Comment by jsheard

13 days ago

They already support ID checks as an alternative to face scanning, if the latter proves to be untenable then it's literally a case of flipping a switch to mandate ID instead.

The long term solution would have to be some kind of integration with a government platform where the platform doesn’t see your ID and the government doesn’t see what you are signing up for.

I don’t this will happen in the US but I can see it in more privacy responding countries.

Apple and Google may also add some kind of “child flag” parents can enable which tells websites and apps this user is a child and all age checks should immediately fail.

  • I do like the idea of the “this is a child” taint (ok, terrible name but I really think it should be a near-unremovable thing on a platform like Apple’s that’s so locked down/crypto signed etc).

    Like, you’d enroll it by adding a DOB and the computer/phone/etc would just intentionally fail all compatible age checks until that date is 18 years in the past. To remove it (e.g. reuse a device for a non-child), an adult would need to show ID in person at Apple.

    Government IDs could be used to do completely privacy preserving, basically OpenID Connect but with no identifying property, just an “isEighteenOrMore” property. However, i agree it’ll never happen in the US because “regular” people still don’t know how identity providers can attest without identifying, and thus would never agree to use their government ID to sign into a pornsite. And on top of all that yeah nobody trusts the government, basically in either party, so they’d be convinced the government was secretly keeping a record of which porn sites they use. Which to be fair is not entirely unlikely. Heck, they’d probably even do it by incompetence via logs or something and then have people get blackmailed!

    • When I played an MMOG, if the admins found out that a child was underage, it was customary for them to suspend their account until their 13th birthday. I thought this was a clever policy, but I just can't understand the reverse of authenticating someone's age based on that of their account...

      7 replies →

    • Exactly, that's the problem: with OIDC the ID provider gets to know which sites you visit. That is unavoidable given how the protocol works. And you don't want to give all that information to the government in the first place.

  • > where the platform doesn’t see your ID

    ID checks aren't very worthwhile if anyone can use any ID with no consequences.

    How long would it take for someone's 18 year old brother to realize they can charge everyone $10 to "verify" everyone's accounts with their ID, because it doesn't matter whose ID is used?

    • Ok, at which point an adult has taken responsibility for giving them access.

      The older brother could also rent an R (or x) rated movie, buy cigarettes, lighters, dry ice, and give them to the kids. The point of the age check is to prevent kids from getting access without an adult in the loop, not to prevent an adult from providing kids access

      2 replies →

  • this is already how the EU infrastructure for digital ID works, basically. Using public/private keys on your national id, the government functions as a root authority that you (and other trusted verifiers downstream) can identify you with and commercial platforms only get a yes/no when you want to identify yourself but have no access to any data.

    South Korea also has had various versions of this even going back to ~2004 I think.

    • Yes, it has been possible for a long time to provide anonymous attestations. But somehow, they also always seem to require that you have something like Google play services running for you to ask for the attestation in the first place. And with PKI, even though they could do with just the public key, they somehow also always insist on generating the keys for you (so they have the private key as well).

    • Do all EU countries have that? I know our (German) ID works that way, using the FOSS AusweisApp, but I hadn’t heard of it being EU-wide (it should be, though).

      3 replies →

    • It's nice that the platforms don't get access to data, but does the government gets information about who is trying to access what?

  • I see this currently being pushed by some politicians in the EU. And I have a slight suspicion that some of these politicians are literally lobbyists.

    The "oh my god, think of the children" is similar to "oh my god, think of the terrorists". I am not saying all of this is propaganda 1:1 or a lie, but a lot of it is and it is used as a rhetoric tool of influence by many politicians. Both seems to connect to many people who do not really think about who influences them.

ID is much easier to forge, it's just a flat 2-d shape. None of the physical security features come through in images.

  • In functioning states, the ID contains a chip with a private key that can be used to sign a message, and ID verification would not be an image of the ID card, but rather holding your phone's NFC reader to the card and signing a message from the site.

    In Japan, there are already multiple apps which use something like this to verify user's age via the "my number card" + the smartphone's NFC reader.

    It's more or less impossible to forge without stealing the government's private keys, or infiltrating the government and issuing a fraudulent card.

    Of course, the US isn't a functioning state, the people don't trust it with their identity and security and would rather simply give all their information to private companies instead.

    • > In Japan, there are already multiple apps which use something like this to verify user's age via the "my number card" + the smartphone's NFC reader.

      Does this also leak your identity to the app?

      2 replies →

  • When I had to prove my passport for my bank over a video call they told me to rotate it around in the sunlight to show that it had the holo-whatever ink. So I wouldn't put it past them.

They can't feasibly do this in the US since many people don't have drivers licenses or passports.

