Re: Practical suggestions for resolving the Age Verification problem

> Chris <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > way their regulated already. Adding another category and applying appropriate
> > perms to match. It basically changes nothing in the way a system regulates
> > user categories now. I was simply suggesting adding another (age based) 
> > category.
> > Perms can be set accordingly.
> 
> If you're going down that sort of route, why not just add a bunch of new
> groups to /etc/group:
> 
> not_verified_13:*:newuser1,newuser2
> not_verified_18:*:newuser3,newuser4
> not_verified_21:*:newuser5,newuser6
> 
> Of course, that would need to be manually altered when someone reaches an age milestone,
> but that would be the same with an extra field.
> 
> Still (and this isn't directed at you), I think the whole thing is stupid and doomed
> to failure.
> 
> Besides, this would be moot for someone running a FreeBSD desktop, or other system
> they control, and for things like web-based services that use a FreeBSD backend, they'll
> already have higher level authorisation controls baked into the system.
> 
> So, it probably would only work for the small percentage of pre university aged
> children who access remote unix systems to play nethack in the terminal! :-)
> 
> </bikeshedding>

FYI:
unix already have a way to store birthdays, it is called calendar,
please see /usr/share/calendar/calendar for many of ``our'' birthdays.
Expand that and add the appropriate API's would be one way to go.

Though I really think these pieces of legislation well ultimately
fail in the courts as untenable solutions to a social problem.

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 [email protected]