|
|
|
|
|
|
by uniq7
67 days ago
|
|
|
In your proposed scheme, it is in the best interest of web sites to store the certificates from users indefinitely, since it's the only evidence they have that prove that their users are not minors. Since authorities have the power of accessing that data and identify the user who created the certificate, this scheme is not anonymous. Authorities can access that data via court orders today, or via a global automatic mandatory data sharing law in the future. In the example of USA, even if for some reason people still trust the current Government (although ICE already accessed private medical records to track and arrest people), I don't see why they should trust all future Governments which will have retroactive access to all that data. |
|
|
We should not underestimate the power of the legal system to enforce freedom and anonymity. And on the flip side, it's hard to create a technical system which can actually withstand the force of the government if it chooses to come after you.
I believe the correct battlefield for freedom is the political one, in the end it decides everything. And neither guns nor technical tricks can secure freedom against a tyrannical state.
Wuth that said, it does tickle the curiosity to think about! A technical-political solution could be to introduce a new actor, the broker. It sits between the webpage and the age-verifier, receiving the age-verification, but then giving it's own proofs to the webpage (so acting as a trusted middleman). Now to match up visitors with identities you need to get the data from both the webpage, the broker and the age-verifier.
You could imagine that the broker were in a different jurisdiction, maybe even one without a close cooperation with the government. Maybe people could even choose their own brokers (among certified ones).