Discord/Twitch/Snapchat age verification bypass
332 points
3 hours ago
| 22 comments
| age-verifier.kibty.town
| HN
cocoto
2 hours ago
[-]
The real and robust method will be generating artificial video input instead of the real webcam. I really don’t think any platform will be able to counter this. If they start requiring to use a phone with harder to spoof camera input, you will simply be able to put the camera in front of a high resolution screen. The cat and mouse game will not last long.
reply
michaelt
1 hour ago
[-]
> I really don’t think any platform will be able to counter this.

Do platforms want to counter it?

Seems to me with an unreliable video selfie age verification:

* Reasonable people with common sense don't need to upload scans of their driving licenses and passports

* The platform gets to retain users without too much hassle

* Porn site users are forced to create accounts; this enables tracking, boosting ad revenue and growth numbers.

* Politicians get to announce that they have introduced age controls.

* People who claimed age checks wouldn't invade people's privacy don't get proven wrong

* Teens can sidestep the age checks and retain their access; teens trying to hide their porn from their parents is an age-old tradition.

* Parents don't see their teens accessing porn. They feel reassured without having to have any awkward conversations or figure out any baffling smartphone parental controls.

Everyone wins.

reply
internetter
1 hour ago
[-]
Until somebody (likely a politician or anti-porn advocacy group) decides to poke the bear and ruin it
reply
gclawes
2 hours ago
[-]
Don't Windows Hello camera devices have some kind of hardware attestation? I'm sure verification schemes like this will eventually go down that path soon.

My guess is that's probably one of the reasons Google tried to push for Play Store only apps, provide a measurable/verifiable software chain for stuff like this.

reply
nitwit005
1 hour ago
[-]
That the camera is real doesn't imply the thing it's viewing is real.
reply
kulahan
11 minutes ago
[-]
You're not wrong, but I have had to do video verification over a phone once, and it seemed quite advanced. It would flash through a number of colors and settings and take probably 30 frames of you. I presume they're checking for "this came from a screen and not a human", but of course I have no idea how it works, so I don't know if it's truly sophisticated or not.
reply
michaelt
1 hour ago
[-]
As I understand it, 'Windows Hello' requires a near-IR image alongside the RGB image.

It's not the fancy structured light of phone-style Face ID, but it still protects against the more common ways of fooling biometrics, like holding up a photo or wearing a simple paper mask.

reply
nitwit005
1 hour ago
[-]
Fair enough. That removes the virtual option, and you'll be forced to point the camera at your older brother.
reply
OptionOfT
2 hours ago
[-]
Yes they do. Part of the reason why you can't use certain webcams that are Windows Hello compatible (I.e. with IR) in recent versions of Windows.
reply
jsheard
2 hours ago
[-]
They already support ID checks as an alternative to face scanning, if the latter proves to be untenable then it's literally a case of flipping a switch to mandate ID instead.
reply
Gigachad
1 hour ago
[-]
The long term solution would have to be some kind of integration with a government platform where the platform doesn’t see your ID and the government doesn’t see what you are signing up for.

I don’t this will happen in the US but I can see it in more privacy responding countries.

Apple and Google may also add some kind of “child flag” parents can enable which tells websites and apps this user is a child and all age checks should immediately fail.

reply
Aurornis
1 hour ago
[-]
> where the platform doesn’t see your ID

ID checks aren't very worthwhile if anyone can use any ID with no consequences.

How long would it take for someone's 18 year old brother to realize they can charge everyone $10 to "verify" everyone's accounts with their ID, because it doesn't matter whose ID is used?

reply
BobaFloutist
43 minutes ago
[-]
Ok, at which point an adult has taken responsibility for giving them access.

The older brother could also rent an R (or x) rated movie, buy cigarettes, lighters, dry ice, and give them to the kids. The point of the age check is to prevent kids from getting access without an adult in the loop, not to prevent an adult from providing kids access

reply
Gigachad
33 minutes ago
[-]
The system doesn’t have to be bulletproof. It just has to be better than the free for all it is today.
reply
Barrin92
1 hour ago
[-]
this is already how the EU infrastructure for digital ID works, basically. Using public/private keys on your national id, the government functions as a root authority that you (and other trusted verifiers downstream) can identify you with and commercial platforms only get a yes/no when you want to identify yourself but have no access to any data.

South Korea also has had various versions of this even going back to ~2004 I think.

reply
beambot
2 hours ago
[-]
Personal Identity Verification (PIV) and Common Access Card (CAC) credentials used by US government & military via NFC already work on web browsers. States should just move to digital IDs stored on smartphones, with chain of trust up through the secure element...
reply
esseph
1 hour ago
[-]
> Personal Identity Verification (PIV) and Common Access Card (CAC) credentials used by US government & military via NFC already work on web browsers. States should just move to digital IDs stored on smartphones, with chain of trust up through the secure element...

