Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

Post by cynicalsecurity » Sun, Aug 02, 2026, 8:14 AM UTC

izacus wrote: post #486

cynicalsecurity wrote: post #14

This smells like Soviet Union. The next step will be a requirement to confirm your identity - trying to justify it with a wicked manipulation tactic "we need to know your are not lying when selecting your age". No one asked for it to begin with. Android is normalising totalitarianism and mass spying on citizens, one step at a time. This is a very bad feature and a very bad development.

Yes, checking the age of people when accessing and buying things (like alcohol at 21) is absolutely a Soviet Union invention. Modern democracies like USA would never check for age of people when entering clubs or buying drugs. Do you listen to yourself?

Post by creatacc » Sun, Aug 02, 2026, 1:57 PM UTC

MichaelZuo wrote: post #512

palata wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely sure what you are trying to say, other than you don't really care as long as you are not the one who is marginalised. Anyway it's generally a tradeoff: is it worth doing it? By adding very strict age verification systems and marginalising people, do we make society globally better or not? Will those age verification systems work to prevent underage people from accessing the stuff we don't want them to ac…

Since my old reply was flagged, this now seems like coordinated trolling. I really doubt you are genuinely incapable of understanding what “regulated electricity utilities” or “expected to provide service” means.

Post by fsflover » Sun, Aug 02, 2026, 6:01 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #238

baby_souffle wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not as described. There's no location info in that path Ip address and general time of day will tell you a lot about location. Not street level, but country or state level. > UUID passing the age check does not need to be re-signed because I've not given any consideration to expiry. So as soon as any one uuid is leaked, it becomes plausible for any child to bypass the gates until the uuid is manually revoked?

> So as soon as any one uuid is leaked, it becomes plausible for any child to bypass the gates until the uuid is manually revoked? How? Phones are already locked down pretty hard. Anything like this would need to be in something secured at the OS level just to stop signatures getting leaked between apps. If you're thinking "kid roots device, replaces OS entirely", that's not the problem of the manufacturer of the OS…

Post by baby_souffle » Mon, Aug 03, 2026, 12:30 AM UTC

fsflover wrote: post #545

ben_w wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So as soon as any one uuid is leaked, it becomes plausible for any child to bypass the gates until the uuid is manually revoked? How? Phones are already locked down pretty hard. Anything like this would need to be in something secured at the OS level just to stop signatures getting leaked between apps. If you're thinking "kid roots device, replaces OS entirely", that's not the problem of the manufacturer of the OS…

> Phones are already locked down pretty hard. Which is not how it should be done at all. Outsourcing your security to a big brother leads to all kinds of problems like planned obsolescence and spying.

Post by fsflover » Mon, Aug 03, 2026, 7:26 AM UTC

baby_souffle wrote: post #547

fsflover wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Phones are already locked down pretty hard. Which is not how it should be done at all. Outsourcing your security to a big brother leads to all kinds of problems like planned obsolescence and spying.

> Outsourcing your security to a big brother leads to all kinds of problems like planned obsolescence and spying. But, won't somebody think of the children! _sigh_.