The honest slogan is "Age Verification Solution for Europeans Who Use Mobile Devices that are Controlled by US Corporations and by Extension US Government Which Can Revoke Your Use of the Solution with No Recourse".
I also find the de-banking mechanism fascinating. Bunch of anons decide privately if you are fkd for whatever reason they want (if any)
[1] - https://wero-wallet.eu
EDIT: A possible way, https://european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/write-us_en
The non-EU Serbia has the equivalent app, but also you might be able to get individual/personal e-certificate (for logging into e-government or signing e-documents) added into smart card chip of your ID. But in practice it seems thats only used for business purposes, like CEO/Accountants/etc to sign/submit business records/taxes.
It's one of the only things that Belgium does right.
And on top of that you add stuff like sim cloning, and all the other things that one gets by having a direct SS7 connection (there were blog posts/YouTube videos - IIRC Linus Tech Tips calls/SMS got routed to Australia).
Using SMS for 2FA or anything similar is my last resort.
Granted I stopped working there 15+ years ago - but I imagine that the basic economy reasoning where it's impractical for every mobile operator to have a direct peering contract with every other operator in the world - is still the same.
And messages originating from non mobile users/operators (like DigiD 2FA) always start at one of these messaging gateways/SMSCs (e.g. InfoBip.com), and often go through a few different ones before reaching your mobile operator.
Yes, in https://ageverification.dev/av-doc-technical-specification/d..., section 2.3 User Journey says
“To enable online age verification, the User is required to install an AV app on their mobile device”
but section 3 Architecture says
“The solution relies on a device-based proof of age model, leveraging widely available mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets to store age attestations. This approach supports the goal of rapid deployment and broad accessibility. Alternative mechanisms for storing and presenting proof of age may be considered for future versions of the solution.”
and
“It is also recognised that devices may be shared among multiple users, for example, when a child has access to a parent’s mobile phone”
That indicates the child may not need to have a smartphone.
I think the vast majority of cases where this will be used it with users wanting to run smartphone or tablet apps, though. For those cases, requiring the user to own a smartphone isn’t problematic.
There's been extensive discussion about this, but the developers refuse to even fully acknowledge the problem.
And yes, it remains to be seen whether, as they say “alternative mechanisms for storing and presenting proof of age” that “may be considered for future versions of the solution” actually will actually surface, but their argument “The solution relies on a device-based proof of age model, leveraging widely available mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets to store age attestations. This approach supports the goal of rapid deployment and broad accessibility.” has merit.
There were good ideas at first but especially data protection features have already been scrapped. Also you need to buy into the Apple or Google ecosystem, no alternatives allowed. Especially funny if the next sentence contains some reference about independence...
I will not use it for anything privately as I neither trust the issuer, nor the notified bodies providing the infrastructure.
Our police accessed app data from Corona movement apps, it will do the same for any and all digital solutions the bureaucracy tries to sell. This is political problem we had for decades. Authorities aren't trustworthy, the legislative refuses to introduce strong privacy protection and instead tries to do the opposite. They even further enabled large platforms to scrap user data even more unhinged. To hell with them and with their shitty projects, I don't need a shitty content gatekeeper, even if you pay me.
Can you elaborate on... why?
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act)
ePrivacy Directive (Cookie Law)
Digital Services Act (DSA)
Digital Markets Act (DMA)
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
EU Emissions Trading System (ETS)
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)
REACH Regulation (chemicals control)
Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR)
Nature Restoration Law
Renewable Energy Directive (RED III)
Working Time Directive
Posted Workers Directive
Roaming Regulation (price caps for telecoms)
VAT Directive (harmonized VAT rules)
State Aid Rules
Schengen Border Code (migration/border controls)
Eco-design and product standardization rules
Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)
EU Taxonomy Regulation
Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation
Regulation to Prevent and Combat Child Sexual Abuse
Basically EU holds power through funding projects by grants, which fundamentally breaks free market and there is no transparency in it (ie. Pfizer contracts, proponents of Chat Control, etc.).
That's why DSA doesn't work. Small and medium-sized enterprises comply and delete unnecessary content because they face crippling fines, while big ones just pay fines made from harmful content. Over and over.
Btw, the Very Large ones regulated under DSA are either neutral or negative seen.
LOL.
The EAVS will be dropping yeah?