From syarus at gmail.com Mon Mar 23 15:09:52 2026 From: syarus at gmail.com (stuart yarus) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 17:09:52 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd Message-ID: Hi, >From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: "Last week we talked about age verification laws , what they are and the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age tracking feature was added to systemd : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal that needs a data source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by the user and the user's applications. " "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made to revert the change . The attempted reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date storage or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user data in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project leader Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " -- Stuart Yarus From david.good1 at gmail.com Mon Mar 23 15:50:58 2026 From: david.good1 at gmail.com (David Good) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 17:50:58 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So the anti-systemd crowd is slowly being proven right ? They were always concerned that systemd was centralizing things too much and making the system into a tool managing the user rather than the other way round . These concerns only grew louder when Pottering went to Microsoft . To be fair to Pottering , his work has definitely changed the Linux tools and experience to be a lot more "modern" , though the question remains whether or not it's "better" . --David On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 5:10?PM stuart yarus wrote: > Hi, > > From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: > > "Last week we talked about age verification laws > , what they are and > the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age > tracking feature was added to systemd > : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal > that needs a > data > source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata > (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The > birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by > the user and the user's applications. " > > "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made > to revert the change . The attempted > reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date storage > or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user data > in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like > checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more > invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project leader > Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " > > > -- > Stuart Yarus > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From crem1111 at hushmail.com Mon Mar 23 16:10:58 2026 From: crem1111 at hushmail.com (crem1111 at hushmail.com) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:10:58 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Is it April 1st already? CRem From: Discuss On Behalf Of stuart yarus via Discuss Sent: Monday, March 23, 2026 5:10 PM To: Open Discussion List ; NTLUG Discussion List ; dfwrpi at groups.io Cc: stuart yarus Subject: [Discuss] age verification in systemd Hi, >From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: "Last week we talked about age verification laws , what they are and the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age tracking feature was added to systemd : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal that needs a data source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by the user and the user's applications. " "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made to revert the change . The attempted reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date storage or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user data in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project leader Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " -- Stuart Yarus From david.eddleman at gmail.com Mon Mar 23 16:25:02 2026 From: david.eddleman at gmail.com (David Eddleman) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:25:02 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: I wouldn't say that. systemd does do some things right, but they creeped it over the years to do more and more. If they had just kept it to init-level stuff, then they would've been fine. But systemd managing disks, mountpoints, and a lot more is much too bloated and a source of a lot of the issues. Also this has caused a fork of systemd. Because that's a wonderful thing about OSS: if you don't like it, fork it! The primary one is liberated systemd, but several other forks have been done. This should be a sign to the systemd developers, but I think they're too ideologically captured. But I think at this point the next solution is to ditch systemd entirely where possible. I'll probably continue to use RH and derivatives for work since I'm stuck there, but I'll probably use OpenMandriva, Devuan, or Artix for my personal builds in the future. FYI, this is a list being maintained by Bryan Lunduke of those he knows who are or aren't going to comply: https://github.com/BryanLunduke/DoesItAgeVerify (I have heard Arch is considering it, or at least has some of the same people pushing, so who knows there.) On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 5:52?PM David Good wrote: > So the anti-systemd crowd is slowly being proven right ? They were always > concerned that systemd was centralizing things too much and making the > system into a tool managing the user rather than the other way round . > These concerns only grew louder when Pottering went to Microsoft . > > To be fair to Pottering , his work has definitely changed the Linux tools > and experience to be a lot more "modern" , though the question remains > whether or not it's "better" . > > --David > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 5:10?PM stuart yarus wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: > > > > "Last week we talked about age verification laws > > , what they are > and > > the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age > > tracking feature was added to systemd > > : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal > > that needs a > > data > > source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata > > (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The > > birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by > > the user and the user's applications. " > > > > "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was > made > > to revert the change . The attempted > > reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date > storage > > or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user > data > > in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like > > checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more > > invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project > leader > > Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " > > > > > > -- > > Stuart Yarus > > _______________________________________________ > > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From leroy_tennison at prodigy.net Mon Mar 23 17:59:16 2026 From: leroy_tennison at prodigy.net (LEROY TENNISON) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:59:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <560122533.2146037.1774313956476@mail.yahoo.com> Given the laws, there is a real dilemma regardless of your feelings regarding Pottering.? What strikes me is this age-verification thing is pretty much a matter of trust, which, with computers, is pretty much a joke.? Or am I missing something? On Monday, March 23, 2026 at 06:18:15 PM CDT, crem1111--- via Discuss wrote: Is it April 1st already? ? CRem ? ? From: Discuss On Behalf Of stuart yarus via Discuss Sent: Monday, March 23, 2026 5:10 PM To: Open Discussion List ; NTLUG Discussion List ; dfwrpi at groups.io Cc: stuart yarus Subject: [Discuss] age verification in systemd ? Hi, ? >From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: ? "Last week we talked about age verification laws, what they are and the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age tracking feature was added to systemd: "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal that needs a data source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by the user and the user's applications. " "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made to revert the change. The attempted reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date storage or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user data in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project leader Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " ? ? -- Stuart Yarus -- Discuss mailing list Discuss at dfwuug.org https://www.dfwuug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss From slitt at troubleshooters.com Mon Mar 23 18:43:04 2026 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 21:43:04 -0400 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> David Eddleman said on Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:25:02 -0500 >FYI, this is a list being maintained by Bryan Lunduke of those he >knows who are or aren't going to comply: LOL, systemd and Lunduke. They deserve each other. They're brothers in arms, each being a parasitic carpetbagger messing up Linux. SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com From david.eddleman at gmail.com Mon Mar 23 19:16:21 2026 From: david.eddleman at gmail.com (David Eddleman) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 21:16:21 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: <560122533.2146037.1774313956476@mail.yahoo.com> References: <560122533.2146037.1774313956476@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: It's intrusion into your life, an erosion of privacy. They start with requiring age verification for you to do things, then eventually require a face scan or ID verification. That ties your computer to who you are. From there you can see how downhill it goes. And quickly. It's more control over what you can do with your own hardware and software and what you can say and do on the internet. On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 8:00?PM LEROY TENNISON wrote: > Given the laws, there is a real dilemma regardless of your > feelings regarding Pottering. What strikes me is this age-verification > thing is pretty much a matter of trust, which, with computers, is pretty > much a joke. Or am I missing something? > On Monday, March 23, 2026 at 06:18:15 PM CDT, crem1111--- via Discuss < > discuss at dfwuug.org> wrote: > > > Is it April 1st already? > > > > CRem > > > > > > From: Discuss On Behalf Of stuart yarus via > Discuss > Sent: Monday, March 23, 2026 5:10 PM > To: Open Discussion List ; NTLUG Discussion List < > discuss at ntlug.org>; dfwrpi at groups.io > Cc: stuart yarus > Subject: [Discuss] age verification in systemd > > > > Hi, > > > > From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: > > > > "Last week we talked about age verification laws, what they are and the > issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age tracking > feature was added to systemd: "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal > project is adding an age verification portal that needs a data source for > the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata (emailAddress, > realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The birthdate field can > be set by the administrator only, but can be read by the user and the > user's applications. " > > "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made > to revert the change. The attempted reversal of the change includes a > comment: "Introducing birth date storage or age queries (even local-only) > creates a new class of sensitive user data in the OS that didn't exist > before. It risks normalizing permission-like checks inside the desktop > session and could be extended to far more invasive controls in