I think you're... missing the point of the pushback. People DO NOT WANT to be identified online, for fear for different types of persecution.

reply
arcologies1985
2 hours ago
[-]
They can't feasibly do this in the US since many people don't have drivers licenses or passports.
reply
jsheard
2 hours ago
[-]
Don't you have to be over 18 to get a credit card in the US? How many wouldn't be able to present a CC or ID?
reply
Aurornis
1 hour ago
[-]
Age verification requires a document that can be matched to your ID, such as by the photo on your ID card.

Credit cards don't have photos.

> How many Americans wouldn't be able to present a CC or ID?

The number of Americans who don't have a government issued photo ID is estimated around 1%. The number gets larger if you start going by technicalities like having an expired ID that hasn't been renewed yet.

The intersection between the 1% of 18+ Americans who don't have an ID and those who want to fully verify their Discord accounts is probably a very small number.

reply
Denatonium
2 hours ago
[-]
Only to have your own card. You can be an authorized user on a credit card even if you're under 18.
reply
jsheard
2 hours ago
[-]
Ah right. That's no use for verification then, unless there's a way for payment gateways to distinguish the primary user from their authorized users.
reply
Gigachad
2 hours ago
[-]
At least in Australia you absolutely can have a debit card under 18 and it’s extremely common for adults to not have a credit card.
reply
jsheard
2 hours ago
[-]
> At least in Australia you absolutely can have a debit card under 18

Same in the UK, but Steam uses credit cards for age verification there and refuses if you provide a debit card instead. Evidently the payment backends can tell credit and debit apart.

reply
carcabob
2 hours ago
[-]
Those without driver's licenses or passports can get a state ID card instead, if I'm not mistaken. A pain, but an option.
reply
buzzerbetrayed
2 hours ago
[-]
Yeah that’s not true. It’s a lie. And we all know why it’s a lie. Adults in the US with ID is 99%
reply
jtmarl1n
2 hours ago
[-]
Somehow they don’t have trouble getting an ID when they want to buy alcohol
reply
bikezen
2 hours ago
[-]
*Citation needed

> Nearly 21 million voting-age U.S. citizens do not have a current (non-expired) driver’s license. Just under 9%, or 20.76 million people, who are U.S. citizens aged 18 or older do not have a non-expired driver’s license. Another 12% (28.6 million) have a non- expired license, but it does not have both their current address and current name. For these individuals, a mismatched address is the largest issue. Ninety-six percent of those with some discrepancy have a license that does not have their current address, 1.5% have their current address but not their current name, and just over 2% do not have their current address or current name on their license. Additionally, just over 1% of adult U.S. citizens do not have any form of government-issued photo identification, which amounts to nearly 2.6 million people.

From https://cdce.umd.edu/sites/cdce.umd.edu/files/pubs/Voter%20I...

reply
Aurornis
1 hour ago
[-]
That seems like a good citation, but it supports the 99% number above

> Additionally, just over 1% of adult U.S. citizens do not have any form of government-issued photo identification, which amounts to nearly 2.6 million people.

The rest of the statistic is about driver's licenses specifically, including technicalities like expiration dates and address changes. The online ID check for age verification don't care about the address part anyway, in my experience.

If someone has an expired drivers' license or they changed their name and haven't updated their IDs, they have bigger problems than age-verifying their Discord accounts.

reply
Brybry
53 minutes ago
[-]
My driver's license was expired for 8 years until last year. I wasn't driving so the pressure to renew it was very low.

I actually only renewed it to get medical care and because renewing the license was only a little more expensive than getting an ID-only card.

It did prevent me from using some porn sites because my state requires ID verification but many sites just ignore the requirement so I just didn't use the sites that required ID.

reply
edm0nd
2 hours ago
[-]
wat. the majority of Americans have a DL, ID, or Passport. What a silly thing to say.

For DL alone:

>Data indicates that approximately 84% to 91% of all Americans hold a driver's license, with roughly 237.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. as of 2023.

Add in an ID and Passport and we are likely closer to 99%

reply
alright2565
2 hours ago
[-]
ID is much easier to forge, it's just a flat 2-d shape. None of the physical security features come through in images.
reply
TheDong
39 minutes ago
[-]
In functioning states, the ID contains a chip with a private key that can be used to sign a message, and ID verification would not be an image of the ID card, but rather holding your phone's NFC reader to the card and signing a message from the site.

In Japan, there are already multiple apps which use something like this to verify user's age via the "my number card" + the smartphone's NFC reader.

It's more or less impossible to forge without stealing the government's private keys, or infiltrating the government and issuing a fraudulent card.

