633
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 62 points 1 week ago

So like, when do we get a government-run service to issue zero-knowledge proofs about us so companies have no reason to store stuff like this in the first place?

[-] Godric@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

Oh aye, I am the #1 government truster, they should "not record" where I visit and should be trusted to ignore my internet history

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 week ago

If I had to choose between a government and a private entity to store my personal governmental records (e.g. age and name), I'd 100% choose the government first.

[-] hcbxzz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

easy to say, but that depends entirely on the government and company doesn't it?

[-] Mistic@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Any government already has all of that information, so, no.

By giving it to a company, you just increase the risks of info leakage.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago

I assume OP actually meant the additional info the government can get from where I authenticate with my goverment ID to a company.

Hypothecial situation: You wanna buy a sex toy.
If the goverment does store where and what you buy, they could punish you by withholding services.
And they might not say why and give a bs excuse or send you on a goose hunt to do more paperwork.
You can suspect that but probably never proof that it was the case.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago

As always life is complicated.
I am talking about my personal situation.

^(Do I really need to put a disclaimer to all posts, that mentions all comments are from my own view and might no apply to every situation in every country?)

[-] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 1 points 1 week ago

In turkey, the government stores data words than the company. I can be doxxed just by giving you hints of which city I live in. It's bad

[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 12 points 1 week ago

They wouldn’t see what sites you give the tokens to — unless those sites choose to phone home, for some reason.

  • You log in to the government site
  • You ask for a token to prove your age/gender/whatever
  • You copy the token
  • You go to the age/gender-restricted site
  • You provide the token
  • The restricted site asks the government site how to verify any arbitrary token (but doesn’t mention your specific token)
  • The restricted site verifies the token
[-] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago

It either doesn't work or means that they have your ID info anyways. There's no 3rd option

[-] offspec@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

???? This is just textbook sso/openid but backed by the government. There's nothing intrinsically insecure about having third parties send you directly to a trusted government site for authorization.

[-] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago

And how does that prevent hacks that reveal the connection between ID and user account ?

[-] offspec@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

What connection do you think a third party is saving when using openid? Generally speaking the only thing the third party needs is your identifier which in most cases is just an email. It's no more devastating for the user base for that information to be leaked than it is when they're handling authorization themselves. I personally think using a government backed authorization platform is a terrible idea and something completely liable to be abused by those in power, but it would objectively be better than trying to have every single service store your personally identifiable information themselves.

[-] iglou@programming.dev 3 points 1 week ago

The only entity able to connect you in this case is the identity verification third party. The premise is that a government-backed identification system is more secure than a rando private company.

Private company asks government "hey is this user real and unique", government replies "yes". Private webiste does not need to know your ID. No identifying element needs to be transmitted by the government.

Of course some private companies will need more, and in that case the user, you, can grant them access to data, much like the current authentication systems using Google accounts & co.

In which case the flow would be:

  • Rando insecure company asks government "is this user real and unique? I need their name"
  • Government website asks you "this rando company wants to know your name"
  • You accept
  • Goverbment replies to rando insecure conpany "yes, user real, name is X"

That's how it should be.

this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2025
633 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

73534 readers
2377 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS