this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2026
36 points (95.0% liked)

Technology

42547 readers
473 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
remington@beehaw.org
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
36
Age checks creep into Linux as systemd gets a DOB field (www.theregister.com)
submitted 4 hours ago by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Just what I want in my distro.

After weeks of debate, code to record user age was finally merged into the Linux world's favorite system management daemon.

Pull request #40954 to the systemd project is titled "userdb: add birthDate field to JSON user records." It's a new function for the existing userdb service, which adds a field to hold the user's date of birth:

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.

The contents of the field will be protected from modification except by users with root privileges.

The change comes after the recent release of systemd 260 but unless it is reverted for some reason, it will be part of systemd 261. One of the justifications is to facilitate the new parental controls in Flatpak, which are still in the draft stage.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 16 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

This was my reply in another thread about this bullshit:

“It’s just a harmless field; what’s the big deal?”

The big deal is that it’s on the heels of age verification bullshit that fascists are pushing through with the help of tech bros, so that they can eventually push all of us into a scenario where we have zero privacy.

It’s not the adding of the field itself or the fact that it can be filled with nonsense. It’s the reasoning backing it.

“But it’s the law!”

Yeah, fucking and…? It’s a stupid mass surveillance law disguised as a protection, and per usual, it’s written like vague dog shit. This is the smallest part of the wedge. More will come of this and if developers like this keep volunteering themselves to help the fascists, we will all be fucked. Here’s an alternative approach: just don’t add this. You can fight back by not fucking implementing this. Easy.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The big deal is that it’s on the heels of age verification bullshit that fascists are pushing through with the help of tech bros, so that they can eventually push all of us into a scenario where we have zero privacy.

That's a bit difficult to argue in a world where the most prominent of such laws was passed in California, where Democrats control the entire legislative process.

I have not looked up the voting record for it, but would suspect that, like most of the worst laws in the US, it was enthusiastically supported by both parties? Am I wrong about that?

[–] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 2 points 52 minutes ago

passed in California, where Democrats control the entire legislative process.

I think that's the "with the help of tech bros" part. Rather high population of those in California, and boy do they have lobbying money.