Of course, the US isn't a functioning state, the people don't trust it with their identity and security and would rather simply give all their information to private companies instead.

reply
junon
2 hours ago
[-]
When I had to prove my passport for my bank over a video call they told me to rotate it around in the sunlight to show that it had the holo-whatever ink. So I wouldn't put it past them.
reply
digiown
2 hours ago
[-]
A call requires a human, which is inherently not scalable. And even humans have trouble distinguishing AI content these days.
reply
ziml77
1 hour ago
[-]
And it's not like Discord actually cares. They just care about appearing like they care. Something to keep the heat off of them from regulators and angry parents.
reply
krisoft
1 hour ago
[-]
A “video call” perhaps requires a human, but the type of test described need not be a video call. One can imagine a network trained to distinguish a fake id card from real one from a video recorded where the user is asked to move the card such that the holograph is glinting in the sunlight.
reply
airstrike
2 hours ago
[-]
And lose every user in the process
reply
jasonfarnon
2 hours ago
[-]
Is there any data on what kind of hits to enrollment were taken by facebook, gmail etc when they added requirements like a phone #? Maybe it's buried in their sec filings. Anyway, this "cat and mouse" game is probably irrelevant. They're not looking for and don't need a perfect system. Bc 99% of the public couldn't care less about handing over their information.
reply
jasonfarnon
2 hours ago
[-]
Is there any data on what kind of hits to enrollment were taken by facebook, gmail etc when they added requirements like a phone #? Maybe it's buried in their sec filings.
reply
dark-star
2 hours ago
[-]
I think you massively overestimate how many people actually care.

My guess is that 95% or more of all Discord users do not care and simply upload their selfie or ID card and be done with it. I know I will (although they did say that they expect 80%+ to not require verification since they can somehow infer their age from other parameters)

reply
esseph
1 hour ago
[-]
> I know I will

Are you a minority, LGBTQ+, etc or of a "different" political persuasion that might have any reason to be distrustful of the US government? If so, you probably wouldn't just "be done with it".

reply
Forgeties79
2 hours ago
[-]
Most people under the driving age don’t have ID’s, at least in the US.
reply
TheDong
48 minutes ago
[-]
There is an easy solution to this - require a government ID, and only permit government IDs that can be verified with the state's government.

There are a lot of countries and US states where such validation is possible.

Given the state is mandating these checks, it only makes sense that the state should be responsible for making it possible to perform these checks.

reply
darth_avocado
44 minutes ago
[-]
Remind me again, why do people need government approved ids to access discord in the first place? Everyone in this thread is solutioning how we could make government ids work, but no one seems to be asking if that’s a good idea.
reply
subscribed
27 minutes ago
[-]
Because governments really want people to think about children with naughty stuff.

Gross.

(I'm not verifying anywhere unless required for official business. Still have my non-KYC sim for people)

reply
samename
36 minutes ago
[-]
Manufacturing consent at work
reply
gnarbarian
2 hours ago
[-]
you counter this by using an id verified service like login.gov or okta verify.

That's the endgame and what the EU really wants. No poasting unless they can arrest you for inconvenient memes.

reply
leftouterjoins
2 hours ago
[-]
Yes this is spot on. Apple & Google mobile platforms are locked down tight for this reason. Try installing okta verify on graphene OS. You cannot.
reply
monksy
1 hour ago
[-]
They're getting worse with attested and validated environments. This one of the reasons that google is trying to kill sideloaded apps and checking for root access.

Weird thing.. the people who want this validation fully expect for you to pay for, maintain, keep it valid, and pay for upkeep/service for their desires. Honestly, this is something that SHOULD get very aggressive pushback.. but most people accept for no reason.

reply
apeters
2 hours ago
[-]
Wow. The EU.
reply
gnarbarian
1 hour ago
[-]
yes, avoiding EU fines and ensuring availability there is most likely the motivating factor behind the change.
reply
bob1029
1 hour ago
[-]
They could do what a bank does and run everyone's ID through chexsystems. It's really hard to defeat this. Fake identities don't exist in the system and stolen ones would get flagged by geographic, time of use and velocity rules.
reply
decimalenough
1 hour ago
[-]
Doesn't work for places like Australia, where the social media ban applies only to under-16s. Teenagers rarely have ID, especially in countries where the minimum driving age is higher than 16 (read: most of the world outside the US).
reply
bob1029
1 hour ago
[-]
The concept of identity doesn't necessarily have to be embodied by a piece of physical plastic that goes into a wallet.

Ad-hoc identification can occur via other means like dynamic knowledge based authentication. The sources of this mechanism can be literally anything. Social media itself being one obvious source for the target cohort.

You can walk into many US financial institutions without an ID and still get really far using KBA workflows. The back office will hassle you for a proper scan of a physical ID, but you can often get an account open and funded with just KBA.

reply
michaelt
1 hour ago
[-]
Knowledge-based authentication is a joke - it doesn't work at all.

This basically only gets used for businesses that need a fig leaf for regulatory purposes. You know, $30 loans for uber eats and tiny loans like that.

reply
RupertSalt
1 hour ago
[-]
Unix and Windows and MacOS and every computer since 1970 has relied on knowledge-based authentication, so let's cool the hyperbole.