the future." > The reversal was denied by project leader Pottering, who insists the > tracking feature will remain. " > > > > > > -- > > Stuart Yarus > -- > Discuss mailing list > Discuss at dfwuug.org > https://www.dfwuug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From slitt at troubleshooters.com Mon Mar 23 20:15:21 2026 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 23:15:21 -0400 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References: <560122533.2146037.1774313956476@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20260323231521.0e4c5534@mydesk.domain.cxm> David Eddleman said on Mon, 23 Mar 2026 21:16:21 -0500 >It's intrusion into your life, an erosion of privacy. They start with >requiring age verification for you to do things, then eventually >require a face scan or ID verification. That ties your computer to who >you are. From there you can see how downhill it goes. And quickly. >It's more control over what you can do with your own hardware and >software and what you can say and do on the internet. Or off. SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com From thomas.cameron at camerontech.com Tue Mar 24 08:23:57 2026 From: thomas.cameron at camerontech.com (Thomas Cameron) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 10:23:57 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: <20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> References:

<20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> Message-ID: <09b1057c-a9b7-4092-aef0-8f1748cdfdee@camerontech.com> On 3/23/26 8:43 PM, Steve Litt wrote: > David Eddleman said on Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:25:02 -0500 > >> FYI, this is a list being maintained by Bryan Lunduke of those he >> knows who are or aren't going to comply: > LOL, systemd and Lunduke. They deserve each other. They're brothers in > arms, each being a parasitic carpetbagger messing up Linux. Amen, brother. I have met Lunduke several times, and have been genuinely saddened to see his descent into... whatever the hell is going on with him. Seeing him come out as a right wing, racist, red-pilled woman-hater is heartbreaking... and disgusting. -- Thomas From kylerdanielster at gmail.com Tue Mar 24 09:00:49 2026 From: kylerdanielster at gmail.com (Kyle Daniel) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 11:00:49 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: <09b1057c-a9b7-4092-aef0-8f1748cdfdee@camerontech.com> References:

<20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> <09b1057c-a9b7-4092-aef0-8f1748cdfdee@camerontech.com> Message-ID: Whoa?who is this? What did they do? On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 10:24?AM Thomas Cameron < thomas.cameron at camerontech.com> wrote: > On 3/23/26 8:43 PM, Steve Litt wrote: > > David Eddleman said on Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:25:02 -0500 > > > >> FYI, this is a list being maintained by Bryan Lunduke of those he > >> knows who are or aren't going to comply: > > LOL, systemd and Lunduke. They deserve each other. They're brothers in > > arms, each being a parasitic carpetbagger messing up Linux. > > Amen, brother. I have met Lunduke several times, and have been genuinely > saddened to see his descent into... whatever the hell is going on with him. > > Seeing him come out as a right wing, racist, red-pilled woman-hater is > heartbreaking... and disgusting. > > -- > Thomas > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From thomas.cameron at camerontech.com Tue Mar 24 09:23:50 2026 From: thomas.cameron at camerontech.com (Thomas Cameron) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 11:23:50 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

<20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> <09b1057c-a9b7-4092-aef0-8f1748cdfdee@camerontech.com> Message-ID: On 3/24/26 11:00 AM, Kyle Daniel wrote: > Whoa?who is this? What did they do? > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 10:24?AM Thomas Cameron < > thomas.cameron at camerontech.com> wrote: >> Amen, brother. I have met Lunduke several times, and have been genuinely >> saddened to see his descent into... whatever the hell is going on with him. >> >> Seeing him come out as a right wing, racist, red-pilled woman-hater is >> heartbreaking... and disgusting. From Gemini AI: ----------------------------- "Bryan Lunduke is a prominent independent technology journalist, software developer, and commentator known for his long-standing focus on the Linux and open-source ecosystems. He currently operates The Lunduke Journal of Technology, a subscriber-supported platform that positions itself as an "independent, big tech-free, and non-woke" source for tech news." ----------------------------- If you look at his substack (I don't recommend it, don't reward his spew), he has tons of articles decrying "woke" people, and tons of "white men are being persecuted" garbage. I used to love his "Linux sucks" series, because he used humor to point out how Linux needs to improve. But he's descended into the whole red-pill manosphere and spewing anti-DEI racism and anti-women and anti-LGBT garbage. The Open Source community already has a hard time bringing in women, minorities, and LGBT folks. IMHO, we're supposed to be open, welcoming, and inclusive. I know some folks disagree with me, and that's fine, they're wrong. ;-) He also posted some really offensive screeds and wound up getting them removed from social media, which of course, triggered the whole "conservatives are getting censored" line of crap. He's misgendered and deadnamed trans folks in F/OSS community, and he faded a lot of heat about that, for good reason. He's been kicked from a number of communities for his political spew. He claims that he is just trying to get folks to keep politics and technology separate, but the reality is that tech is political, so that's nonsense. He just spews right wing talking points and tries to dominate conversations by injecting offensive statements to derail the conversation. At least, that's what I've observed. I used to really enjoy his talks. I pretty much