this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2026
65 points (90.1% liked)

Technology

42561 readers
559 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
remington@beehaw.org
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
65
Age checks creep into Linux as systemd gets a DOB field (www.theregister.com)
submitted 1 day ago by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
51 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Just what I want in my distro.

After weeks of debate, code to record user age was finally merged into the Linux world's favorite system management daemon.

Pull request #40954 to the systemd project is titled "userdb: add birthDate field to JSON user records." It's a new function for the existing userdb service, which adds a field to hold the user's date of birth:

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 contents of the field will be protected from modification except by users with root privileges.

The change comes after the recent release of systemd 260 but unless it is reverted for some reason, it will be part of systemd 261. One of the justifications is to facilitate the new parental controls in Flatpak, which are still in the draft stage.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Dylan's words in the PR:

After reading the bill text, this is the conclusion I came to - arch install is an OS installer, the law asks for users to provide birth date when installing an OS. Is that going to be hilariously pointless and ineffective? Yes.

I feel like he's getting ahead of the work as a matter-of-fact. In other words, the law passed, Arch is used by Californians, they need measures to make sure they're not breaking the law.

I don't think protest even falls into it with these kind of people, even though a majority of us would jump on the chance to actively protest this law and these changes. I personally cannot wait to have this shit throw at me at the next Linux upgrade, just to pull something like what Ageless Linux does against it.

That's why I was vehemently opposed to the hit piece that was attacking this guy personally, by a shit blogger who I will forever blacklist. Also, fuck the mod who submitted that hit piece to Lemmy.