In the nomenclature of Multi-Factor Authentication, "something you know" is one factor. So if you know a password and you have a hardware token, that's 2 factors and combining different types is the key to MFA.

Many "knowledge based authentication" tries to string together "things you know" without a different type, and that's a weakness.

However, it can be strengthened through various techniques. If a human is authenticating you in real-time, they may choose a factoid that an impostor is unlikely to know which may be agreed in advance. For example, the security questions combined with other challenges, or a "curve ball" that may elicit a stutter, pause, or prevarication. This is a dynamic method that bob refers to.

In fact, knowledge-based quizzes are used routinely by credit reporting agencies -- the big ones like Experian. And they've been presented by background check services, too. They work like this: they scrape your credit reports and public records in a deep dive for your old addresses, employers, contact info, a whole smorgasbord of stuff. Maybe attackers know some of it. But it's multiple choice: "which of these did you live at? None of the above? All of them?" "Which one of these wasn't your employer?" And the attacker would need to have the same list of public records, and also know the wrong answers! Knowing the wrong answers is the "curve ball" here! How many attackers know that I didn't work for Acme, Inc, and I never lived in San Antonio?

It's also worth pointing out that I've opened at least 3 bank accounts without setting foot in a bank. Even if yours is brick-and-mortar, they probably have a flow on their website for account creation and funding. It is not difficult to satisfy their ID requirements. If they glitch, then you're just flagged a bit, and you follow up as instructed. I've also authenticated identity to the federal government agencies, and accessed several DMV services, using only the apps and websites.

People may feel reticent about establishing their identity online, but isn't it better that you do it first before someone else does? If your identity is known and registered and builds up data points that correspond to you, aren't you less likely to be a victim of fraud or identity theft when things don't add up?

reply
darth_avocado
45 minutes ago
[-]
> The cat and mouse game will not last long.

Yes but for completely different reasons: I will not bother to play the game and stop using the platform.

reply
kevinh
2 hours ago
[-]
Alternatively, hand someone $20 and your phone and have them do the verification for you.
reply
pfych
2 hours ago
[-]
This is just what I did, and plan to continue to do.
reply
ddtaylor
2 hours ago
[-]
You can just use a video from YouTube there are people that do it that just don't care
reply
qwertox
2 hours ago
[-]
you put a flickering light, pwm creating artifacts in the video and have it apologize for it, to hopefully break some watermarks. my led light started acting up since yesterday, i have no other bulb.
reply
ddtaylor
2 hours ago
[-]
I did this with OBS Virtual Camera for a thing in Oregon and it worked.
reply
tjpnz
2 hours ago
[-]
Death Stranding 2 photo-mode works well for this.
reply
toomuchtodo
2 hours ago
[-]
You require a human to identity proof in real life and bind that to a digital identity with a strong authenticator. Anti fraud detection systems can suspend or ban if evasion attempts are detected. Perfect is not the target, it doesn’t have to be.

See: Login.gov (USPS offline proofing) and other national identity systems.

(digital identity is a component of my work)

reply
gruez
2 hours ago
[-]
>You require a human to identity proof in real life and bind that to a digital identity

That's going to be a no from me, dawg. I'm sympathetic to ID checks like if you're buying beer or whatever, but not linking my real life identity to discord or whatever.

reply
toomuchtodo
2 hours ago
[-]
Not my call, it’ll be the law of the land. Some may leave, but most won’t, and that’s good enough for corporate and enterprise value purposes.

Pornhub is fighting state age verification and keeps losing state by state, for example.

reply
dark-star
2 hours ago
[-]
You have to show ID to buy beer?
reply
subscribed
2 hours ago
[-]
If you aren't obviously adult then yeah. Where do you live so there are no laws on selling the alcohol to children?
reply
michaelt
1 hour ago
[-]
Store doesn't get to photograph your ID, share it with 548 of their advertising partners, and leak it to 7 different hacker groups.
reply
wileydragonfly
2 hours ago
[-]
Why should anyone inclined to want to buy beer have to show ID to do it?
reply
chrysoprace
2 hours ago
[-]
I don't know how it works where you live, but in many jurisdictions around the world (including the one I live in), you have to provide ID to prove that you're of drinking age.
reply
toomuchtodo
2 hours ago
[-]
Because you’re required to in all 50 states to prove you’re over 21.
reply
coldpie
2 hours ago
[-]
I don't think that's true? Rather, stores must not sell to anyone under 21. I'm almost 40 and rarely get carded these days.
reply
MrDrMcCoy
2 hours ago
[-]
Which is by nature transient. There are many more and quite dangerous strings attached to doing this online. You never know if all parties involved in the verification are trustworthy.
reply
EGreg
2 hours ago
[-]
Actually, there are many ways. For example they change colors on your screen and check in real time how it reflects on your face, eyes, etc. Very hard for a model to be trained to respond this quickly to what's on the screen.