just roll my eyes when I see his name now. -- Thomas From dfwuug at keck.us Tue Mar 24 10:06:48 2026 From: dfwuug at keck.us (Cornelius Keck) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 12:06:48 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Isn't that the Microslime-affiliated dude who came up with that piece of useless unwanted junk to begin with? Why am I not surprised. Have to dig this up, but IIRC I've seen a FB post where somebody forked that junk to remove that "feature". This is what one gets if one lets induhvidials with little technical understanding pass laws with dumb excuses. On 2026-03-23 17:09, stuart yarus wrote: > Hi, > >>From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: > > "Last week we talked about age verification laws > , what they are and > the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age > tracking feature was added to systemd > : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal > that needs a data > source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata > (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The > birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by > the user and the user's applications. " > > "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made > to revert the change . The attempted > reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date storage > or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user data > in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like > checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more > invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project leader > Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " > > From david.good1 at gmail.com Tue Mar 24 10:16:35 2026 From: david.good1 at gmail.com (David Good) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 12:16:35 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

<20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> <09b1057c-a9b7-4092-aef0-8f1748cdfdee@camerontech.com>

Message-ID: Uh , no . The "he's anti-whatever" nonsense is just sloganeering designed at character assassination . He never "spews hate" or anything like that . This is truly a Rorschach test for the listener / viewer . You are free not to agree with him , but don't misrepresent him and pretend to be morally superior . --David On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 11:24?AM Thomas Cameron < thomas.cameron at camerontech.com> wrote: > On 3/24/26 11:00 AM, Kyle Daniel wrote: > > Whoa?who is this? What did they do? > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 10:24?AM Thomas Cameron < > > thomas.cameron at camerontech.com> wrote: > >> Amen, brother. I have met Lunduke several times, and have been genuinely > >> saddened to see his descent into... whatever the hell is going on with > him. > >> > >> Seeing him come out as a right wing, racist, red-pilled woman-hater is > >> heartbreaking... and disgusting. > From Gemini AI: > > ----------------------------- > "Bryan Lunduke is a prominent independent technology journalist, > software developer, and commentator known for his long-standing focus on > the Linux and open-source ecosystems. He currently operates The Lunduke > Journal of Technology, a subscriber-supported platform that positions > itself as an "independent, big tech-free, and non-woke" source for tech > news." > ----------------------------- > > If you look at his substack (I don't recommend it, don't reward his > spew), he has tons of articles decrying "woke" people, and tons of > "white men are being persecuted" garbage. I used to love his "Linux > sucks" series, because he used humor to point out how Linux needs to > improve. > > But he's descended into the whole red-pill manosphere and spewing > anti-DEI racism and anti-women and anti-LGBT garbage. The Open Source > community already has a hard time bringing in women, minorities, and > LGBT folks. IMHO, we're supposed to be open, welcoming, and inclusive. I > know some folks disagree with me, and that's fine, they're wrong. ;-) > > He also posted some really offensive screeds and wound up getting them > removed from social media, which of course, triggered the whole > "conservatives are getting censored" line of crap. He's misgendered and > deadnamed trans folks in F/OSS community, and he faded a lot of heat > about that, for good reason. > > He's been kicked from a number of communities for his political spew. He > claims that he is just trying to get folks to keep politics and > technology separate, but the reality is that tech is political, so > that's nonsense. He just spews right wing talking points and tries to > dominate conversations by injecting offensive statements to derail the > conversation. > > At least, that's what I've observed. I used to really enjoy his talks. I > pretty much just roll my eyes when I see his name now. > > -- > Thomas > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From lnxguy at lnxguy.com Tue Mar 24 10:29:46 2026 From: lnxguy at lnxguy.com (LNXGUY) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 17:29:46 +0000 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

<20260323214304.653a6a8e@mydesk.domain.cxm> <09b1057c-a9b7-4092-aef0-8f1748cdfdee@camerontech.com>

