Age verification, Failure or Success?

I am not taking credit for this post as it is also here at:

https://www.xstreetsl.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=100014

However i felt it would be a good idea to run the same poll here as well for those that perhaps are not members of Xstreet.

and i quote from this thread



I also had no trouble verifying myself or my alts.

It verifies data, it does not verify the person entering the data.


So fail

Not only does it not verify adulthood or identity on the part of the person submitting the data, but ...
1. In some jurisdictions it asks for data that it can not possible cross-check against. It's not 'verification'. It's 'data-collection'.
2. In some jurisdictions, it asks for data that is illegal for the person to submit.

FAIL


Where's the poll option for "Will not take part in a farce"?

I voted yes for Uk success but I verified during early concierge beta and I could leave certain fields blank at that point.

That's not strictly true is it, me thinks you're being a wee bit economic with the truth. Didn't you say you had to use your UK details even though you live in Holland?

I am not US or UK but Australia and I verified and had no issues

Dam, you have to split hairs lol Problem i had was that my passport is still registered as a UK passport and therefore i had to use my old UK address as i am not going to pay the UK passport office a stupid fee to change the address until i have to renew my passport

There i have admitted it again

Dam sorry i forgot that one

So you verified using false information????

ZOMG!!




But seriously..
Integrity have now tied you to your old address, as you've sorta kinda sworn it to be your address.
So if one of their customers is checking your input to them against Integrity, you'll be treated as an imposter unless you continue to use the 'false' address.

No problem verifiying here. Verifiying was 100 times easier than whining about not verifying in the forums.

desperate times call for desperate measures.. just ask LL lol

LOL well it didn't ask me if i still lived at that address which i did before i moved to Holland so call it older information rather than false

But on saying that LL has my business partners numbers on file, thats Mr Visa and Master Card so i didn't really have to but well it was a challenge i love pressing buttons

Well if they sell my details the new owners of my old house can forward the spam onto me lol

Verified from "other than Europe/USA" with success, using my real info.

"I am a PG player" is totally out of place though. I know some "PG players" who had to verify *because* they are PG players - they are kid avatars, ffs!

As in all polls here no one poster has got it dead right when posting a poll but the essence of i am a PG player was for those that have no interest in the adult stuff whatsoever and therefore the verification system is probably a moot point for them at this time

Sad thing is: the age verification does not protect them from ARs about age or age play


edit: proper spelling, wrong word

I age/identity verified in the UK about a year ago with no problems. Speaking personally (and I know others think differently), the existence of anonymous accounts within SL causes me greater concern than the identity verification process. I understand that at one time identity verification was compulsory in order to join. To my mind that requirement should never have been relaxed. That said, it should be applied across the board or not at all.

It wasn't really identity verification, but yes at one time you had a 2 week trial then had to pay $9.95 for a lifetime basic account. It did keep accounts under control since you were limited to 5 per credit card and address. I knew some that burned through their limit quickly and had to leave SL because they used all of their alts for nothing but trouble.

Everything online is anonymous, there is no way to actually verify who is at the computer.

There is only verification of data given by that person.

This would appear true. However, something is better than nothing, and most people would, surely, jealously guard their passport, driver's licence, national insurance details etc.

I successfully verified some alts during the early beta in an attempt to have test accounts to cover the combinatorics of IDV'd or not, PIOF or not, and web page or not. Back then I was a USA resident, so maybe that made it easier.

This isn't to say I don't have concerns about the security of any data exposed to Aristotle / Integrity. According to what we were promised, they are not to retain any of the information used to verify, and only return the single bit that the verification succeeded or not for a particular account. Given their track record, however, there's ample reason to doubt that claim.

There's also the problem that this process doesn't reliably associate the person supplying the data with the data being supplied (assuming the data supplied is reliably tested as belonging to an of-age living person in the first place).

And finally there's the problem of IDV status not being reliably used to restrict or allow access to age-restricted in-world parcels. I haven't tested this very recently, but I tested it repeatedly over a long interval after parcel-level restriction was possible on Mainland: unverified could get into some restricted parcels, and some verified couldn't get into others.

All of which is to say that only the narrowest possible interpretation of "success" has ever been possible with the current IDV process.

I did the age verification when the process first came out but I do not remember the details of what I had to do ....so it must have been a pretty simple process.

But then I am in the USA...one of those referred to in the quote below so maybe LL made it extra simple for us that are not quite bright.

I am in the USA, and was able to pass Aristotle's Verification process for my main account and all my alts with no difficulty.

HOWEVER

I consider the implementation of the USE of that status flag to be an epic fail.

In-world, there have been far too many cases where a "false positive" verification check allowed someone who had NEVER verified to gain access to an age-restricted sim or parcel.

In-world, there have been far too many cases where a "false negative" verification check denied access to an age-restricted sim or parcel for someone who had SUCCESSFULLY verified.

In-world, we, as residents, have NO way to "Check ID" to ensure that someone that we allow to have membership in a group is also age-verified.

In-world, we, as residents, have NO way to "Check ID" to ensure that someone that we allow to have access to an area protected by a security orb is also age-verified. Remember, at the parcel level, age verification ONLY affects the first 50 M above the terrain.

In world, we have NO way to use age verification to control access to a sim or parcel while still being able to use access groups or an access list to limit who may enter that area. A sim has to be tagged "Public access" in order to use the age verification restriction, and this DISABLES all access control lists and access groups.

None of these issues has been addressed or resolved in the last year. They have repeatedly been raised to the Lindens attention in the past year, and have repeatedly been blown off. If the NEW "Adult" flagging at the sim level is based on the existing verification check process and the existing ways to tag a sim for "Adult" access restrictions, then the process WILL NOT WORK AS PLANNED.

It's called a knee jerk reaction or appeasement

It doesn't do anything but make folks feel good and causes problems down the road due to being a worthless placebo.

Like the sharp point knife ban, slapping more gun laws on the books (when the current ones were all broken in the crime to begin with), etc...

Why bother with something that makes folks feel good, when it's doing nothing but causing problems with the system and prone to abuse.

for those of you who ended up only being able to verify if you used an old address, was that address the same as the one you originally gave to LL?

It was just a random thought.

If you look into Aristotle, LL's third-party verification service, you will find past political ties with U.S. conservatives and often-voiced concerns about their datamining practices.

I, personally, had an unpleasant encounter with them. I was unable to pay an emergency vet I took my cat to by check, because since my checking account had never previously been "verified" through Aristotle they labeled it as "untrustworthy". It took 3 phone calls to find this out.

I'm not voluntarily giving any of the patchwork of information that makes up my identity to these clowns again.
.