They also have you move your head in multiple directions.

reply
cocoto
2 hours ago
[-]
You could always generate a random face model with real time rendering with enough details to trick any AI detector (or even human) and then you can do real time animation to orders or screen light tricks. You could also simply use some face filter on your face and these ones are really convincing these days (like on Snapchat and such).
reply
EGreg
2 hours ago
[-]
Show me such a model.

It would be interesting to see a model completely indistinguishable from a real human in behavior, as well as real-time reflection off different surfaces, etc.

The next step would be to make a complete digital clone of a person based on surreptitiously recording them with hidden cameras. I doubt it's possible.

reply
viraptor
1 hour ago
[-]
The pieces are there. If you're not modifying everything in the image all the time, there's no reason to run it through a visual model. Generate it once (we have it), transform into textured 3d model (we have it), animate and map to movements with vtuber software (we have it). Adding screen colour reflection is trivial. We just need a pipeline for this.

We had facerig for over a decade now. Facefilter recently. It's not hard anymore.

reply
ddtaylor
2 hours ago
[-]
This is doable using high end stuff like Runway with a draft quality.

Your better bet would be to generate a face as an image and then you can easily generate that same face in different expected poses and conditions. You can then use existing models where you get to select the starting image and the ending image. Add some filters and noise to just make it look like normal crappy low light camera.

As for the color that's another expected condition and can be overlayed or pre-generated.

reply
Retr0id
2 hours ago
[-]
Hm, when attempting it I get redirected to https://age-verifier.kibty.town/webview?url=null, which says:

{"error":"error parsing webview url"}

Edit: Apparently my discord account is in some kind of A/B feature test that uses a different verification provider, Persona

reply
joeevans1000
1 hour ago
[-]
Persona is the same company oftentimes used for the "show your ID to get in the bar and also we'll data harvest you... and share your data with various people if asked". Go ahead and google search on them for more insight.
reply
daniel31x13
1 hour ago
[-]
reply
0x1ch
1 hour ago
[-]
Hopefully your comment gets pushed to the top. Would like the security guys from the blog to see it.
reply
internetter
1 hour ago
[-]
It only works because the other provider has a more private implementation compounded with bad security.
reply
scarygliders
2 hours ago
[-]
It does appear to work. I received a message from Discord saying "We determined you're in the adult group. <learn more>"

narrator> And that's when he discovers his account has now been hacked...

;)

reply
0x1ch
2 hours ago
[-]
Worked for me as well. Hopefully my account of 11+ years isn't penalized because of this. Not like it matters because I'll quit anyways if forced to send my face or ID.
reply
dark-star
2 hours ago
[-]
You probably won't even have to validate then. I guess they can safely assume that you didn't create your account when you were 7 years or younger. They said they expect 80% of users or so to be auto-verified by some other means (account age, typing statistics, whatever)
reply
varun_ch
1 hour ago
[-]
Unfortunately I wouldn’t be so sure that there aren’t any 7 year old Discord users
reply
Retr0id
2 hours ago
[-]
My account is almost a decade old and discord is still asking me to complete age verification.
reply
poly2it
1 hour ago
[-]
Are they rolling this out in stages? I haven't been asked to prove the age of my account.
reply
Retr0id
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm in the UK (where the law allows them to use heuristics).
reply
rationalist
22 minutes ago
[-]
So VPN to the UK?
reply
Retr0id
19 minutes ago
[-]
What?
reply
0x1ch
1 hour ago
[-]
Wonderful. Hopefully I'm not retroactively banned for things I said when I was fourteen on servers long gone.
reply
hypercube33
1 hour ago
[-]
This isn't as fun as using the g-man from half life to verify
reply
kattagarian
2 hours ago
[-]
i changed the password later just to be sure.
reply
GaryBluto
2 hours ago
[-]
I don't understand why (mostly) young people put so much effort into remaining customers of a service that is actively hostile against them and that they do not like. Does the convenience of remaining on a service you don't like the management of outweigh the mild effort to find an alternative solution?
reply
zahlman
2 hours ago
[-]
> the mild effort to find an alternative solution?

Calling it a "mild effort" assumes skills that older generations took for granted but many young people seem to have been actively trained out of. We're past the era where I take for granted that aspiring programmers need to have the basics of a terminal or shell explained to them, into one where they might need an explanation for the basics of a file system and paths. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that hardly any of them could touch-type, either. (I wonder what the speed record is for cell phone text input...)

Yes, they can query a search engine (kind of) or, I guess nowadays, ask ChatGPT. But there's going to be more to setting up an alternative than that. And they need to have the idea that an alternative might exist. (After all, they're asking ChatGPT, not some alternative offering from a company that provides alternatives to Google services....)

reply
nine_k
1 hour ago
[-]
I don't think it's beyond their comprehension to ask: "how can I have a chat system that I personally control?" The rest will be taken care of.

