Every time a regulator announces the blocking of unauthorized online casinos, the same question resurfaces: can digital access really be shut down in 2026?
Technically, yes. Practically, it is far more complex.
Countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain have implemented DNS and IP blocking measures for years. Australia’s ACMA has blocked more than 800 offshore gambling domains since 2017. Germany tightened its framework through the Interstate Treaty on Gambling (GlüNeuRStV 2021). Yet, at the same time, VPN usage has grown steadily across the globe.
According to DataReportal and Statista, more than 31% of global internet users aged 16–64 have used a VPN. In several key markets, the percentage is significantly higher.
India represents one of the most striking cases. With more than 800 million internet users, estimates suggest that between 40% and 45% have used VPN services at some point. India consistently ranks among the top three countries worldwide in VPN app downloads. In absolute terms, this means hundreds of millions of users are already familiar with bypassing geographic restrictions.
Brazil presents another major example. With over 165 million internet users, approximately 35% report having used a VPN, according to GlobalWebIndex. VPN adoption has accelerated amid regulatory discussions around online betting controls. Brazil is now one of the world’s fastest-growing digital betting markets, and VPN usage is increasingly common among younger demographics.
What does this mean in practical terms?
A VPN allows users to route their connection through servers located in another country. From the perspective of a local internet provider, the traffic is not heading to a blocked casino but to an external server. From there, access continues uninterrupted. Blocking measures effectively reduce casual traffic but are not an impenetrable barrier for users who can install a VPN in minutes.
This does not render regulation useless. Website blocking raises operational costs for unlicensed operators, reduces uninformed access, and signals regulatory enforcement. However, it does not constitute a full digital blackout.
That is why some jurisdictions, including regulated U.S. states such as New Jersey and Michigan, combine technical blocking with financial traceability, payment monitoring, and cooperation with processors. The objective is not only to restrict access but to disrupt monetization.
The internet was designed to be resilient. Domains can be replaced within minutes. Mirror sites can be activated within hours. Mobile redistribution channels can scale within days. The regulatory challenge is not purely technological—it is structural and economic.
In massive digital markets like India and Brazil, where millions already understand geolocation circumvention tools, the core question is no longer whether a website can be blocked. The real question is how to design an effective regulatory framework in a borderless digital environment.
The tension between technology and regulation is not disappearing. It is redefining the future of global online gambling.