Message-ID: <1mxTMU55fzf8Rp012YHLX6CkLokaW7XW4y2uCAaz12N5_NQgyVz6M7YVfbTFkRTum8lS9hcCJSUe_VyJGtYe3b9PH4YhDJH-KOJL2LNt69I=@lnxguy.com> Howdy, You must be new. This has been his view of things since the '90s. Feel free to skip or block as needed... On Tuesday, March 24th, 2026 at 12:18, David Good wrote: > Uh , no . The "he's anti-whatever" nonsense is just sloganeering designed > at character assassination . He never "spews hate" or anything like that . > This is truly a Rorschach test for the listener / viewer . You are free not > to agree with him , but don't misrepresent him and pretend to be morally > superior . > > --David From leroy.tennison at verizon.net Tue Mar 24 11:50:20 2026 From: leroy.tennison at verizon.net (Leroy Tennison) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 18:50:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <1754534666.1640060.1774378220978@mail.yahoo.com> OK, can you find/provide details about that fork and how to implement it? On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 12:20:55 PM CDT, Cornelius Keck via Discuss wrote: Isn't that the Microslime-affiliated dude who came up with that piece of useless unwanted junk to begin with? Why am I not surprised. Have to dig this up, but IIRC I've seen a FB post where somebody forked that junk to remove that "feature". This is what one gets if one lets induhvidials with little technical understanding pass laws with dumb excuses. On 2026-03-23 17:09, stuart yarus wrote: > Hi, > >>From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: > > "Last week we talked about age verification laws > , what they are and > the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age > tracking feature was added to systemd > : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal > that needs a data > source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata > (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The > birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by > the user and the user's applications. " > > "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was made > to revert the change . The attempted > reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date storage > or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user data > in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like > checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more > invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project leader > Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " > > -- Discuss mailing list Discuss at dfwuug.org https://www.dfwuug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss From dfwuug at keck.us Tue Mar 24 11:50:37 2026 From: dfwuug at keck.us (Cornelius Keck) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 13:50:37 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <6c3743d9-e552-486e-ae04-54a2c2e9afa7@keck.us> On a separate note, you might have gotten bounces from groups.io because dfwrpi at groups.io did not exist. Just created that group because. Not sure yet how to set up automated forwarding and all that. Stay tuned. On 2026-03-24 12:06, Cornelius Keck via Discuss wrote: > Isn't that the Microslime-affiliated dude who came up with that piece of > useless unwanted junk to begin with? > > Why am I not surprised. Have to dig this up, but IIRC I've seen a FB > post where somebody forked that junk to remove that "feature". > > This is what one gets if one lets induhvidials with little technical > understanding pass laws with dumb excuses. > > On 2026-03-23 17:09, stuart yarus wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: >> >> "Last week we talked about age verification laws >> , what they are and >> the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age >> tracking feature was added to systemd >> : "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal >> that needs a >> data >> source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata >> (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The >> birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by >> the user and the user's applications. " >> >> "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was >> made >> to revert the change . The attempted >> reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date >> storage >> or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive user >> data >> in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like >> checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more >> invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project >> leader >> Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " >> >> > From dfwuug at keck.us Tue Mar 24 12:19:17 2026 From: dfwuug at keck.us (Cornelius Keck) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:19:17 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: <1754534666.1640060.1774378220978@mail.yahoo.com> References:

<1754534666.1640060.1774378220978@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Quick search brings up this one: https://github.com/jeffrey-sardina/systemd I'm sure there's more, and should be easy to find using whichever search engine one sets as a default. Heck, in this case even the Awkwardly Inebriated summaries are almost usable. Anybody feel like presenting this in talks? On 2026-03-24 13:50, Leroy Tennison wrote: > OK, can you find/provide details about that fork and how to implement it? > > On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 12:20:55 PM CDT, Cornelius Keck via > Discuss wrote: > > > Isn't that the Microslime-affiliated dude who came up with that piece of > useless unwanted junk to begin with? > > Why am I not surprised. Have to dig this up, but IIRC I've seen a FB > post where somebody forked that junk to remove that "feature". > > This is what one gets if one lets induhvidials with little technical > understanding pass laws with dumb excuses. > > On 2026-03-23 17:09, stuart yarus wrote: > > Hi, > > > >>From distrowatch dot com / weekly.php?issue=20260323#news: > > > > "Last week we talked about age verification laws > > distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20260316#qa>>, what they are and > > the issues surrounding these surveillance efforts. This week a new age > > tracking feature was added to systemd > > systemd/systemd/pull/40954>>: "[This change] 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 xdg-desktop-portal project is adding an age verification portal > > github.com/flatpak/xdg-desktop-portal/pull/1922>> that needs a data > > source for the user's age. userdb already stores personal metadata > > (emailAddress, realName, location) so birthDate is a natural fit." The > > birthdate field can be set by the administrator only, but can be read by > > the user and the user's applications. " > > > > "Update: Following strong feedback from the community, an attempt was > made > > to revert the change distrowatch.com/>. The attempted > > reversal of the change