Look at the Amnezia VPN. It's an app that helps you buy a VPS from a range of cloud provides, then sets it up, completely from the phone, as an exit node under user control.

I don't see why a chat server cannot be set up and managed this way. It only takes one dedicated developer to produce.

reply
sli
34 minutes ago
[-]
Even considering that one can personally control their own chat service is already a pretty big leap in technical knowledge. Many, many average users don't even know that's an option, nevermind how it's even done.
reply
johnnyanmac
1 hour ago
[-]
>The rest will be taken care of.

by a system with a incentive to keep them in centralized black boxes, yes.

>The rest will be taken care of.

It's never the tech hat's hard, but the networks. If people were able to just jump on a whim a lot of dynamics of modern corruption would fall apart.

reply
nine_k
36 minutes ago
[-]
Now we're having an event when networks would be shedding kids en masse, all at approximately the same time. It the best possible time for switching, when clinging to the old discord / snapchat / other centralized blackbox becomes hard or impossible.
reply
SabrinaJewson
1 hour ago
[-]
You’re ignoring the obvious reason, aside from the network effect: there are no alternative solutions. Some people are building Discord alternatives but they are far from production-ready, often lacking critical features (e.g. Matrix not being able to delete rooms, or still having trouble with decrypting messages). It is simply the case at this point in time that Discord is factually the least bad option for many many use cases.
reply
unleaded
9 minutes ago
[-]
The network effect as seen in the other comments plays a big part, but also discord offers a useful service that really nobody else does well. there's a lot wrong with it but you can still create a community in a few clicks and you have text messages, photos, videos, gifs, voice chats, screenshare, a comprehensive permission/role system, tons of bots.. all for free and without needing to be too tech savvy, that's pretty damn cool.
reply
oliyoung
1 hour ago
[-]
> I don't understand why (mostly) young people put so much effort into remaining customers of a service that is actively hostile against them

The Network Effect.

That's it. Their friends are there so they're there.

reply
Anonbrit
2 hours ago
[-]
I don't control most of the discord communities I'm in. Some have been going a long time, and every platform migration sheds and shreds members. The 'mild effort' to move an old community to a new platform more often than not killed the community
reply
GaryBluto
2 hours ago
[-]
> and every platform migration sheds and shreds members.

What's the problem? You're filtering out people who don't really care about participation in whatever group or society is there. People who want to participate will move to an acceptable service and those who feel that is too much effort probably weren't participating much (if at all) anyway - in that case the only difference is the visible list of people with accounts going down, not the actual "users".

reply
ipdashc
1 hour ago
[-]
In most cases, I would like to speak with those people and would miss them if I lost regular contact because they didn't want to change platforms.

Most people just care about being able to talk to each other, not their devotion to some "group or society".

reply
Gigachad
2 hours ago
[-]
The people will just recreate the same community on the same platform without you as the owner. They don’t care about you running it.

It’s also a futile effort since age checks for adult content is becoming the law around the world so soon any platform you move to will have the same checks.

reply
KittenInABox
2 hours ago
[-]
I disagree with this sentiment. It is entirely possible that there will be people who are regulars on one platform who are just unable (actually unable or perceives themselves unable) to migrate and the morale lost from losing their regulars is huge. Or a subset who insist on staying, forming their own sub-community, and neither the migrating group nor the people who insist on staying produce enough engagement for the members and so the community as a whole fizzles out. This is all squishiness. There is a reason why deplatforming appears to work in reducing the effectiveness of political groups, even if the people who remain in the community post-deplatforming are hardened in their loyalty to the political policy of the group.
reply
johnnyanmac
1 hour ago
[-]
>You're filtering out people who don't really care about participation in whatever group or society is there.

You underestimate how many people would rather do nothing than be inconvenienced, sadly. If you're not the personality that the community is rotating around, you'll find the migration pretty lonely.

Heck, even esablished personalities can only do so much. Remember that Microsoft paid top Twitch streamers 10s of milllions to move to Mixer for exclusive streaming. Even that wasn't enough to give a leg up.

reply
Gigachad
2 hours ago
[-]
Why do middle aged people still use Facebook marketplace rather than another platform? Because even if you put in the effort to use something different, you’ll be the only one there.

The effort to coordinate everyone to move at the same time is bordering on impossible.

reply
ddtaylor
1 hour ago
[-]
First mover advantage with network effects
reply
dpkirchner
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm the first and only one of my friend group on my IRC server. It's an elite claim, I know.
reply
dmitrygr
48 minutes ago
[-]

  > Facebook marketplace rather than another platform
which? I'd love to, but FB marketplace is the platform.
reply
Gigachad
32 minutes ago
[-]
Exactly. And discord is _the_ platform for others.
reply
jwkerr
2 hours ago
[-]
Most people don’t really care that their privacy is violated, at least not any more than a superficial “oh well it’s obvious they’re doing that, but what can you do about it!”, no point switching platform if there’s no one there to talk to.
reply
diath
45 minutes ago
[-]
No other chat platform has as many seamless features and such a big userbase. The friction of verifying the identity for a random person that doesn't care about privacy is not really a big deal compared to the downgrade that migrating to another platform would be.
reply
brooke2k
1 hour ago
[-]
I think for a lot of people (me included) Discord isn't just a chat service like WhatsApp but more of a "home base" where you can hang out with all your friends, make new friends, share media, chat, play games together, stream games to each other, etc.

