Émilio GonzalezFeb 23

Something that icks me regarding the online #ageverification discourse that we see today is that everyone seems to assume that giving privacy-intrusive or PII datais the only way to have age verification online. However, we already know how to make age verification where:

  • The government doesn't know on which sites you register or give access to third parties to PII
  • The website to which you register doesn't need to interact with the government or any third party
  • The website doesn't know your age, just that you're over 18
  • No third party is required

    • The two things you need is a digital ID system and zero-knowledge proofs. That's it

    Show threadKevin Karhan 

    @res260 no, and no again!

    Not to mention any "Age Verification" REQUIRES breaking anonymity if it wants to be at least more effective than a Paywall…

    🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄) (@[email protected])

    @[email protected] """ Persona’s exposed code compares your selfie to watchlist photos using facial recognition, screens you against 14 categories of adverse media from mentions of terrorism to espionage, and tags reports with codenames from active intelligence programs consisting of public-private partnerships to combat online child exploitative material, cannabis trafficking, fentanyl trafficking, romance fraud, money laundering, and illegal wildlife trade. Once a user verifies their identity with Persona, the software performs 269 distinct verification checks and scours the internet and government sources for potential matches... """ So to keep kids safe from online predators, we're willing to *horribly* invade their privacy and sell all their data to predators? I see the system is working as intended 😮‍💨

    LGBTQIA.Space
    Feb 23 at 2:42amWeb
    Show threadÉmilio GonzalezFeb 23
    @kkarhan It kind of looks like you did not read my post at all. Except the first point, your other points are simply false. I'll gladly engage more if you're interested, but please read and understand the original post before replying at least
    Show threadÉmilio GonzalezFeb 23

    @kkarhan the bullet point and the link to another toot confused me, what I meant to say was that you can be against age verification for moral reason, I understand that and actually support most of this way of thinking. However, it is dishonest to pretend that the only way to do age verification is whatever we have right now. I am against that because of the abuse risk that are very well documented, as you pointed out.

    But there is a way to do age verification without having these PIIs being thrown around and all this tracking. This is a fact and a lot of people are either not aware of it or are ignoring it on purpose

    Show threadKevin Karhan Feb 23

    @res260 Well, I do provide sources and context.

    If that's too hard to follow, maybe consider shutting up and stop spouting #TechFetishist|ic BS!

    https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/116119496354754877

    Kevin Karhan :verified: (@[email protected])

    @[email protected] @[email protected] it's not a hardline, but a basic and fundamental #HumanRight to access information. - If you can't be assed to understand that *"#AgeVerification"* will be used to commit #QueerGenocide and #Censorship, then you are either in complete denial of history or [criminally naive](https://lgbtqia.space/@alice/116111471700029651) when it comes to the #Cyberfascism that is being [introduced here.](https://mastodon.online/@mullvadnet/116087059413472819) - I wish to be wrong, but the fact is that I am not! So yes, demanding any form of #ID is [irreedeemable](https://todon.nl/@PensioNien/116113124361551837) #fascist shite, no matter the pretense! - Anything else is normalizing the #CorrosionStrategy on #HumanRights & #CivilRights!

    Infosec.Space
    Show threadPAIGE! 🍁Feb 23
    @res260 @kkarhan you meet some real hardliners out in the fediverse wilds.
    Asking for ID is a war crime!
    Show threadKevin Karhan Feb 23

    @paige @res260 it's not a hardline, but a basic and fundamental #HumanRight to access information.

    So yes, demanding any form of #ID is irreedeemable #fascist shite, no matter the pretense!

    🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄) (@[email protected])

    @[email protected] """ Persona’s exposed code compares your selfie to watchlist photos using facial recognition, screens you against 14 categories of adverse media from mentions of terrorism to espionage, and tags reports with codenames from active intelligence programs consisting of public-private partnerships to combat online child exploitative material, cannabis trafficking, fentanyl trafficking, romance fraud, money laundering, and illegal wildlife trade. Once a user verifies their identity with Persona, the software performs 269 distinct verification checks and scours the internet and government sources for potential matches... """ So to keep kids safe from online predators, we're willing to *horribly* invade their privacy and sell all their data to predators? I see the system is working as intended 😮‍💨

    LGBTQIA.Space
    Show threadschuelermineFeb 23
    @kkarhan @paige @res260 while I agree that further ID requirements are still worrying and age verification in general is worrying even if it was all privacy-preserving, that's not the point you made in the previous post, which didn't effectively argue against anything. The thing being discussed here is that privacy-preserving age verification is possible. Your point is that even that is problematic, which you didn't state clearly.
    Show threadKevin Karhan Feb 23

    @anselmschueler @paige @res260 no, it is inherently not!

    • And if you don't believe me, look at how a 13yr old can circumvent it.
    Show threadschuelermineFeb 23

    @kkarhan @paige @res260

    Why do you consider a ZKP-based age verification process to not be privacy-preserving?
    That process works like this:
    The government already has files on citizens, including their age. The government can issue certificates of age, for example stored online encrypted with a key in the person's ID card. Then, to access a restricted service, the user performs a ZKP that proves they are in possession of a certificate that has sufficient age.
    I'm not well-versed in the technical details of ZKPs, so I believe there would be many details to work out, but this is in principle not absurd.
    A much simpler solution would be to contact a government server to issue a certificate on-demand. That would, however, potentially reveal your actions to the government.
    In any case, these certificates can be made such that the identity of the verified person isn't revealed to the platform, and potentially not even their exact age (but only the fact that it is >X years).

    Show threadKevin Karhan Feb 23

    @anselmschueler @paige @res260 Don't 'splain on me, #TechBro!

    "#KYC" and any"#AgeVerification" IS the illicit activity!

    All you'll achieve with some #TechnoFetishist solution is #paywalling access!

    Show threadschuelermineFeb 23
    @kkarhan @paige @res260 Right, but that's what I said—even with privacy-preserving age verification, it's still not good. But that's not what YOU said originally, you only made that point later. I think I agree with you, but I think that you didn't express yourself very clearly.
    Show threadPAIGE! 🍁Feb 23
    @anselmschueler @kkarhan @res260 this is a fun way to start the week!
    Here's what I'd propose, we all just mute whoever we think is being a dick, and if in 30 days we decide that this is a good way to spend our time we can get back into arguing if wanting some sort of standard mechanism to check who someone is online makes you a genocidal fascist.
    Show threadÉmilio GonzalezFeb 23
    @paige Next time I'll be more careful about which hashtags I use 😂 I just blocked