6 ms·

> All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random bl

> All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random blog with their ID? Kind of unfortunate that PICS[1][2] and POWDER[3][4] never really took off: it allowed web sites to 'self-label' and then browsers (and proxies?) could use the metadata and built-in rules/filters to determine if the content should be displayed. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_for_Internet_Content_Selection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_for_Internet_Content_... [2] https://www.w3.org/PICS/ https://www.w3.org/PICS/ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_for_Web_Description_Resources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_for_Web_Description_R... [4] https://www.w3.org/2007/powder/ https://www.w3.org/2007/powder/

Bender 1y ago
PICS and ICRA were not adopted by many due to complexity. RTA [1][2] is a more generic header that can be used on any adult site or site that allows user contributed content and is easier to implement. There needs to be a law that requires clients to look for this header if parental controls are enabled. Not perfect, nothing is. Teens will easily get around it but most small children will not which should be the spirit of the ID verification movement. It's better than what we have today. The centralized ID verification sites will push many small sites to Tor and bigger sites to island nations and tax evasion in my opinion. More browsers are natively supporting .onion domains. Congress critters should be opposed to the centralized ID verification systems as their browsing habbits will be exposed to the world when those sites ooopsie dooopsie "leak" the data or just openly sell it or an employee turns that data into a summarized online spreadsheet of who is into what. The kickbacks and lobbying they may be potentially receiving will not be worth it. [1] - https://www.rtalabel.org/index.php?content=howtofaq#single https://www.rtalabel.org/index.php?content=howtofaq#single [2] - https://www.shodan.io/search?query=RTA-5042-1996-1400-1577-RTA https://www.shodan.io/search?query=RTA-5042-1996-1400-1577-R... [dont follow the links, NSFW]
- sigwinch 1y ago
  > There needs to be a law that requires clients to look for this header if parental controls are enabled Would that require MiTM at the network level? Or, is there a custom X.509 RTA that would tell clients not to accept the certificate?
  - rocqua 1y ago
    Put it in the parental controls feature of the browser. Parents have to turn it on. Parents get to decide if their kids can watch porn. The government helps parents enforce the rules parents want.
    - sigwinch 1y ago
      I wonder if I can detect when parental controls are engaged like that. As of this ruling, all sites within striking distance of South Dakota must take “reasonable efforts” to age-verify, or be certain that no content could ever be politically harmful to the hypothetical minor.
      - Bender 1y ago
        Reasonable efforts in this case would be to send the RTA header. That's it. Done and dusted. If the client is able to browse your site that would mean that either parental controls are not enabled or they are enabled and your site was approve-listed in the client. This of course depends on changing the laws anywhere that require using a third party data-leakage site to verify ID.

Bender 1y ago

PICS and ICRA were not adopted by many due to complexity. RTA [1][2] is a more generic header that can be used on any adult site or site that allows user contributed content and is easier to implement. There needs to be a law that requires clients to look for this header if parental controls are enabled. Not perfect, nothing is. Teens will easily get around it but most small children will not which should be the spirit of the ID verification movement. It's better than what we have today. The centralized ID verification sites will push many small sites to Tor and bigger sites to island nations and tax evasion in my opinion. More browsers are natively supporting .onion domains. Congress critters should be opposed to the centralized ID verification systems as their browsing habbits will be exposed to the world when those sites ooopsie dooopsie "leak" the data or just openly sell it or an employee turns that data into a summarized online spreadsheet of who is into what. The kickbacks and lobbying they may be potentially receiving will not be worth it. [1] - https://www.rtalabel.org/index.php?content=howtofaq#single https://www.rtalabel.org/index.php?content=howtofaq#single [2] - https://www.shodan.io/search?query=RTA-5042-1996-1400-1577-RTA https://www.shodan.io/search?query=RTA-5042-1996-1400-1577-R... [dont follow the links, NSFW]

sigwinch 1y ago
> There needs to be a law that requires clients to look for this header if parental controls are enabled Would that require MiTM at the network level? Or, is there a custom X.509 RTA that would tell clients not to accept the certificate?
- rocqua 1y ago
  Put it in the parental controls feature of the browser. Parents have to turn it on. Parents get to decide if their kids can watch porn. The government helps parents enforce the rules parents want.
  - sigwinch 1y ago
    I wonder if I can detect when parental controls are engaged like that. As of this ruling, all sites within striking distance of South Dakota must take “reasonable efforts” to age-verify, or be certain that no content could ever be politically harmful to the hypothetical minor.
    - Bender 1y ago
      Reasonable efforts in this case would be to send the RTA header. That's it. Done and dusted. If the client is able to browse your site that would mean that either parental controls are not enabled or they are enabled and your site was approve-listed in the client. This of course depends on changing the laws anywhere that require using a third party data-leakage site to verify ID.