In the gaming sphere it's so universally used that all the friends you've ever made while gaming are on it, as well as all your chat history, and the entire history of whatever server you met them on. And if you want to make new friends, say to play a particular game, it's incredibly easy to find the official game server and start talking to people and forming lobbies with them.

My main friend group in particular has a server that we've had running since we were teenagers (all in our mid-20s now) which is a central place for all of the conversations we've ever had, all of the pictures we've ever sent each other, all the videos we've ever shared, and so on. That's something I search back through frequently looking for stuff we talked about years ago.

So I'm not saying it's impossible to move, but understand that it would require:

- Intentionally separating from the entire gaming sphere, making it so, so much harder to make new friends or talk to people. - Getting every single one of your friends that you play games with to agree to downloading and signing up for this new service (in my case that would be approx. a dozen people) - Accepting that this huge repository of history will be wiped out when moving to the new service (I suppose you could always log back in and scroll through it, but it's at least _harder_ to access, and is separated from all your new history)

On top of this, every time I've looked for capable alternatives to Discord I've come up empty-handed. Nothing else, as far as I can tell supports free servers, the ability to be in multiple servers, text chat divided into separate channels, optional threaded communication, voice chat joinable at any time with customizable audio setup (voice gate, push-to-talk, etc), game streaming from the voice chat at any time, and some "friend" system so that DMs and private calls can be made with each other. And even if I found one, then again I can't express enough that in the gaming sphere effectively _zero_ people use it or even know what it is.

Anyways, I'm not saying that nothing could make me abandon Discord, I'm just saying that doing so is a tremendous effort, and the result at the end will be a significantly worse online social life. So not a mild inconvienence.

reply
nomdep
1 hour ago
[-]
Because they are used to follow limitations since the day they were born, and have all the time in the world
reply
herpdyderp
2 hours ago
[-]
> remaining customers of a service that is actively hostile against them and that they do not like

And yet here we all are, still in an uproar every time GitHub goes down. Change is slow, we can't all leave GitHub in a day. Same with Discord users.

reply
ddtaylor
1 hour ago
[-]
I think the Discord situation is a bit different.

Getting everyone to switch away from Discord has been hard because getting everyone to spontaneously switch with no clear benefit hasn't worked. They want to just keep using the app and get back into a game with their friend.

It's different to lock a door and task users with getting the key to come back in. This is more similar to an MMORPG that kills their audience because they cause the core group to stop playing and then all of the other players experiences get worse, which causes a downward trend that avalanches.

reply
Barrin92
1 hour ago
[-]
>remaining customers of a service that is actively hostile against them

because that's not how they view it. For most Gen Z users and younger their digital identity already is their identity and they have no problem verifying it because the idea of being anonymous on a social network defeats the purpose of being there in the first place.

reply
johnnyanmac
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm more than ready to leave if push really comes to shove. Wouldn't be the first time.

From experience, I know if I leave that few of my friends will follow. So I understand the resistance.

reply
g947o
1 hour ago
[-]
I mean, it's called a social network
reply
Computer0
2 hours ago
[-]
I am sure that is part of the appeal to the developing mind, the adversarial nature.
reply
GaryBluto
2 hours ago
[-]
Nothing more "adversarial" than continuing to allow a service to leach on whatever information you're giving to it despite it kicking you in the face at every opportunity.
reply
Computer0
40 minutes ago
[-]
Key word is developing
reply
brokenmachine
56 minutes ago
[-]
On Discord, I got the captcha, but then after it redirected, I got a page saying:

    {"error":"failed to execute k-id privately action (status=404)"}
I'm very much an adult, this whole thing is ridiculous. Ban me, I don't care.
reply
paularmstrong
47 minutes ago
[-]
I got this, but then refreshing that page made it work for me
reply
diogenes_atx
37 minutes ago
[-]
The text with the code shows another step.
reply
brokenmachine
26 minutes ago
[-]
I tried it a couple more times, and it worked on the third try and showed me the green successfully verified message.
reply
engelo_b
3 hours ago
[-]
the cat-and-mouse game of digital age verification is such a massive compliance headache. if these guards are this easy to bypass the platforms are basically just checking a box to satisfy regulators while leaving the actual liability wide open. it’s hard to underwrite trust when the verification layer is this brittle.
reply
consumer451
2 hours ago
[-]
There is a way to do this, where nearly everyone is fine.[0]

However, the orgs don’t get to capture verified adult user identity to pad the value of their user data profiles…

