4 ms·

I think the way discords setup works is reasonable. It’s an on-device model that only submits the outcome of the scan to the platform. I hope they just improve

by hhh 1y ago

I think the way discords setup works is reasonable. It’s an on-device model that only submits the outcome of the scan to the platform. I hope they just improve that performance, rather than see this and back out of it entirely and require ID checks.

edm0nd 1y ago
I think this is the correct way too. Some of the age verification systems that use digital ids (mDLs) do the same thing but people freak out about how they work because I think they misunderstand the tech. They system basically asks the mDL via an api call "is this user above the age of 18/21" and the app only responds with a yes or no. It doesn't pass the users fulls details over or anything like that.
- MattPalmer1086 1y ago
  Do these systems prevent linkability or allow the use of pseudonyms? As in, if I repeatedly ask for age verification to the same service, does it know: 1) the identity of the user making the request, and 2) whether repeated requests comes from the same user (even if they don't know who it is?)
  - ndriscoll 1y ago
    My non-expert understanding is that in the short term mDL is linkable to a cert serial, but those are supposed to be regularly rotated. So you might have 2) for a day or whatever the rotation period is. I think I've seen it asserted that it is possible to have a ZKP framework that doesn't require this, but I don't know how that might work. The age verification bills in the US at least also make it illegal to record that information, sometimes with high penalties (e.g. my reading of Texas's is that it is up to $10k per retained record).
    - MattPalmer1086 1y ago
      Thanks. Didn't know it was illegal to record it in the US - or does that vary by State? There's a bunch of ways to achieve this privately. The work of Jan Camenisch on Anonymous Credentials and other things was done quite a long time ago now. It's a well studied field.
rumblefrog 1y ago
Could you point to the source of the on-device model? Moreso for curiosity.
- michaelt 1y ago
  No, but I can tell you that the moment you open the browser console, it stops scanning and marks the scan as failed. The vendor is https://www.k-id.com https://www.k-id.com in Discord's case
  - a2128 1y ago
    That just seems like a standard anti-tampering measure, I don't think it necessarily means the model is local or anything
    - michaelt 1y ago
      https://www.k-id.com/post/adapting-discord-for-the-uk-online-safety-act https://www.k-id.com/post/adapting-discord-for-the-uk-online... says that:- > Identity documents are deleted after a user’s age group is confirmed, and the video selfies used for facial age estimation never leaves their device.
Retr0id 1y ago
On-device models are excellent for privacy, but they are fundamentally broken from a security perspective. Preventing people from spoofing the results would involve locking them out of their own devices, via DRM.
- hhh 1y ago
  I understand, and think that there’s an acceptance criteria for some level of fraud tbh.
  - FergusArgyll 1y ago
    Paging @patio11
- immibis 1y ago
  You're treating this as a computer security problem when it's actually a political problem. It doesn't have to work to be mandated. It doesn't even have to work, for everyone to get a pat on the back and a raise for implementing it. Keeping minors away from porn isn't the point, the point is more like to scare people about being surveilled so they voluntarily won't watch it.
- subscribed 1y ago
  Hardware attestation would be enough to clamp down on almost anything, ensuring the hardware and the os guarantee the outcome is not manipulated. Not the broken anti-competitive Google play store integrity (which is passing for any handset not patched for the last 8 years but with Google buttplug in it, effectively nullifying assurances from the attestation), but a proper hw attestation.
  - Retr0id 1y ago
    You just described DRM
    - astrange 1y ago
      DRM mostly explicitly does /not/ function that way. If you jailbreak an iPhone you can still use store apps and watch movies. You don't think that's just because Apple forgot about it, right? Or because the movie studios are merciful? They definitely aren't. It's because they think it'd be illegal to lock you out over it.
amoshi 1y ago
>It’s an on-device model that only submits the outcome of the scan to the platform. And that's why it's been bypassed already https://x.com/Pirat_Nation/status/1949036664132657225 https://x.com/Pirat_Nation/status/1949036664132657225
- leshenka 1y ago
  No way discord has enabled devtools haha On the other note, can one attach chrome devtools to any electron application?
  - jfyi 1y ago
    It was available with ctrl+shift+I for forever in their desktop client. It only changed in the last 2 years or so. Pretty sure it's just a flag somewhere to re-enable.

by hhh 1y ago

edm0nd 1y ago

I think this is the correct way too. Some of the age verification systems that use digital ids (mDLs) do the same thing but people freak out about how they work because I think they misunderstand the tech. They system basically asks the mDL via an api call "is this user above the age of 18/21" and the app only responds with a yes or no. It doesn't pass the users fulls details over or anything like that.