  • Don't you have to be over 18 to get a credit card in the US? How many wouldn't be able to present a CC or ID?

    • Age verification requires a document that can be matched to your ID, such as by the photo on your ID card.

      Credit cards don't have photos.

      > How many Americans wouldn't be able to present a CC or ID?

      The number of Americans who don't have a government issued photo ID is estimated around 1%. The number gets larger if you start going by technicalities like having an expired ID that hasn't been renewed yet.

      The intersection between the 1% of 18+ Americans who don't have an ID and those who want to fully verify their Discord accounts is probably a very small number.

  • Those without driver's licenses or passports can get a state ID card instead, if I'm not mistaken. A pain, but an option.

    • It's actually not a pain. It's the same process as getting a driver's license, minus the test. You go into the DMV and wait in the same lines (at least in California; I have a CA state ID, not a license)

  • Yeah that’s not true. It’s a lie. And we all know why it’s a lie. Adults in the US with ID is 99%

    • *Citation needed

      > Nearly 21 million voting-age U.S. citizens do not have a current (non-expired) driver’s license. Just under 9%, or 20.76 million people, who are U.S. citizens aged 18 or older do not have a non-expired driver’s license. Another 12% (28.6 million) have a non- expired license, but it does not have both their current address and current name. For these individuals, a mismatched address is the largest issue. Ninety-six percent of those with some discrepancy have a license that does not have their current address, 1.5% have their current address but not their current name, and just over 2% do not have their current address or current name on their license. Additionally, just over 1% of adult U.S. citizens do not have any form of government-issued photo identification, which amounts to nearly 2.6 million people.

      From https://cdce.umd.edu/sites/cdce.umd.edu/files/pubs/Voter%20I...

      3 replies →

  • wat. the majority of Americans have a DL, ID, or Passport. What a silly thing to say.

    For DL alone:

    >Data indicates that approximately 84% to 91% of all Americans hold a driver's license, with roughly 237.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. as of 2023.

    Add in an ID and Passport and we are likely closer to 99%

    • Yep. You basically cannot function in legal society without an ID. If you are an adult and don't have ID you are intentionally trying to live a cloaked life and it won't be very easy.

Personal Identity Verification (PIV) and Common Access Card (CAC) credentials used by US government & military via NFC already work on web browsers. States should just move to digital IDs stored on smartphones, with chain of trust up through the secure element...

  • This is extremely dangerous, and would only work with hardware/software that is nonfree (i.e., not under the user's control, or any attestation could be spoofed).

    • This is effectively PKI for personhood. The State DMV acts as the Certificate Authority (CA), signing a "leaf certificate" that is bound to the device's hardware Secure Element.

      It’s less like a TLS handshake and more like OpenID for Verifiable Presentations (OID4VP). The "non-free" hardware requirement serves as Remote Attestation—it allows a verifier to cryptographically prove that the identity hasn't been cloned or spoofed by a script. The verification happens offline or via a standard web flow using the DMV’s public key to validate the data signature, ensuring the credential is authentic without requiring a phone-home to the issuer.

      1 reply →

  • > Personal Identity Verification (PIV) and Common Access Card (CAC) credentials used by US government & military via NFC already work on web browsers. States should just move to digital IDs stored on smartphones, with chain of trust up through the secure element...

    I think you're... missing the point of the pushback. People DO NOT WANT to be identified online, for fear for different types of persecution.

And lose every user in the process

  • Is there any data on what kind of hits to enrollment were taken by facebook, gmail etc when they added requirements like a phone #? Maybe it's buried in their sec filings. Anyway, this "cat and mouse" game is probably irrelevant. They're not looking for and don't need a perfect system. Bc 99% of the public couldn't care less about handing over their information.

    • Google does not require a phone number. They may ask for one and tell you it's for your own good, but you can skip the request.

  • I think you massively overestimate how many people actually care.

    My guess is that 95% or more of all Discord users do not care and simply upload their selfie or ID card and be done with it. I know I will (although they did say that they expect 80%+ to not require verification since they can somehow infer their age from other parameters)

    • Remember digg?

      I've already cancelled my Nitro account. I'm quite active on a ~5k member programming server and we're giving Zulip another try. I think it's unlikely we'll stay on Discord.

      Obviously anecdotal, but eventually this adds up.

      2 replies →

    • > I know I will

      Are you a minority, LGBTQ+, etc or of a "different" political persuasion that might have any reason to be distrustful of the US government? If so, you probably wouldn't just "be done with it".

      2 replies →

  • Is there any data on what kind of hits to enrollment were taken by facebook, gmail etc when they added requirements like a phone #? Maybe it's buried in their sec filings.