Discord/Twitch/Snapchat age verification bypass

Post by phatfish » Fri, Feb 13, 2026, 9:42 AM UTC

vintermann wrote: post #362

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just government legislation, but also lawsuits. I'm confident that Discord is a hotbed of all kinds of abuse and inappropriate / adult content, a lot targeting younger generations, and most of their resources are spent on that. Age verification doesn't solve that problem per se, but it makes things a bit easier. The challenge with "protect the children" is not only evildoers targeting them, but targets actively s…

It seems to me that also if you succeed in making child-only spaces, those spaces become a magnet for adult abusers. They become an all the more desirable prize for them. Whereas spaces like this - hacker news, that is - don't need any age verification because although it's a safe bet some users are underage here too, the abusers would have to search a long time for them and the seemingly most common manipulation tec…

Post by cowboylowrez » Fri, Feb 13, 2026, 10:21 AM UTC

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #468

cowboylowrez wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just make internet 18+, solves everything. demand ID's at the time of purchase.

ICE agents will LOVE this one neat hack

Post by hhh » Fri, Feb 13, 2026, 5:57 PM UTC

ulrikrasmussen wrote: post #298

hhh wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discord does have a problem with grooming.

I did not mean to talk about Discord specifically but all sites which will be required to do age verification. It wouldn't be hard to imagine a situation where social media sites leaning towards the government (e.g. Truth Social, X or the like) will be getting a free pass on using age verification methods which are easy to bypass while social media sites that are more critical (e.g. Reddit) will be sanctioned into im…

Post by ongy » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 4:35 AM UTC

hparadiz wrote: post #448

voxic11 wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the solution to this seems to be to issue multiple "IDs". So essentially the government mints you a batch of like 30 "IDs" and you can use each of those once per service to verify an account (30 verified accounts per service). That allows for the use case of needing to verify multiple accounts without allowing you to verify unlimited accounts (and therefor run into the large scale misuse issue I pointed out). If you…

This is a solved problem in the authentication space. Short lived tokens backed by short lived keys. A token is generated that has a timestamp and is signed by a private key with payload. The public key is available through a public api. You throw out any token older than 30 seconds. Unlimited IDs. That's basically what you want.

Post by adjfasn47573 » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 3:43 PM UTC

iepathos wrote: post #452

voxic11 wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't understand about this approach is if it's truly completely privacy preserving what stops me from making a service where anyone can use my ID to verify? If the site owner really learns nothing about me except for my age then they can't tell that it's the same id being used for every account. And if the government truly knows nothing about the sites I verify on they can't tell that I'm misusing the id eith…

The hole is closed with per-site pseudonyms. Your wallet generates a unique cryptographic key pair for each site so same person + same site = same pseudonym, same person + different sites = different, unlinkable pseudonyms. "The actual correct way" is an overstatement that misses jfaganel99's point. There are always tradeoffs. EUDI is no exception. It sacrifices full anonymity to prevent credential sharing so the sit…