Live data from Hacker News

The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

expression.fire.org

411–420 of 655 posts

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#411
post #21

There are at least some technological solutions here, such as anonymous credentials. [1] Modern versions of this technique allow one to associate metadata (like a proof of age exceeding a threshold) in such a way that the verifier can't even correlate repeated requests across users. Governments that are serious about age verification and individual privacy (which, doubtful they truly are) should agree on a protocol a…

The article talks about the possibilities of malicious cloning of these tokens by third parties, but fails to identify the much more common use case, and one that makes this scheme useless for age verification. It's one thing to be concerned about someone stealing my credential, but another to prevent the transfer of these credentials, especially if they are limited use credentials. The entire point of age verificati…

> The entire point of age verification systems is to prevent minors from accessing certain resources. I think we all know that this is basically impossible; but what these various governments and social media companies want to do is to make it high friction to do so.

The problem is, this is wrong. What these governments want to do is get a grip on online behavior, through actions against individuals, who can't/won't defend themselves, rather than through actions against gigantic corporations that may choose litigation and take years to change their behavior, if they do at all.

Governments want to declare something illegal, say downloading a movie, putting racist comments online, ... then catch everyone who engages in that behavior online through mandatory identification, and actually have an effect.

To do this, breaking privacy is, of course, a core requirement. This can be introduced into these systems afterwards ("judge X wants to know who authenticated with token , please provide the information"). Without this, government rules will remain totally ineffective online like they have been in the last 40 years.

I personally much prefer government rules remaining totally ineffective online.

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#412
post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define remote privacy? Beyond a few decades ago I could use a phone booth and pay in coins.

And any phone could be tapped with a signature by a judge.

This issue here isn't surveillance as per a signed warrant. I don't think anybody's really arguing against that.

The problem is mass data collection without suspicion, probable cause, or warrants whatsoever. That's a brand new thing, other than the places in the world unfortunate enough to have roving gangs of police going door to door and searching homes without warrants. This facilitates it on a scale that's never really been seen before in human history.

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#413
post #40

I'm pretty sure this is a "pick your poison" problem. We as a society are damned no matter what we do or do not do. For my part, we need to do something, because things are not fine the way they are, including the half ass Australian solution. We can't keep putting the onus on private enterprise to address social issues. I may sound crazy for saying so, but I think the answer is more government run infrastructure for…

> including the half ass Australian solution.

It was designed to be half-arsed so Digital ID can come along and save the day. Australia's Digital ID opens up to the private sector on 30 November.

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#414
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see, when the governments are outraged that they can't monitor all facets of communication or are disallowed from using their shiny new ways to automatically observe and categorize billions of datapoints to automatically surveil-by-default millions of people, that is called having serious doubts and grave concerns, very important stuff. When the people are outraged that a freedom they've enjoyed for several decad…

You see, when someone talks about "the governments" without realising that they do represent the people in a democracy, their ignorance show so much that it is difficult for them to attract any sympathy in those places where the laws are discussed.

I'm sure all the people in the world suddenly did a 180 over the course of the last year, often with no new elections held, and all the governments are merely addressing their concerns by moving in complete lockstep with the exact same sets of policies proposed after ignoring 'the problems' for decades. After all, we live in a happy wonder world with perfect representation, direct democracy and absolutely no malicious actors, corruption, lobbying and coordination that is not controllable by ordinary people in any meaningful way - at least, as long as that thought-terminating assumption helps me argue for what I like. Stop protesting against Democracy (me).

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#416
post #21

There are at least some technological solutions here, such as anonymous credentials. [1] Modern versions of this technique allow one to associate metadata (like a proof of age exceeding a threshold) in such a way that the verifier can't even correlate repeated requests across users. Governments that are serious about age verification and individual privacy (which, doubtful they truly are) should agree on a protocol a…

Governments are serious about knowing who’s doing what online, and all this age verification is just an excuse. It will also raise the barrier to entry for newcomers in the market, so it’s convenient for platform owners as well.

Let's remember that this will greatly help ad attribution as well, enriching the platform owners. This reveals that their incentives are aligned against privacy.

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#417
post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't required to identify yourself to get a phone. You can get a prepaid phone with no ID. You are required to identify yourself for an electricity account because it is essentially extending you credit. You use the electricity first, and then they bill you for it later. They also only identify the person who is receiving the bill. You could have a house with a dozen people in it but the electric company only k…

> You aren't required to identify yourself to get a phone. You can get a prepaid phone with no ID. Requiring ID to buy a prepaid SIM card has become the norm across the developed world. There are still a few holdout countries, but they won’t hold out for long.

You say that as though it's a feature rather than a bug. Being able to have an anonymous SIM card is a useful privacy and security feature, to avoid things like "tell me the ID of everyone in the vicinity of this protest". (And that's one reason governments try to break that.)

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#418
post #386

I am always surprised that people get shocked when online privacy is put at risk, as if it was a fundamental human right. REMOTE PRIVACY NEVER EXISTED BEFORE A FEW DECADES AGO! And what happened in these decades are enough for the societies to wonder whether this new possibility in human connections (i.e. remote privacy) is globally a good thing. Just stomping your feet because the new toy may be declared illegal is…

> REMOTE PRIVACY NEVER EXISTED BEFORE A FEW DECADES AGO!

