[NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd

[David Eddleman]

It's intrusion into your life, an erosion of privacy. They start with
requiring age verification for you to do things, then eventually require a
face scan or ID verification. That ties your computer to who you are. From
there you can see how downhill it goes. And quickly. It's more control over
what you can do with your own hardware and software and what you can say
and do on the internet.

On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 8:00 PM LEROY TENNISON <leroy_tennison at prodigy.net>
wrote:

>  <sigh> Given the laws, there is a real dilemma regardless of your
> feelings regarding Pottering.  What strikes me is this age-verification
> thing is pretty much a matter of trust, which, with computers, is pretty
> much a joke.  Or am I missing something?
>     On Monday, March 23, 2026 at 06:18:15 PM CDT, crem1111--- via Discuss <
> discuss at dfwuug.org> wrote:
>
>
> Is it April 1st already?
>
>
>
> CRem
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Discuss <discuss-bounces at dfwuug.org> On Behalf Of stuart yarus via
> Discuss
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2026 5:10 PM
> To: Open Discussion List <discuss at dfwuug.org>; NTLUG Discussion List <
> discuss at ntlug.org>; dfwrpi at groups.io
> Cc: stuart yarus <syarus at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Discuss] age verification in systemd
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news:
>
>
>
> "Last week we talked about age verification laws, what they are and the
> issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age tracking
> feature was added to systemd: "[This change] stores the user's birth date
> for age verification, as required by recent laws in California (AB-1043),
> Colorado (SB26-051), Brazil (Lei 15.211/2025), etc. The xdg-desktop-portal
> project is adding an age verification portal that needs a data source for
> the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata (emailAddress,
> realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The birthdate field can
> be set by the administrator only, but can be read by the user and the
> user's applications. "
>
> "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made
> to revert the change. The attempted reversal of the change includes a
> comment: "Introducing birth date storage or age queries (even local-only)
> creates a new class of sensitive user data in the OS that didn't exist
> before. It risks normalizing permission-like checks inside the desktop
> session and could be extended to far more invasive controls in the future."
> The reversal was denied by project leader Pottering, who insists the
> tracking feature will remain. "
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Stuart Yarus
> --
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at dfwuug.org
> https://www.dfwuug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>