this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2025
53 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

5676 readers
1007 users here now

News and information from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to any of the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
 

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child clearly expresses that minors have rights to freedom of expression and access to information online, as well as the right to privacy.

These rights would be steamrolled by age verification requirements.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Ooops@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Just imagine your passport just has a separate set of information saved "This person is legally an adult" signed of by the government issueing them. No transfer of any other data neccessary. You don't need to know their name, their age or anything else. And you don't need some database to be queried. You just get the certified "I have the proper age to access this"-card build into their regular papers.

[โ€“] kbal@fedia.io 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah it's really not that simple. If you give someone a unique signed token that just says "whoever has this is over the age of 35" then that token becomes your unique id number that every website you share it with can use to track you. If you create a whole bunch of temporarily valid tokens for old-enough citizens any time they want some, so far you have no way top stop those getting into the hands of teenagers who want to use them to sneak into feddit.

[โ€“] Ooops@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Which is the reason I talked about the passport. It doesn't have to be unique, just a flag cryptographically signed by the issueing government.

Yes, I can still give away my passport then so that someone can get into adult stuff on the internet... or I can open it for them. So that's not exactly the use case I'm that actually about.

But that's all missing the point. There is simply no interest in developing a proper system. Just like terrorism, or child-pornography, age verification is just another pretense to establish surveilance, weaken privacy rights and monetize us by outsourcing everything to private companies (purely concidently usually connected to AI and very interested in all data they can get theri greedy little hands on). We can discuss the technical issues for years, but the people actually planning that stuff won't care because that's not the actual agenda.

[โ€“] kbal@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Uh... if "it doesn't have to be unique" then you may as well just have a password โ€” everyone who knows that the password is "swordfish" is allowed into the adults-only club. There are things stopping people selling their actual paper-based passports en masse or just making photocopies. If you have an easily-replaceable digital token with no biometric info and it's not tied to your identity in any way, there are no such constraints.

[โ€“] Ooops@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I was obviously not talking about random paper-based passports but the one ID that is already standard and required for every citizen. And that one -if you decide to give it away- is tied to you, has your identity and is not easily replaced. But requiring to submit all that information on a low level internet verification process is unneccessary, when just "yes, I have that card proving I have the proper age!" is perfectly functional for that purpose.

There is no one-size-fits all solution for security. But for basic stuff like acccess to online stuff an anonymous solution based on your ID is perfectly workable. Nobody is preventing additional biometric checks for more important stuff, it's the general things in day-to-day life we need to primarily protect from data kraken trying to profile us to make money.

[โ€“] kbal@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm still curious as to what it is that you have in mind. "Yes I have that card" will be communicated to random web services by the user presenting to them some kind of signed digital token I imagine, as is usual, and that token itself, or the user-held secret used in generating it, is what can then be sold, transferred, or used to track the user unless you have some way to prevent that. If you've given any hint of how you think it can be done, I didn't get it.

One thing people sometimes think of is having the user be authenticated with a government (or other authority) server in real time whenever they want to prove their age to some stranger โ€” but the system I saw which worked like that was obviously a pretty big violation of privacy so I assumed it wasn't the sort of thing you meant. If that's the idea, how would you prevent the central authority from keeping a record of when and where your "passport" was used?

[โ€“] Ooops@feddit.org 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

We seem to talk about vastly different things or from complete different technical perspectives here, so I will take a few steps back and simplify it:

I, the government, issue your ID (with all the usual stuff making if forgery-proof). On the front is all your personal info, on the back a big marker that you are a legal adult.

If you want to buy something age-limited you just show the backside of your ID. I as the government have all your data but don't know where you use your ID, the guy checking your ID has no data because he can trust me that I checked your age and provided a forgery-proof ID personally for you.

That's it. That's the whole (simplified) process. And you can reacreate exactly this concept digitally with basic cryptographic methods for online use.

So were is the problem with such a model? (Yes, I know that this is NOT what they are planning. But that's the whole point. It is possible, the governments are just not interested because they actually don't want to protect oyur privacy and outsourcing other methods to private companies -that do it cheaply because they want your data- is more profitable.)

[โ€“] kbal@fedia.io 1 points 20 hours ago

The main reason we can show our physical government-issued ID card to someone in a shop in relative safety is that it's a human looking at it with their eyes, which do not have the ability to record and permanently store in machine-readable form all the information on it (such as a photo) that would identify their customer. (Of course when they hook up face recognition systems to their surveillance cameras we have other privacy problems, but that's another story.)

The same thing cannot so easily be done across the Internet. Something like it may be possible in theory, with some caveats, although it's hard to tell for sure until we see an actual design document for such a system that is complete to the point where we could examine the details and see if it might really work in practice. Nobody seems to have got that far as of yet. All the actual proposals that I've seen sacrifice privacy for convenience of implementation because doing otherwise would be very complicated and difficult.