[0] https://blog.google/company-news/inside-google/around-the-gl...

reply
brian-armstrong
2 hours ago
[-]
It seems unlikely that "is user adult" is not already easily modeled by any of these companies to within a very high degree of confidence. Even 15 or 20 years ago Google search could bracket your age pretty effectively. It doesn't seem like this adds metadata that wasn't already there.
reply
chatmasta
1 hour ago
[-]
Google prompts me to verify my age on my account I created in 2004. They’re not trying too hard.
reply
digiown
1 hour ago
[-]
If they admit this, they wouldn't be able to advertise to children anymore without breaking many rules.
reply
Dusseldorf
1 hour ago
[-]
Except that in the legal sense, "is user adult" flips from false to true overnight, and there isn't an easy way to account for that in any model that doesn't include verified ID. Same reason many liquor stores ID anyone who looks younger than 40.
reply
tentacleuno
2 hours ago
[-]
It was never going to be perfect. I suspect the goal with things like these is to add additional friction to the process, to make it much harder for the general population to bypass them.
reply
Namidairo
1 hour ago
[-]
I suspected something along these lines was possible when I looked at this provider a couple months ago.

If I recall, I had a fairly decent view of their various checks because it was delivered completely unminified, including a couple amusing sections and unimplemented features. (A gesture detector with the middle finger gesture in the enumerable commented out, for example...)

Another attack vector that I speculated upon was intercepting and replacing their tflite model with ones own, returning whatever results required.

Additionally, I believe they had a check for virtual camera names in place, as checks would quietly fail with a generic message in the interface, but show the reason as being virtual camera within responses. (Camera names are mutable though, so...)

reply
Fnoord
28 minutes ago
[-]
Your browser is not currently supported. Please use a recommended browser or learn more here.

Apparently Twitch doesn't like Mozilla Firefox...

reply
syntaxing
2 hours ago
[-]
Wow that was a fun read, I never thought about the technical implementation of these verification systems.
reply
monksy
1 hour ago
[-]
This project is something that we would want to archive pretty quickly. I can see those service being upset over that being exposed.
reply
digiown
1 hour ago
[-]
You're assuming discord or twitch actually care. I doubt they actually do. It's there to preempt the regulatory hammer, and the presence of clunky workarounds like this doesn't affect it if it doesn't reach the mainstream. If it does, they can just patch it.
reply
zerebos
1 hour ago
[-]
That code snippet for Discord is pretty brittle and will likely break with future updates.
reply
electrotype
2 hours ago
[-]
I'm against workarounds. I'm pro "leaving them and only come back when Digital ID is not required anymore".
reply
Bilal_io
1 hour ago
[-]
If only most people leave them and it affects their bottom line.
reply
grishka
1 hour ago
[-]
Except you don't get to choose where other people host their communities.
reply
lelandfe
2 hours ago
[-]
Love that hackers are still using "greetz"
reply
at__
1 hour ago
[-]
Came here to say the same, has been a long time since I've seen one of those in the wild!
reply
nirav72
1 hour ago
[-]
That worked for me. Got a response on desktop discord client once it was done. Wonder how long before they lock this down.
reply
lemoncookiechip
1 hour ago
[-]
Any chance this can be used to token-log people's accounts?
reply
mzajc
36 minutes ago
[-]
It looks like only k-id's session token is transmitted back to the site, which can't be used to authenticate to Discord.

You can also self-host the backend from https://github.com/xyzeva/k-id-age-verifier.

reply
k33n
1 hour ago
[-]
Age verification itself isn't such a bad thing. I feel most people are more angry about having to verify their actual identity. Every ad provider knows your address and complete identity every time you log into anything though. I guess its the illusion of anonymity that's so popular.
reply
relma2
3 hours ago
[-]
Alright, how long until they patch this? Anyone takin' bets?
reply
idontwantthis
1 hour ago
[-]
Is this not easily patched by the provider encrypting and signing the whole payload? I would have thought that would be table stakes for an identity provider.
reply
arcologies1985
1 hour ago
[-]
The identity provider is on-device and has to run on phones which don't do hardware attestation.
reply
idontwantthis
52 minutes ago
[-]
That’s only for selfies. If they use and id I’m pretty sure it is getting sent to a k-id server.
reply
thephotonsphere
2 hours ago
[-]
too late: I have already deleted my Discord account; Twitch is also going to enforce this? hmmm...
reply
dark-star
2 hours ago
[-]
if you don't actively use discord, then this is probably the best solution, I agree
reply
zb3
1 hour ago
[-]
Worked, hopefully Discord will retroactively discover this and ban my account.
reply
taesu
2 hours ago
[-]
doesn't work - request times out.
reply
kotaKat
2 hours ago
[-]
worked here - as soon as i did it i heard a dm ping from the 'official' discord account...

"We determined you're in the adult age group."

reply
whh
2 hours ago
[-]
That was fast.
reply