Age Verification isn't a technical problem to solve. If you think that, you're missing the point.

It's a social problem used by authoritarian governments as an excuse for population control and censorship.

It's a fundamental attack on free speech and democracy.

It must not be accommodated.
It must be stopped.

#MassSurveillance #AgeVerification #Privacy #Democracy #HumanRights

@Em0nM4stodon What do you think of age verification in bars before they give you the alcohol? Or age verification before they let you in a sex convention. /gen
@Azarilh Showing ID in person to another human is very different. It doesn't require to collect and keep a copy of it digitally, and therefore is an entirely different situation that isn't even comparable. It also doesn't gatekeep portals of information in the same way that digital age verification on the internet does.
@Em0nM4stodon What about an open source solution that doesn't collect anything, and it simply tells the website "yes" or "no"?
@Azarilh There would still be a need for this open-source app to collect "something" in order to answer this question. When I say it's not possible, I do not say this lightly. I have been researching this issue for a very long time.

@Azarilh I do not have the time to review and speak about this specific product sadly. But in general, even if the token handed to the application requesting it is fully anonymized, the application collecting the initial data is still a potential attack vector and point of failure.

If it's proprietary, then it entirely relies on blind trust. If it's open source, then it must be fully audited regularly and built and reviewed with independent experts. But even if it was perfectly secure and private, the piece of ID showing the age must be uploaded somehow. Is the whole system secure? Where is this data stored? Does it get fully purged after or is the "deleted" information only flagged as deleted but kept in a database somewhere?

If all identifiable information is fully deleted, then what shows this token is reliably only used by an adult and not shared with a child? Where is this token stored? Can it be sold to others online? People have already done that with the supposedly secure and supposedly private World App. If identifiable information is kept to prevent this, then all the other problems mentioned above remain.

And regardless of all of this, having to upload an official ID, even in the imaginary scenario where we would magically have a perfectly privacy-preserving technology, gatekeeps the use of devices and access to information and communication from many people who, for various reasons, cannot have this official ID. It closes down the internet. We should never agree to that, let alone contribute to facilitating it. More information here: https://www.eff.org/issues/age-verification

Age Verification and Age Gating: Resource Hub

Age verification (or age-gating) laws generally require online services to check, estimate, or verify all users’ ages—often through invasive tools like ID checks, biometric scans, or other dubious “age estimation” methods—before granting them access to certain online content or services.  Governments in the U.S. and around the world are increasingly adopting these restrictive measures in the name of protecting children online. But in practice, these systems create dangerous new forms of surveillance, censorship, and exclusion.  Technologically, the age verification process can take many forms: collection and analysis of government ID, biometric scans, algorithmic or AI-based behavioral or user monitoring, digital ID, the list goes on. But no matter the method, every system demands users hand over sensitive and immutable personal information that links their offline identity to their online activity. Once that valuable data is collected, it can easily be leaked, hacked, or misused. (Indeed, we’ve already seen several breaches of age verification providers.) EFF has long warned against age-gating the internet. Age verification technology itself is often inaccurate and privacy-invasive. These restrictive mandates strike at the foundation of the free and open internet. They are tools of censorship, used to block people from viewing or sharing information that the government deems “harmful” or “offensive.” And they create surveillance systems that critically undermine online privacy, chill access to vital online communities and resources, and burden the expressive rights of adults and young people alike. EFF.org/Age: A Resource to Empower Users Age-gating mandates are reshaping the internet in ways that are invasive, dangerous, and deeply unnecessary. But users are not powerless! We can challenge these laws, protect our digital rights, and build a safer digital world for all internet users, no matter their ages. This resource hub is here to help—so explore, share, and join us in the fight for a better internet.

Electronic Frontier Foundation
@Em0nM4stodon So your point is that "no system is safe"? I would agree with that, but vaccines are not 100% safe either yet we should still take them. The importance is to make it as safe as possible, and it has to be safe enough. Everything is corruptable, with physical ID too ( they could be taking photos for all i know ).

@Em0nM4stodon

And i guess this would be a good reason to not over-implement it for things we don't need it. It should not be used for social media, it's so unnecessary i think.

@Azarilh No, this isn't like vaccines at all. Vaccines do not facilitate mass surveillance.
@Em0nM4stodon True, they don't facilitate surveillence, but someone can get a very bad reaction from it. What i meant is that it's impossible to make anything 100% safe.

@Em0nM4stodon I know i keep trying to find a good side, while at the same time i disagree with age checks for most things. I am just trying to provoke thoughts about any side i care about.

I am all for privacy and a free Internet. I don't think age checks are the solution for social media, especially with the current methods. The EU eID would improve it but i would still rather have none at all in this context. Social media should be regulated, not age gated.