Source: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2026/03/msg00199.html
msg extract:
I want to share a public project I created in response to the ongoing discussions around OS-level age verification, age signaling, and related mechanisms in free software distributions:
https://github.com/AntiSurv/oss-anti-surveillance
The project exists to document, track, oppose, and prepare the removal of OS-level surveillance, classification, and policy-enforcement mechanisms in free software distributions.
This is not limited to one patch or one component. A visible implementation path is now emerging across multiple layers of the Linux stack, including provisioning flows, account metadata services, user records, and application-facing interfaces.
[...] The project’s position is explicit:
- no OS-level age verification
- no age signaling or age-bracket APIs
- no client-side scanning or device-side inspection primitives
- no passive downstream inheritance of such mechanisms
- no geo-fencing users out of free software as a substitute for refusal
[...] The repository is intended as a public dossier and working reference point. It includes:
- a front page and project statement
- a manifesto
- a tracker of issues, PRs, and MRs
- a policy and law background file
- a technical architecture map
- a component-by-component target list
- a downstream stripping and reversal strategy
The immediate goal is to keep the implementation path visible, linkable, and auditable so that these changes can be challenged upstream and, if they are merged anyway, stripped downstream rather than quietly inherited.
If useful, I would welcome corrections, additional evidence, and links to relevant upstream or downstream work that should be tracked.
Free software was written for users, not for surveillance.
- Martinx - ジェームズ
-
See: https://github.com/AntiSurv/oss-anti-surveillance/blob/main/TRACKER.md#current-evidence-index for current packages, distributions… discussing implementing age verification.
-
Disclaimer: I'm not the author.
That seems extreme. Could you explain your point of view a bit more? Is it because it seems hes implying (presently non existing) consequences on users or legal comsequences toward init and distro projects?