European "age verification" "app" forcing everyone to use Android or iOS

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

EU plans for a government-backed age verification system tied to mobile apps on Android and iOS are raising alarms about privacy, digital exclusion, and dependence on two US-controlled platforms. Commenters argue that making such apps a de facto requirement for accessing social media and other online services would marginalize users without modern smartphones or with alternative operating systems, while expanding state and corporate surveillance capabilities. Some see a state-run solution as still preferable to private biometric verification firms, but many question whether mandatory online age checks should exist at all.

Scope and Technical Design

  • Planned EU “age verification” system currently revolves around a mobile app; demo flows show websites prompting users to scan a QR code with an Android/iOS app.
  • Initial docs referenced Google Play Integrity and Apple App Attestation; that text was later removed from some READMEs.
    • One side: this was only in a reference Android app, since removed; spec doesn’t require attestation and doesn’t forbid non‑mobile or non‑Google/Apple implementations.
    • Other side: national implementations are already planning to use attestation, and spec only mandates mobile apps, so in practice it will be Android/iOS with Google/Apple attestation.

Platform Lock‑In and Digital Exclusion

  • Strong concern that tying age verification to attested Android/iOS:
    • Excludes users of alternative OSes (GrapheneOS, LineageOS, Sailfish, HarmonyOS, Linux phones) and desktop‑only users.
    • Punishes rooted/custom devices and older versions, pushing constant hardware upgrades.
    • Creates heavy anti‑competition pressure against any new mobile platform.
  • Critics note this contradicts EU “digital sovereignty” rhetoric and entrenches dependence on two US companies.

Privacy, Surveillance, and Civil Liberties

  • Many see age verification as de‑facto identity binding, risking:
    • Chilling effects on speech.
    • Future misuse by governments (historical examples of registries later abused for persecution).
    • Foreign access via US legal regimes or app‑store control.
  • EU materials claim only “over/under age” is stored and no tracking of which sites you visit, but skeptics doubt long‑term guarantees and point to frequent data breaches and legal exemptions.

“Protecting Children” vs. Motives and Alternatives

  • Some argue age verification is democratically popular and necessary to keep children away from harmful content (social media, adult content, addictive feeds).
  • Others say:
    • The real driver is broader control and surveillance, with child protection as a pretext.
    • Platforms and parents should use improved parental controls and ban dark patterns, rather than mass deanonymization.
    • Scope definitions (“social media+”) are so broad they cover almost any user‑generated or multiplayer service, and may creep into essential services.

Government vs. Corporate Solutions

  • Some prefer a regulated, possibly open‑source government app over opaque US/Israeli ID‑verification vendors (e.g., Roblox’s face scans).
  • Opponents counter that government systems can also be abused, are hard to opt out of, and may become de facto mandatory for banking, healthcare, and travel.