MattPalmer1086 1y ago
Do these systems prevent linkability or allow the use of pseudonyms? As in, if I repeatedly ask for age verification to the same service, does it know: 1) the identity of the user making the request, and 2) whether repeated requests comes from the same user (even if they don't know who it is?)
- ndriscoll 1y ago
  My non-expert understanding is that in the short term mDL is linkable to a cert serial, but those are supposed to be regularly rotated. So you might have 2) for a day or whatever the rotation period is. I think I've seen it asserted that it is possible to have a ZKP framework that doesn't require this, but I don't know how that might work. The age verification bills in the US at least also make it illegal to record that information, sometimes with high penalties (e.g. my reading of Texas's is that it is up to $10k per retained record).
  - MattPalmer1086 1y ago
    Thanks. Didn't know it was illegal to record it in the US - or does that vary by State? There's a bunch of ways to achieve this privately. The work of Jan Camenisch on Anonymous Credentials and other things was done quite a long time ago now. It's a well studied field.

rumblefrog 1y ago

Could you point to the source of the on-device model? Moreso for curiosity.

michaelt 1y ago
No, but I can tell you that the moment you open the browser console, it stops scanning and marks the scan as failed. The vendor is https://www.k-id.com https://www.k-id.com in Discord's case
- a2128 1y ago
  That just seems like a standard anti-tampering measure, I don't think it necessarily means the model is local or anything
  - michaelt 1y ago
    https://www.k-id.com/post/adapting-discord-for-the-uk-online-safety-act https://www.k-id.com/post/adapting-discord-for-the-uk-online... says that:- > Identity documents are deleted after a user’s age group is confirmed, and the video selfies used for facial age estimation never leaves their device.

Retr0id 1y ago

On-device models are excellent for privacy, but they are fundamentally broken from a security perspective. Preventing people from spoofing the results would involve locking them out of their own devices, via DRM.

hhh 1y ago
I understand, and think that there’s an acceptance criteria for some level of fraud tbh.
- FergusArgyll 1y ago
  Paging @patio11
immibis 1y ago
You're treating this as a computer security problem when it's actually a political problem. It doesn't have to work to be mandated. It doesn't even have to work, for everyone to get a pat on the back and a raise for implementing it. Keeping minors away from porn isn't the point, the point is more like to scare people about being surveilled so they voluntarily won't watch it.
subscribed 1y ago
Hardware attestation would be enough to clamp down on almost anything, ensuring the hardware and the os guarantee the outcome is not manipulated. Not the broken anti-competitive Google play store integrity (which is passing for any handset not patched for the last 8 years but with Google buttplug in it, effectively nullifying assurances from the attestation), but a proper hw attestation.
- Retr0id 1y ago
  You just described DRM
  - astrange 1y ago
    DRM mostly explicitly does /not/ function that way. If you jailbreak an iPhone you can still use store apps and watch movies. You don't think that's just because Apple forgot about it, right? Or because the movie studios are merciful? They definitely aren't. It's because they think it'd be illegal to lock you out over it.

amoshi 1y ago

>It’s an on-device model that only submits the outcome of the scan to the platform. And that's why it's been bypassed already https://x.com/Pirat_Nation/status/1949036664132657225 https://x.com/Pirat_Nation/status/1949036664132657225

leshenka 1y ago
No way discord has enabled devtools haha On the other note, can one attach chrome devtools to any electron application?
- jfyi 1y ago
  It was available with ctrl+shift+I for forever in their desktop client. It only changed in the last 2 years or so. Pretty sure it's just a flag somewhere to re-enable.