That is plain wrong.

You could absolutely send a letter anonymously without showing your ID. You could use a phone booth without showing your ID. Increasingly more countries demand ID verification for such things like getting a SIM card that used to be remote privacy.

But much more importantly you are making a false differentiation between 'remote' and local privacy. Before the internet that made some amount of sense. What you do in the locality of your home is private and what you do in public is not, such as buying a book in a store.

However two things have fundamentally changed since then:

1. This difference largely does not exist anymore. Things that used to be in your home and private and are now in some way or another in internet connected computers that act as surveillance devices. Your movie and book library used to sit on a bookshelf in the privacy of your home and only you would know when you watch a movie. Today it sits on Amazon's or Netflix servers and they know exactly what and when you watch and read. In fact turning the digital library you "bought" into something you own by converting them into a format you can store locally and use without restrictions and surveillance (local privacy) is illegal and punishable with jail time under the DMCA.

Notes written in a note book used to be local privacy, now they are written on a computer that automatically, without consent uploads them to "the cloud", a server controlled by a large corporation that acts as a panopticon for the state.

I could go on forever. Our lives are increasingly digital. That in itself would not necessitate being "remote", but in reality that is what follows, because people do not control their devices. Instead these devices are surveillance appliances controlled by corporations and increasingly the state.

2. Technology did not just enable the means for more anonymity, but also for a completely new, fundamentally different level of automated, all encompassing surveillance.

Before the internet you went into a store and bought a book with cash. You were not anonymous in the strict sense, the cashier could see you and might even recognize you, but you did not have to show your ID for everything you buy. The cashier did not create a log with your legal name and all the items you bought. Sure, the cashier might know you bought that book, but no one else did. There was no central surveillance log of every purchase accessible to corporations and the state.

Today credit cards are exactly that. Many countries have begun attacking cash as part of the war on privacy. We are heading towards a world where you effectively have to show your ID for absolutely everything you buy and every purchase will be logged.

CCTV is old, but the footage used to sit on tapes in the possession of individual stores and tracking someone's movements with this was a massive amount of work that would only make sense for specific investigations like murder cases.

Now CCTV is everywhere and systems like Palantir collect them all in a central system that logs everyone's movements all the time. The government can just search for "people who met with X in the last month" and get a log of all these people, their complete movement profiles, the people they met with etc.

Letters weren't exactly well protected, but no one would read your letters because it was infeasible. Now we have the infrastructure to automatically read all messages sent by anyone and the government can just get notified of anyone who voices in private communications that they do not like strawberries or the ruling political party.

Western democracies are building the wet dream of the Stasi, something that just a few years ago was supposedly an authoritarian dystopia and our great enemy. We were supposedly so much better than the bad guys of the Stasi. Now we are building a future where we are still different from the Stasi, because we are making it outdated.

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They become a traceable identity token Not if you use a challenge-response protocol where the client returns a zero-knowledge proof of age, where the proof incorporates a random string sent by the website. The traceable stuff is private information that the website never sees. If a minor is caught with it, then law enforcement has local access to the minor's hardware and can probably view the private data. At that…

This doesn’t stop the scheme the parent proposes, where adults install some proxy on their device and challenges are responded to on the parent device. Then the private key never leaves the parent device and all the child device has is the proxy software, which could be set up to not log any identifier of the key that it used

Sure, but then you're partnering with someone you probably don't know to take payment for doing something illegal, and that partner knows your device and where to send the money.

And if it's a phone app, it's not going to be on app stores and you already know the person giving you the app is a criminal.

So you're installing an untrustworthy app to risk criminal charges, and the customers of this scheme are kids who mostly don't have a lot of money.

Re: The 'papers, please' era of the internet will decimate your privacy

#420
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is precisely why powers will try to make all these illegal

I don't think they are going to make libraries illegal mate.

In the US, if you do not have a passport and want to apply for a new one, you have to go to certain places where an authorized person will check your paperwork, see that you match the paperwork and send that directly to the passport office. Generally, county clerks and large post offices are the places that most people go. In some states, libraries are also authorized to do so. In 2026, Trump signed an executive order banning libraries from doing so. Libraries were doing the service for free. County clerks in my state charge around $50 for the service. The libraries doing this service were almost always in "blue" districts.

The SAVE ACT [0], which passed the House of Representatives last year (and is stalled in the Senate) only allows 4 types of identity documents to be allowed to register to vote in federal elections:

1. A US Passport, 2. A US Military ID with proof of US citizenship. 3. A US REAL ID with proof of US citizenship [1]. 4. A US REAL ID without proof of US citizenship, plus a US birth certificate and the names must match [2].

Notes:

0 - https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22/t...

1 - This is called Enhanced Driving License. It exists in only 5 states (Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, and Washington) and is an additional $35-40 above the cost of a regular driving license.

https://www.tsa.gov/realid/realid-faqs

2 - In the US, it is common for a wife to take her husband's surname. This means that 74,000,000 US women will lose the right to vote in federal elections if they don't spend $150 (for a new passport) or hundreds-to-thousands of dollars changing their name legally.

Post reply on HN