audited VPN as provided by SecUTAH for remote access. Submit your business requirements for review and oh we also know all the keys for anti terror reasons.