> government passes law that requires companies to age verify users
> said government provides no way to actually verify a human's age
> hilarity ensuesIn the old days the put the porno mags on the top shelf so kids couldn't read them. That was hackable too but it didn't matter much.
If I've understood it correctly, Pornhub can't see anything except that you've turned 18 (no names, no date of births, nothing) and your local government can't see that you've signed up for Pornhub using the app.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/04/age-verification-europ...
Having to use passports or poor solutions like face scanning isn't good enough. I guess the reason they don't do this is because they fear the cost, anything governments price up these days seems to be in the billion range. So the politicians who don't understand how cheap it is to build software assume it's way out of their price range.
It is literally illegal to slap a few lines of glue code and say “there’s your age verification, look how cheap it is.” The public would be happy about saving money right up until there’s a massive privacy breach and all the ways you cut corners are exposed.
I don’t know if leaving the standards unspecified is the right thing to do (it’s probably not), but don’t pretend like a government verified solution could ever be cheap when dealing with citizens’ identities.
Then a small team of highly skilled engineers from Google/Facebook etc were brought in to fix it. They stabilized and relaunched the system in weeks at a fraction of the original cost. It showed that the problem wasn't the complexity or the standards, it was how the project was managed and who was building it.
The idea that a small group of people can't produce something that can scale to millions of people is just false.
It also wouldn't just be cheaper; it would be better. The "government" way of doing things would be far more likely to be broken glue code with privacy issues because all those committee meetings and bottom of the barrel contractor selection don't produce better end results
* You create your account as part of your license renewal and have a normal-ass login. As part of that your account is manually marked as being 18+ (or just your age) by the person behind the counter.
* The government publishes a few public certs which will be used to verify.
* Then you go to your account page and click the button to generate a certificate signed by one of the government's private keys. The cert is valid for say 7 days.
* You upload the cert to the website you want to access and the website validates it.
Done. You make it illegal to provide your tokens to minors like it's illegal to provide booze to minors. Good enough for government work. It's literally just an EV cert.
The problem gets a lot easier when you have a country wide IRL ID system already in place and can write laws.
The US refuses to do this, so we get a mess. Every state has different drivers license, Social Security numbers aren’t secure at this point, most people don’t have passports.
But if there was a true national ID, the government could provide APIs to verify those. Then these kind of things would be easy for the apps/sites.
All of that obviously ignores the problems in privacy from doing any of this in the first place, etc. i’m starting to think I’m on the side of our national ID given how much of a mess everything is with our current patchwork. But I certainly wouldn’t want to be giving it over to random sites.
We have sort of accidentally set up a system in which verifying someone’s age is a really really hard problem. If a credit card number or trying to use a photograph are the best tools we have it’s clear this doesn’t work.
It mostly works.
There’s also a system called mDL that allows you to obtain a digitally signed mobile driver’s license that can be used in your smartphone. This is only supported by a few states for now but it’s not hard to imagine this expanding to many more states in the near future, especially now that both Apple and Google are starting to support it. TL;DR we may not have a national ID, but it sure seems like pretty soon we’ll have an effective “national ID” that does most of the same stuff.
Not saying it’s good or bad. Just that it’s intentional.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BankID
Need to buy "toys", vape products, alcohol... anything adult online?
There's a 3rd party web app (you rightfully don't trust) as an age check in the shopping cart / user account of any of these adult shops, and this has multiple ways of verifying your age - and one of them is the bank's api, you pick it, your bank's identity sharing page loads, you log in, it shows exactly what information will be shared in a bullet point list, you tap OK, immediately a request like "this app wants to know your age, please verify" pops up in your smart banking app on your phone, you tap ok, fingerprint scan, DONE.
Problem solved. The 3rd party app knows just what it needs to. All of this takes maybe a minute and your personal info is perfectly safe (unless you don't trust your bank at which point you have bigger problems to worry about...)
Two of the well-used solutions to identity in the U.S. are login.gov (government-managed) and id.me (private, but used by government). Basically to get setup, at some point you have to have physical presence to get an actual government-approved physical ID, which can still be a barrier to some, but it doesn’t require a bank account.
Just don’t implement your own like Discourse and Tea.app.
There is no centralized ID number, the closest is your social security number but this is basically only outbound for PAYE tax and haphazardly correlated to your pension payments in late life.
Everything operates on a “trust system” where you often present paper (!) with whatever address you claim to be living at as proof you are real (e.g. opening bank accounts).
Passport loss is rectified by seeking out “professionals” with government-approved occupations that are not related to you that can vouch you are actually the person you are trying to replace a passport for.
The entire thing is a mess and living in digital-identity-native Europe is a dream come true that you should be extremely thankful for.
Everyone that have worked on passwordless authentication is ultimately responsible for this death of internet anonymity.
For example, our id's have a qr on it that contains some basic info. Why not provide a platform for age checks with that qr? Anyway, fuck them. Education goes a lot further than trying to force identity verification on private companies when there is no real life threat in play.
Here’s Google’s doc:
https://developers.google.com/wallet/identity/verify/accepti...
Looks like it will support zero knowledge proofs?
I, for example, couldn’t add my driver’s license even if I wanted to.
And sometimes kids will put fake ID's on their phones, or borrow a phone, but that's not your problem.
Not that different from "Drink a verification can to continue". Hilariously dystopian.
I hope they just improve that performance, rather than see this and back out of it entirely and require ID checks.
And that's why it's been bypassed already
On the other note, can one attach chrome devtools to any electron application?
