←back to thread

351 points iamnothere | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.391s | source

Also: We built a resource hub to fight back against age verification https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/12/age-verification-comin...
Show context
throwaway198846 ◴[] No.46236617[source]
Why they don't use zero knowledge proof? Also question for the USA constitution experts, is this considered a violation of free speech? The article is not clear on this.
replies(8): >>46236634 #>>46236671 #>>46236673 #>>46236726 #>>46236763 #>>46236810 #>>46236875 #>>46237112 #
rockskon ◴[] No.46236810[source]
Zero knowledge proof is either trivially defeated by re-using the same credentials or doesn't have useful privacy guarantees. There really isn't an in-between here for something like age verification.
replies(3): >>46237042 #>>46237071 #>>46237309 #
1. nostrademons ◴[] No.46237042[source]
Age verification in general is not intended to defend against people lying or using stolen credentials. If you’re 13 but know the password to your dead grandpa’s account and the website in question has no idea he’s dead, there’s no way to defend against that, with or without a ZKP.

What the ZKP does is let you limit the information the site collects to the fact that you are under 18, and nothing else. It’s an application of the principle of least privilege. It lets you give the website that one fact without revealing your name, birthdate, address, browsing history, and all your other private data.

replies(1): >>46238530 #
2. rockskon ◴[] No.46238530[source]
What prevents one kid in a friend group or in a school from sharing the same identifier?

After all - if it doesn't share anything other than a guarantee of the "age" of someone who is authenticating with the website then how would the website know there's re-use of identifiers?