includes a comment: "Introducing birth date > storage > > or age queries (even local-only) creates a new class of sensitive > user data > > in the OS that didn't exist before. It risks normalizing permission-like > > checks inside the desktop session and could be extended to far more > > invasive controls in the future." The reversal was denied by project > leader > > Pottering, who insists the tracking feature will remain. " > > > > > > -- > Discuss mailing list > Discuss at dfwuug.org > https://www.dfwuug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss www.dfwuug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss> From glenn.larson at pobox.com Tue Mar 24 12:44:08 2026 From: glenn.larson at pobox.com (Glenn Larson) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:44:08 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? Message-ID: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> You know the Internet runs on Linux servers? It doesn't seem like it would be some kind of moral infraction to use social media to spar over social issues like age restrictions. Does NTLUG even have any social media accounts? Now I feel like I need to spend time creating a filter to unclutter my email. Unfortunately, I still get email notifications that I fear might be in jeopardy of burial under endless threads of social discussion. Discussion threads in email just seems a little obsolete among innovators. How is AI going to learn anything useful if FUD denies access to our opinions?? Just saying... From slitt at troubleshooters.com Tue Mar 24 12:59:31 2026 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:59:31 -0400 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? In-Reply-To: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> References: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> Glenn Larson said on Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:44:08 -0500 >You know the Internet runs on Linux servers? It doesn't seem like it >would be some kind of moral infraction to use social media to spar >over social issues like age restrictions. You call this a *social* issue? If a birthdate field in the OS is a social issue, then so is SSL. What fields come next? Perhaps a field for HIV status. An arrest record field would be fun. We simply must have Social Security Number and bank account number fields. To the delight of conservatives, we can have a "pronouns" field, and liberals will enjoy the "do you display the American flag" toggle. Once it gets into our OS, it's not social anymore. Very soon I'm going to modify the licenses of all the free software I've authored, making it illegal to use in California, USA. My best years were spent in LA, but F**K CALIFORNIA for doing this. SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com From david.good1 at gmail.com Tue Mar 24 13:02:15 2026 From: david.good1 at gmail.com (David Good) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:02:15 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? In-Reply-To: <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> References: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> Message-ID: But won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN ! --David On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 3:00?PM Steve Litt wrote: > Glenn Larson said on Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:44:08 -0500 > > >You know the Internet runs on Linux servers? It doesn't seem like it > >would be some kind of moral infraction to use social media to spar > >over social issues like age restrictions. > > You call this a *social* issue? If a birthdate field in the OS is a > social issue, then so is SSL. > > What fields come next? Perhaps a field for HIV status. An arrest record > field would be fun. We simply must have Social Security Number and > bank account number fields. To the delight of conservatives, we can > have a "pronouns" field, and liberals will enjoy the "do you display > the American flag" toggle. > > Once it gets into our OS, it's not social anymore. > > Very soon I'm going to modify the licenses of all the free software > I've authored, making it illegal to use in California, USA. My best > years were spent in LA, but F**K CALIFORNIA for doing this. > > SteveT > > Steve Litt > > http://444domains.com > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From lnxguy at lnxguy.com Tue Mar 24 13:27:39 2026 From: lnxguy at lnxguy.com (LNXGUY) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 20:27:39 +0000 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? In-Reply-To: <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> References: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> Message-ID: On Tuesday, March 24th, 2026 at 15:01, Steve Litt wrote: > Very soon I'm going to modify the licenses of all the free software > I've authored, making it illegal to use in California, USA. My best > years were spent in LA, but F**K CALIFORNIA for doing this. I escaped California in 1983 with no regrets. Somehow, my innocent siblings are forced to stay imprisoned there. #Prop13. F**K California, indeed. IK04 From leroy.tennison at verizon.net Tue Mar 24 14:06:55 2026 From: leroy.tennison at verizon.net (Leroy Tennison) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 21:06:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? In-Reply-To: References: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> Message-ID: <1674369866.16126.1774386415168@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, but let's find a GOOD way to do it. On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 03:03:12 PM CDT, David Good wrote: But won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN ! --David On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 3:00?PM Steve Litt wrote: > Glenn Larson said on Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:44:08 -0500 > > >You know the Internet runs on Linux servers? It doesn't seem like it > >would be some kind of moral infraction to use social media to spar > >over social issues like age restrictions. > > You call this a *social* issue? If a birthdate field in the OS is a > social issue, then so is SSL. > > What fields come next? Perhaps a field for HIV status. An arrest record > field would be fun. We simply must have Social Security Number and > bank account number fields. To the delight of conservatives, we can > have a "pronouns" field, and liberals will enjoy the "do you display > the American flag" toggle. > > Once it gets into our OS, it's not social anymore. > > Very soon I'm going to modify the licenses of all the free software > I've authored, making it illegal to use in California, USA. My best > years were spent in LA, but F**K CALIFORNIA for doing this. > > SteveT > > Steve Litt > > http://444domains.com > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss From leroy.tennison at verizon.net Tue Mar 24 18:49:35 2026 From: leroy.tennison at verizon.net (Leroy Tennison) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 01:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Alternate "passwword" processing References: <1816658264.88874.1774403375276.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1816658264.88874.1774403375276@mail.yahoo.com> I'm looking for a way to do authentication in a script based on a username/password equivalent that doesn't rely on /etc/{passwd,shadow} and therefore doesn't require users to exist on the system.? My searching hasn't found much which is why I'm asking.? I've looked into htpasswd and htaccess, rsyncd.secrets and smbpasswd but nothing seems to fit.? I'm aware of openssl-passwd but was hoping for something simpler like a program which could set and test passwords against a specified file.? Any ideas?? Thanks for your help. From ebf at ebfulton.com Tue Mar 24 19:01:39 2026 From: ebf at ebfulton.com (Everett B. Fulton) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 21:01:39 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <803d2c22-6f99-4d90-9af3-5b5577a01c84@ebfulton.com> What's this "systemd" garbage I've been hearing about?? I've been a Slackware user since before the turn of the century.? Doesn't seem to be available even in the alternative package repos. There are alternatives to avoid such crapware: https://www.without-systemd.org/wiki/index_php/Main_Page/ 'systemd-resolvd' is an abomination.? One of the many violations of the "do one thing, and do it well" principle.? K.I.S.S. is the way. Resolvers are hard to get right,? Run a real resolver: https://www.isc.org/bind/ - It's been in your distro's repo for far longer than 'systemd' and its tires are regularly kicked. Many of the BIND devs are the ones whose names are on the (many) DNS RFCs. About the only thing Poettering and his crew of sycophants got right, was 'pulseaudio' - It "just works" for most use cases.? For all else (e.g.:? JACK), they do provide the 'pasuspender' utility. -- Some guy who was signed up on this list at a hamfest, and I find it generally entertaining.? :) On 3/24/26 12:06 PM, Cornelius Keck via Discuss wrote: > Isn't that the Microslime-affiliated dude who came up with that piece > of useless unwanted junk to begin with? > > Why am I not surprised. Have to dig this up, but IIRC I've seen a FB > post where somebody forked that junk to remove that "feature". > > This is what one gets if one lets induhvidials with little technical > understanding pass laws with dumb excuses. From david.eddleman at gmail.com Tue Mar 24 19:14:16 2026 From: david.eddleman at gmail.com (David Eddleman) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 21:14:16 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: <803d2c22-6f99-4d90-9af3-5b5577a01c84@ebfulton.com> References:

Message-ID: <1249103661.115392.1774416411208@mail.yahoo.com> I appreciate all the replies (and Chris, good to hear from you).? I'll look into them as soon as taxes are done.... On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 11:35:51 PM CDT, Christopher Cox wrote: Chiming in (blast from the past).? You could use pam_userdb and something like pamtester.? You'd just create your own pam service to reference in using pamtester. e.g. pamtester my-service the-username authenticate Where: /etc/pam.d/my-service contains: auth required pam_userdb.so db=/path/to/db-file crypt="your-preferred hash type" So... this might not be "perfect".... may need some tweaking. On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 9:25?PM David Eddleman wrote: > > Knowing a bit more about what this is would help, but first blush would be > something already like what shadow and htpasswd do. Have a file that has a > hash (md5, sha1, etc.) of the password written into it, make it read-only > and immutable, then on login have the password ran through the same hash > mechanism and compared. `diff` has a way to check between two files/streams > using -q and only report if there's a difference ( > https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/diff.1.html), and with an exit code > of 0 it matches. A non-zero exit code means the existing and new > comparisons don't match. > > As long as your hashing algo isn't vulnerable to replay attacks or > collisions, it's solid. > > If you want to go deeper with user settable passwords and the like, I'd > encourage you to look at pam and see how those modules operate. But for a > simple admin-set password with no user servicing, the above will work fine. > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 8:50?PM Leroy Tennison > wrote: > > > I'm looking for a way to do authentication in a script based on a > > username/password equivalent that doesn't rely on /etc/{passwd,shadow} and > > therefore doesn't require users to exist on the system.? My searching > > hasn't found much which is why I'm asking.? I've looked into htpasswd and > > htaccess, rsyncd.secrets and smbpasswd but nothing seems to fit.? I'm aware > > of openssl-passwd but was hoping for something simpler like a program which > > could set and test passwords against a specified file.? Any ideas?? Thanks > > for your help. > > _______________________________________________ > > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss From leroy.tennison at verizon.net Tue Mar 24 22:36:50 2026 From: leroy.tennison at verizon.net (Leroy Tennison) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 05:36:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: <803d2c22-6f99-4d90-9af3-5b5577a01c84@ebfulton.com> References:

