UK to require pre‑release AI testing to block child abuse image creation
Britain seems to be gearing up for a new rule that would put a checkpoint in front of every AI model deemed risky. The plan, unveiled this week, would make developers run a safety assessment before any software hits the public. Officials are zeroing in on tools that can create images - a feature already twisted into illegal child-abuse material.
The Internet Watch Foundation, the charity that flags harmful online content, warned that “apparently benign” generators could be repurposed for abuse if they slip through unchecked. Child-rights groups have rallied behind the idea, saying voluntary checks just aren’t enough. They’re pushing for mandatory safety tests, a demand that appears to have found a sympathetic ear in government circles.
The draft regulations aim to plug a gap that critics claim lets offenders stay one step ahead of police. As the debate sharpens, Jess Phillips is set to spell out why the measures matter - and I’m curious to see how the conversation evolves.
Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips explained that the regulations are designed to stop seemingly harmless AI tools from being turned into instruments for creating abusive content. Child protection groups push for mandatory AI safety tests The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), one of the few organizations authorized to proactively search for CSAM, supports the initiative. According to the IWF, reports of AI-generated abuse imagery have surged.
Between January and October 2025, the group removed 426 AI-related CSAM items, up from 199 during the same period in 2024. IWF CEO Kerry Smith warned that AI enables abusers to revictimize survivors.
The proposal is a step toward curbing generative-AI misuse, but I’m not sure how much it will actually change things. Extending the Crime and Policing Bill would let a handful of authorised testers - mainly tech firms and child-protection groups - legally poke at models before they hit the market. Jess Phillips presented the idea as a guard against “seemingly harmless” tools being turned into illegal image generators.
Child-safety groups have been shouting for mandatory testing, warning that voluntary checks could leave holes. The Internet Watch Foundation, one of the few organisations that can assess those risks, is expected to get involved, yet the article leaves out how its findings would be enforced. That means we don’t really know if the testing will be applied consistently or how compliance will be tracked.
If the framework works, it might stop AI from becoming a conduit for CSAM; if it falls short, loopholes could still slip through. In the end, the final shape of the law and its real-world impact won’t be clear until it’s actually rolled out.
Common Questions Answered
What new requirement will the UK impose on AI models that can generate images?
The UK will require developers to conduct a pre‑release safety assessment for any AI model capable of generating images before it can be released to the public. This mandatory testing aims to prevent the tools from being repurposed to create illegal child‑abuse imagery.
How does the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) view the proposed AI safety tests?
The IWF supports the initiative, noting a sharp rise in AI‑generated child‑abuse imagery reports between January and October 2025. As one of the few bodies authorized to proactively search for CSAM, the IWF believes mandatory testing will help curb this emerging threat.
Which legislation will be amended to give authorised testers legal authority over AI models?
The government plans to extend the Crime and Policing Bill, granting authorised testers—such as tech firms and child‑protection groups—a legal foothold to probe AI models before market release. This amendment is intended to formalise the pre‑release testing regime.
What role does Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips attribute to the new AI regulations?
Jess Phillips explains that the regulations are designed to stop seemingly harmless AI tools from being turned into instruments for creating abusive content. She frames the move as a safeguard against the repurposing of generative AI for illegal imagery.