Pretty sure it's just a flag somewhere to re-enable.
Not the broken anti-competitive Google play store integrity (which is passing for any handset not patched for the last 8 years but with Google buttplug in it, effectively nullifying assurances from the attestation), but a proper hw attestation.
We want a broken and easily bypassable system that only exists to make do-gooders think they did good.
Some of the age verification systems that use digital ids (mDLs) do the same thing but people freak out about how they work because I think they misunderstand the tech.
They system basically asks the mDL via an api call "is this user above the age of 18/21" and the app only responds with a yes or no. It doesn't pass the users fulls details over or anything like that.
As in, if I repeatedly ask for age verification to the same service, does it know:
1) the identity of the user making the request, and 2) whether repeated requests comes from the same user (even if they don't know who it is?)
The age verification bills in the US at least also make it illegal to record that information, sometimes with high penalties (e.g. my reading of Texas's is that it is up to $10k per retained record).
The vendor is https://www.k-id.com in Discord's case
Personally, I will never use Discord and they just gave me another reason not to.
Either way, when I see a person or business advertise a Discord link, I immediately think of either as immature.
I miss the days of forums, and wish something like them could thrive again instead of rather private, but importantly ephemeral chats.
Open source projects have long had ephemeral chats, private to the people in the chat at that moment - it just used to be called IRC.
It has become all too common for a project to offer only Discord, which not only makes all community-collected information more or less ephemeral, but also locks it away behind some corporation's ever-changing terms and conditions, some of which are onerous.
GP's complaint is not that ephemeral chats exist, but rather that there is often nothing else.
This Epic, which famously had to pay half of billion USD settlement when they got caught for law breaking (collecting personal data without consent. Clearly against the law, because they knew they're collecting details of children) : https://www.exterro.com/resources/blog/data-privacy-alert-ft...
Did you never wonder why VPN ads don't really list any actual use cases, yet they're wildly popular? If you know what you need it for, the ad doesn't have to tell you - just has to tell you which company to give your money to.
(I still don't really know what people are actually using VPNs for.)
> Concerned parents, it said, should block or control VPN usage.
Hilarious. I wonder if they realised...
Ridiculous.
And yeah, absurd.
(iOS Safari)
Okay turning off content blockers did the trick. AdGuard was blocking the whole site for some reason.
A law must mandate that an "adult" version of OS (or device) may be sold only to adult users. It is not difficult for Microsoft/Apple to implement this yet they do not want to for some reason.
This would allow more reliable age verification, without revealing identity of account owners. Well, maybe the govt wants exactly the opposite.
The Industrie enforces new rules and suddenly it costs $150000 and has awkward requirements to get your OS certified adult.
For the years to come only the most recent windows versions and customer devices like phones will work. No Linux will pay to get a standard they haven't asked for. Embed devices will stop working as more and more stuff gets simply flagged "adult only"
Just don't ... :)
Edit:// see Silverlight, or why it took years until something like Netflix was even legally technically possible
> This bill would require, among other things related to age verification on the internet, a covered manufacturer to provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an account holder, as defined, to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device for the sole purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s age bracket to applications available in a covered application store and to provide a developer, as defined, who has requested a signal with respect to a particular user with a digital signal via a real-time application programming interface regarding whether a user is in any of several age brackets, as prescribed. The bill would define “covered manufacturer” to mean a person who is a manufacturer of a device, an operating system for a device, or a covered application store. The bill would require a developer to request a signal with respect to a particular user from a covered manufacturer when that user requests to download an application.
> This bill would punish noncompliance with a civil penalty to be enforced by the Attorney General, as prescribed.
[0] https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1043/2025 [1] https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1043/id/3134744
If you want to know more about this lovely bait-and-switch tactic used by the Golden State's legislature, see here: https://californiaglobe.com/uncategorized/gut-and-amend-bill...
I don’t understand why other countries can’t do the same.
First, a vocal minority of security freaks lead by Tony Blair who think that forcing everybody to carry ID cards around is a proportionate way to protect Britain from terrorists, illegal immigrants and other foes.
Second, a large proportion of the country who think that the introduction of optional ID cards is a slippery slope towards the first group getting what they want.
Third, another large proportion of people who think that the risk of the first group getting what they want is overblown, or else think that the convenience of being able to prove identity more easily outweighs the inconvenience of having to carry an ID card around everywhere.
In the great ID card battle of the late-00s, the second group won decisively and politicians have been too scared to take up the issue ever since. Except for Blair, but having the face of your political campaign be a war criminal is of negative value to that cause.
It's compulsory now so it's doable. Especially since voter registers are available to certain companies* regardless of the voters' consent.
*eg political parties, credit bureaus.
How about we don't make lists of people visiting porn sites? How about we accept that children are part of society and not try to put them in little cages like songbirds?
It's the correct idea but the way it should be done is by coming to a democratic consensus that helicopter parenting is bad, not by attempting to hobble the infrastructure of government. If only for the practical reason that it'll simply be outsourced and privatized. In US states where the police can't scan license plates, there's a private industry doing that and then selling the data back to the police. The same result but now you pay a premium.
Lee Kuan Yew was fond of making this point. Weak "horizontal" administrations will creep in ways that are more opaque and without checks than strong "vertical" ones.
But whatever age-verification solution I have seen so far sucked, really badly. And I can't believe people promote something like a government based age check. People need their privacy.
So voter ID laws would make them lose every election. But of course, that's not permanent either.