<803d2c22-6f99-4d90-9af3-5b5577a01c84@ebfulton.com> Message-ID: <454454391.105492.1774417010495@mail.yahoo.com> systemd-resolved is indeed an abomination.? Just fight with it on a system running bind - after making DNS changes you need to know how to work around it to confirm your changes.? And thanks for the URL. On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 11:36:09 PM CDT, Everett B. Fulton wrote: What's this "systemd" garbage I've been hearing about?? I've been a Slackware user since before the turn of the century.? Doesn't seem to be available even in the alternative package repos. There are alternatives to avoid such crapware: https://www.without-systemd.org/wiki/index_php/Main_Page/ 'systemd-resolvd' is an abomination.? One of the many violations of the "do one thing, and do it well" principle.? K.I.S.S. is the way. Resolvers are hard to get right,? Run a real resolver: https://www.isc.org/bind/ - It's been in your distro's repo for far longer than 'systemd' and its tires are regularly kicked. Many of the BIND devs are the ones whose names are on the (many) DNS RFCs. About the only thing Poettering and his crew of sycophants got right, was 'pulseaudio' - It "just works" for most use cases.? For all else (e.g.:? JACK), they do provide the 'pasuspender' utility. -- Some guy who was signed up on this list at a hamfest, and I find it generally entertaining.? :) On 3/24/26 12:06 PM, Cornelius Keck via Discuss wrote: > Isn't that the Microslime-affiliated dude who came up with that piece > of useless unwanted junk to begin with? > > Why am I not surprised. Have to dig this up, but IIRC I've seen a FB > post where somebody forked that junk to remove that "feature". > > This is what one gets if one lets induhvidials with little technical > understanding pass laws with dumb excuses. _______________________________________________ http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss From slitt at troubleshooters.com Thu Mar 26 22:02:04 2026 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 01:02:04 -0400 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? In-Reply-To: <1674369866.16126.1774386415168@mail.yahoo.com> References: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> <1674369866.16126.1774386415168@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20260327010204.4b6079cf@mydesk.domain.cxm> Leroy Tennison said on Tue, 24 Mar 2026 21:06:55 +0000 (UTC) > Yes, but let's find a GOOD way to do it. > On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 03:03:12 PM CDT, David Good > wrote: > > But won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN ! I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com From slitt at troubleshooters.com Thu Mar 26 22:07:33 2026 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 01:07:33 -0400 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] [Discuss] age verification in systemd In-Reply-To: References:

<803d2c22-6f99-4d90-9af3-5b5577a01c84@ebfulton.com> Message-ID: <20260327010733.306aa9e3@mydesk.domain.cxm> David Eddleman said on Tue, 24 Mar 2026 21:14:16 -0500 >Unfortunately this is the problem that systemd had a while ago. Their >ability to solve startup and shutdown orders has been quite good Yeah, quite good compared to sysvinit. Garbage compared to most of the rest. systemd can't even carry s6's jock strap. > and >quite frankly, it just works (most of the issues I've seen has been >from applications that pass a startup state as true while they're >still starting up, causing collisions on dependencies down the line!). You call that "just works?" By the way, I've used the runit init system for 11 years now, and it really does "just work." >The issue, as I pointed out earlier, is they kept on trying to have it >do more and more, soundly violating the UNIX philosophy that Linux >carries: "do one thing, and do it well". Yeah, and that's a pretty big problem for an OS that's supposed to be DIY friendly. Those who want "my way or the highway" are gleefully plinking along on their Macs and Windows boxes. SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com From david.good1 at gmail.com Fri Mar 27 11:37:23 2026 From: david.good1 at gmail.com (David Good) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 13:37:23 -0500 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] Social Media? In-Reply-To: <20260327010204.4b6079cf@mydesk.domain.cxm> References: <475de259-f2d6-4bb7-8732-20781a52adef@pobox.com> <20260324155931.3ce944e9@mydesk.domain.cxm> <1674369866.16126.1774386415168@mail.yahoo.com> <20260327010204.4b6079cf@mydesk.domain.cxm> Message-ID: Yes , I was making a sarcastic comment :) --David On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 12:03?AM Steve Litt wrote: > Leroy Tennison said on Tue, 24 Mar 2026 21:06:55 +0000 (UTC) > > > Yes, but let's find a GOOD way to do it. > > On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 03:03:12 PM CDT, David Good > > wrote: > > > > But won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN ! > > I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. > > SteveT > > Steve Litt > > http://444domains.com > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > From slitt at troubleshooters.com Fri Mar 27 23:31:29 2026 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2026 02:31:29 -0400 Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] AGAIN I have to cancel my Rust presentation Message-ID: <20260328023129.69a2a033@mydesk.domain.cxm> Hi all, Sorry, I have to cancel my April 1 Rust presentation, for the second time in a row. My county just loves to have their meetings the same night as GoLUG meetings. So, anybody can present on or discuss anything at the April 1 GoLUG meeting. At this point I'm not going to reschedule, because I don't want to cancel a third time. SteveT Steve Litt GoLUG Publicity Coordinator