The UK has announced plans to fast-track legislation requiring “age verification for VPN use”.
-
@nuwagaba2 damned if i know. all the right-wing, billionaire-owned, nutcase newspapers starting a campaign against it, maybe?
@fishidwardrobe
Will those billionaires allow that to happen? -
The UK has announced plans to fast-track legislation requiring “age verification for VPN use”. The correct term, however, is not age verification but identity verification.
A law like this would require everyone to identify themselves in order to use a VPN. This would pose a risk to whistleblowers, violate human rights, and represent yet another step toward an authoritarian society.
@mullvadnet what about age verification to access age verification?
-
@fishidwardrobe
Will those billionaires allow that to happen?@nuwagaba2 well, they are not entirely rational. Billionaires are not always smart. but that makes them hard to predict.
they won't like our current government, it's "left wing" (it isn't); so they might want to stir up trouble against it. But in general they have no interest in looking after regular people.
-
@nuwagaba2 well, they are not entirely rational. Billionaires are not always smart. but that makes them hard to predict.
they won't like our current government, it's "left wing" (it isn't); so they might want to stir up trouble against it. But in general they have no interest in looking after regular people.
@fishidwardrobe
Who will then save the regular people? -
@fishidwardrobe
Who will then save the regular people?@nuwagaba2 ::shrugs:: wish i knew
-
@nuwagaba2 ::shrugs:: wish i knew
@fishidwardrobe
Of course the regular people are the ones to save themselves. The biggest challenge is whether they know of what's coming before them. Are they aware of that? -
The UK has announced plans to fast-track legislation requiring “age verification for VPN use”. The correct term, however, is not age verification but identity verification.
A law like this would require everyone to identify themselves in order to use a VPN. This would pose a risk to whistleblowers, violate human rights, and represent yet another step toward an authoritarian society.
@mullvadnet To be fair, Whistleblowers should be using a more secure setup than just a VPN.
-
@mullvadnet curious timing. just about an hour ago I forged and verified my first zero knowledge proof that can tell the verifier that proof holder was born before a certain timestamp (aka. older than N years) at the same time reveling absolutely (!) nothing about proof holders, not even those who authorize it.
@dotfox @mullvadnet But I'm guessing the verification called home to let someone know which app/service you verified with, or is someone making an authorication service that doesn't need that? If so, which one?
-
@dotfox @mullvadnet But I'm guessing the verification called home to let someone know which app/service you verified with, or is someone making an authorication service that doesn't need that? If so, which one?
@paranormal_distribution No one. The presenter asks the verifier to publish their constraints — the trusted root authorities and the current revocation list (one way hashed). The presenter then forges two proofs locally: "I hold a valid capability delegated to me only" and "no intermediate delegator in my chain is revoked, and the delegation chain starts from a trusted root". The verifier checks both proofs against the published roots — no callback, no identity disclosure, no phone-home.
-
@paranormal_distribution No one. The presenter asks the verifier to publish their constraints — the trusted root authorities and the current revocation list (one way hashed). The presenter then forges two proofs locally: "I hold a valid capability delegated to me only" and "no intermediate delegator in my chain is revoked, and the delegation chain starts from a trusted root". The verifier checks both proofs against the published roots — no callback, no identity disclosure, no phone-home.
@paranormal_distribution The verifier learns what the presenter can do, never who they are or how they get this capability. Here I'm using capability as a broad term for "some knowledge I'm willing to disclose".
-
@paranormal_distribution The verifier learns what the presenter can do, never who they are or how they get this capability. Here I'm using capability as a broad term for "some knowledge I'm willing to disclose".
@paranormal_distribution For example: Some government agency can issue a certificate to the person that contains passport number, expiry date and date of birth. A person can then selectively choose what information should be displayed - NO passport number, NO expiry date and mask date of birth behind "before some date". If verifier trust this government agency then presenter can prove "I'm at least 18 years old" and this proof will hold.
-
@paranormal_distribution No one. The presenter asks the verifier to publish their constraints — the trusted root authorities and the current revocation list (one way hashed). The presenter then forges two proofs locally: "I hold a valid capability delegated to me only" and "no intermediate delegator in my chain is revoked, and the delegation chain starts from a trusted root". The verifier checks both proofs against the published roots — no callback, no identity disclosure, no phone-home.
@dotfox Yeah, I agree that it would be possible, with the same degree of certainty that we get when we flash an ID card to buy beer. The problem is that noone is making it, not even the #EUDI wallet will have this functionality in spite of all the privacywashing. If someone did make a solution like this, I would happily use it. Hell, I'd even pay to use it!
@EUCommission take note!
-
@dotfox @mullvadnet why are you working on tech to help the Nazis?
@fluffykittycat @dotfox @mullvadnet do you even grasp what "Nazi" is and what it entails?
-
The UK has announced plans to fast-track legislation requiring “age verification for VPN use”. The correct term, however, is not age verification but identity verification.
A law like this would require everyone to identify themselves in order to use a VPN. This would pose a risk to whistleblowers, violate human rights, and represent yet another step toward an authoritarian society.
@mullvadnet "A law like this would require everyone to identify themselves in order to use a VPN" yeah… but no.
Please kindly stop spreading FUD. There are ways (ZKP) to do that...
-
@mullvadnet "A law like this would require everyone to identify themselves in order to use a VPN" yeah… but no.
Please kindly stop spreading FUD. There are ways (ZKP) to do that...
@wojtek but literally nobody is going down that route? They're all paying KYC companies to harvest data. Hardly FUD is it?
-
This is exactly my point as well. The EU has done some great things in digital privacy laws and yet they still want to do dumb shit. I am appaled with the issues with CSAM and I agree something needs to be done. I also agree with the deplorable ways in which social media has infected society - howver, the answer is not to destroy privacy.
@greatlaketrout @nemo @mullvadnet I think a big issue here is, that politics are focusing far more on the M than on the CSA. However, the CSA does most of the harm, the M then adds insult to injury.
Problem is, actually fighting CSA takes time, requires a lot of effort, costs a lot of money and feels uncomfortable sometimes, as you sometimes need to intervene in family affairs.
-
I have already setup a Wireguard VPN on one over my VPS, no questions asked
@ggrey @mullvadnet And your ISP's DNS, Sir? I hope you have that covered. -
@ggrey @mullvadnet And your ISP's DNS, Sir? I hope you have that covered.
Indeed
-
@wojtek but literally nobody is going down that route? They're all paying KYC companies to harvest data. Hardly FUD is it?
@ret just because UK and usania is going that road doesn't mean "nobody"?
The EU first want to make correct technical spec and then later on implement that (https://ageverification.dev/Technical%20Specification/architecture-and-technical-specifications/)
Mullvad trew a blanket statement implaying that any age-verification is an assult on privacy, which is false.
-
@mullvadnet devil very much in the detail! Is ssh a VPN?
And https for that matter
