Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
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.
Fun fact, systemd also has a field for the user's full name, which they (shocking, I know) don't verify. Most distros ask for it as well.
How is a field you can introduce used to verify anything? There's no "verification" if you choose to put whatever you want.
Or what, do you consider the field that shows up when clicking some games on steam where you just scroll the year 40 down and click whatever, age "verification"? Cuz it isn't.
Having a date field so that parents can define their kids' age in for non root accounts on Linux so the system, in a potential future, automatically limits access to some stuff is useful, and yet there's no age verification being done there, besides the parents themselves knowing that what they inputted is truthful.
they said it's "for age verification"
I know, I read the post thanks.
However, then in a comment below there's discussion about how this change is insufficient for verification, and then even further below there's discussion about how it's a useful feature.
They literally said it's to address the laws in the PR.
It's one step toward addressing the laws, but systemd isn't going to implement the remaining steps to have actual age verification.
Just one little aoldier following orders. There are definitely not copious numbers of examples of that going poorly...
And then expand in the further discussion that the field has further use besides compliance, and that even if it complies that a field that you can control whenever is not real verification. Please don't be a headline Andy. I've also been one, but if I'm to dive in comments and write about it I usually give it a read, specially if I reference the content of the post.
Because it will not be enough.
Because they will come back and say "look at this loophole"
"Think of the children" you'll all say as you agree to give your government authority to determine what information you can or cannot access as "age appropriate" completely ignorant of what you're handing over.
This would be fine if it was just for you, but you're trying to give my control over my system and what I can access away from me because you're too short-sighted to see what comes after volunteer age reporting. And when that still doesn't save the children, which it won't, because it is NEVER ABOUT THE FUCKING CHILDREN ITS ALWAYS ABOUT CONTROL, you'll tell me again that it's just another little minor infraction. It's just a little bit more than volunteer reporting.
Afterall, won't someone please think of the children?!
To actually verify, need not able modify after verify by id or similar.
But root always able to modify. So cannot work.
This is getting really old, really damn fast. π«©
Luckiky we can track that now!
Well itβs only going to get worse as more states start pushing for it.
We can either make a stand and kick up a fuss now or lose a free internetπ«©
Maybeβ¦I misinterpreted your post. I think I'm on your side actually π
Absolutely against the DoB addition, yep.
And so are the users, according to the age verification field
It can't actually be used to verify anything. As implemented, it just reports whatever you entered. It's just as valid as those birthday fields on websites that cater to users that share a 1st of January birthday.
The best kind of age verification
I think we all know where we are headed
It is not age verification
It could be used as part of a age verification system but it isn't by itself age verification. You are doing the equivalent of calling a set of tires a car.
Do you also feel compelled to provide your true name on the "user name" field?
And it can be used to verify how old you are.
How?
This is the part Iβm hung up on. What actually physically happens to make me enter my real birthday in the systemd user field, and verify itβs actually my birthday?
January 1 1900 has been my official online birthday forever.
I was born on January 1st, whichever year before 2000 that I first click on.
I guess the idea is that your parents store the date and you don't get root access (or you store the date for your kids and don't give them root access).
Then what? What stops the kids downloading and running whatever software they like?
Linux is build with different users in mind. So it is not a problem to forbid a user to run any program the root don't like, or run only programs the root like.
Boring dystopia :(
You want the exciting kind? We aren't the ones it's fun for.
Yeah, thats not age verification...
Its only age verification if you set it up.
Not even that
There is no verification what so ever. If anything it might be an age check
Can i not use age verification in systemd if i dont live in usa?
You can even not use it if you live in the US. There's nothing that enforces you put a date in there (and nothing to verify if it's correct, which is why people say it's not age verification).
For now. Let's not pretend this doesn't lay groundwork for goverment to require id verification.
required = yes
Easy to flag. Then Lennart Poettering's startup van deploy the ID tech to comply with age verification laws.
As long as I'm root in Linux there's nothing that can be done about me doing whatever I want with that field. I'll be born in 420-6-9, name "blaze" surname "it".
That's the difference between windows and Linux. In Linux I'm truly root, the I do control everything in it, sometimes to my detriment, but definitely in my benefit in these occasions.
Also, anything the Spanish government wants to protect, is as easy as forcing us to use a free to emit electronic certificate that personally identifies us, which is already used to enter public services webpages in a secure way.
That age thing is actually way more useful that proper bullshit age verification, because parents, actual parents, can set a user account for their kids on the PC, and then that field would actually be valuable to limit access to tools. You know, instead of surrendering power to the government, which this tool doesn't do, you would be giving power to parents to be proactive in protecting their kids.
Isn't that one of the most prominent talking points against mas surveillance based kid protection? Of which I completely agree, about giving tools and power to parents so they can better cater the exposure of their kids, without surrendering control, I mean.
Yes
And even if you do live there.
How does it verify anything if it's not proven in any way?
It doesn't verify how old you are, it verified that you entered a certain set of numbers at some point.
question: do california, colorado, or brazil's laws have any teeth?
what is the penalty if i lie? (a) and am an adult? (b) and am a minor? [i don't really care but for completeness sake]
also, you know those websites that ask for your age so you can see the vidya trailers? will this bypass that so i can just see the redband or am i going to have to put in 1/1/1970 TWICE GODSDAMMIT
Only penalty in this law is for OS makers that didn't include such rules in the OS, paying per affected child.
Systemd has a field which could be used to store age, which a system which has age verification could use to store the age.
Just like the system which performs age verification could store that information in a file.
I guess ext4 is age verification as it allows storing age of birth.
We have different concepts on what "verified" data is.
Raise your hand if you have supplied your mail address to your installation of git^[Couldn't think of a better example right now, but seriously: JUST DON'T SUPPLY YOUR AGE.].
...
I hope people will be this persistent in protesting when apps start requiring actual verification.
picking november 5 1955 because it's a fixed point in time