←back to thread

351 points iamnothere | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.337s | 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
pksebben ◴[] No.46236900[source]
This keeps coming up and we keep having the same debates about what Age Verification isn't.

For the folks in the back row:

Age Verification isn't about Kids or Censorship, It's about Surveillance

Age Verification isn't about Kids or Censorship, It's about Surveillance

Age Verification isn't about Kids or Censorship, It's about Surveillance

Without even reaching for my tinfoil hat, the strategy at work here is clear [0 1 2]. If we have to know that you're not a minor, then we also have to know who you are so we can make any techniques to obfuscate that illegal. By turning this from "keep an eye on your kids" to "prove you're not a kid" they've created the conditions to make privacy itself illegal.

VPNs are next. Then PGP. Then anything else that makes it hard for them to know who you are, what you say, and who you say it to.

Please, please don't fall into the trap and start discussing whether or not this is going to be effective to protect kids. It isn't, and that isn't the point.

0 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/lawmakers-want-ban-vpn...

1 https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/vpn-usage...

2 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-09-15/debates/57714...

replies(14): >>46236954 #>>46237349 #>>46237480 #>>46238016 #>>46238148 #>>46238925 #>>46240138 #>>46240141 #>>46240546 #>>46240662 #>>46240975 #>>46241941 #>>46242412 #>>46243136 #
knallfrosch ◴[] No.46237349[source]
> If we have to know that you're not a minor, then we also have to know who you are

That is untrue

replies(1): >>46237429 #
phyzome ◴[] No.46237429[source]
Are you aware of any age verification systems that do not have this property?

(This includes being robust against law enforcement action, legal or otherwise.)

replies(7): >>46237529 #>>46237535 #>>46237741 #>>46237759 #>>46237958 #>>46239717 #>>46240178 #
pksebben ◴[] No.46237535[source]
Like many mention in other comments on this post, it's possible to implement using ZKPs. There are likely other methods that would be effective without compromising privacy. None of them are part of the Age Verification discussion because kids are not the actual point of Age Verification.

When I say "if we have to know you're not a kid, we have to know who you are" I'm not stating an actual truth, but the argument as it is playing out politically.

replies(7): >>46237671 #>>46237758 #>>46238433 #>>46239088 #>>46240107 #>>46241986 #>>46242597 #
miki123211 ◴[] No.46241986[source]
The simplest possible such method? Single-use age verification codes, generated and validated by the government, sold on physical scratch cards with in-store verification of ID, piggybacking on the infrastructure we already use for selling alcohol and cigarettes.

This would be far easier to implement for websites too. You'd just have a single, unauthenticated API endpoint which, given a code, tells you if the code is valid (and marks it as used). Integrating with such an API is about 1 day of work for a competent dev. Even open, non-profit platforms like Mastodon could easily implement such a mechanism.

Scratch cards wouldn't have to be the only way of getting such codes. THe vast majority of people could just generate them in their banking app or whatever (which would still be far more privacy friendly than the current ID verification mechanisms).

replies(1): >>46242958 #
1. ◴[] No.46242958[source]