Skip Navigation

How could digitial age verification be possibly implemented with privacy in mind?

Many might've seen the Australian ban of social media for <16 y.o with no idea of how to implement it. There have been mentions of "double blind age verification", but I can't find any information on it.

Out of curiosity, how would you implement this with privacy in mind if you really had to?

83 comments
  • Frankly, the only sane option is an "Are you over the age of (whatever is necessary) and willing to view potentially disturbing adult content?" style confirmation.

    Anything else is going to become problematic/abusive sooner or later.

  • It can't. It requires invasion of privacy to verify information about the individual they don't have the right to access.

    Digital age verification goes against privacy. Let's not delude ourselves into thinking it can.

  • Who has age authority? A state agency or service. Like the state issues an ID with age.

    Preferable, we want the user to interact with a website, that website request age authentication, but not the website to talk to the government, but through the user.

    Thus, something/somewhat like

    1. State agency issues a certificate to the user
    2. User assigns a password to encrypt the user certificate
    3. User connects to random website A
    4. Random website A creates an age verification request signed to only be resolveable by state agency but sends it to the user
    5. User sends the request to a state service with their user certificate for authentication
    6. State agency confirms-signs the response
    7. User passes the responds along to the random website A

    There may be alternative, simpler, or less verbose/complicated alternatives. But I'm sure it would be possible, and I think it lays out how "double-blind"(?) could work.

    The random website A does not know the identity or age of the user - only to the degree they requested to verify - and the state agency knows only of a request, not its origin or application - to the degree the request and user pass-along includes.

  • I'd lean on the ISPs. Your ISP knows what sites you visit, and they have your location and payment information. They can just insert some verification page when a classified IP is contacted. This gives them hardly any information beyond what they already have. And since they are mainly located in Australia, it is easy to enforce laws on them.

    You have to lean on ISPs anyway because it is quite ridiculous to assume that the entire global internet will implement Australian laws. Does anyone believe that their Lemmy instance will implement some AI face scan or cryptography scheme?

    You would have to block servers that do not comply with the law anyway. The effective solution would be a whitelist of services that have been vetted. In practice, I think we'll see the digital equivalent of ok boomer.

    If a whitelist seems extreme, then one should have another look at the problem. The point is to make sure that information is only accessed by citizens with official authorization. There is no technological difference between the infrastructure needed to enforce this (or copyrights) and some totalitarian hellscape.

    • This gives them hardly any information beyond what they already have.

      Except now they know the individuals using your Internet.

      Sure if you live alone they already can easily put that information together. However if you have a partner, a relative and children all living in one house they now know who is in that home.

      Plus maybe no one in the house uses Twitter and Aunt Alice the Twitter user came to visit, does she need to reverify? Your ISP knows that now.

      ISPs would be gaining a lot of new information.

      • It's not necessary to expose the identities of the users. The age confirmation could happen via a password, PIN, or even a physical USB dongle. Tying such methods to a particular identity adds nothing to the age verification.

        If that is not enough, then one would need a permanent, live webcam feed of the user. It could be monitored by AI, and/or police officers could make random checks.

        Granted, one would have to make sure that not everyone behind the same router can use age-restricted services; eg with a VPN. That would let them assign connections to individual, anonymous adults. But I'd guess you could do that anyway with some confidence by analyzing usage patterns. Besides, information on who is in a home can also be found in other places such as social media or maybe company websites. So I do not think this is much new information.

        But thinking about it, one could compartmentalize this.

        The ISP only allows connections to whitelisted servers, including 1 or more government approved VPNs. The ISP refuses connection to these VPNs without age confirmation. The VPN provider does not need to be told the identity of the customer. There needs to be no persistence across sessions. The ISP need not know what sites are visited via VPN. While the VPN provider need not know about sites visited without.

        If you do it that way, the ISP ends up knowing less than before.

        Since both ISP and VPN servers and offices would be physically located in the country, one would have no problem enforcing prohibitions on data sharing, if desired by lawmakers.

        Anyway, this is the only realistic approach in the whole thread. Everything else assumes that Australian law will be followed globally. And then the ISP still has all that usage data. Why not just use a blockchain...

83 comments