I already posted about that GitHub repository on the Whonix Forum, among other resources:
While I am here in this topic providing status updates, I am now actively prioritizing contributions to Kicksecure and Whonix over everything else, including Qubes OS, so my contributions to the Qubes OS Forum will be mostly limited to the All around Qubes and HCL Reports categories.
It is a terrible precedent indeed. Several distros have already openly declared they won’t comply and received wide support from users. No distro wants to be the first to implement age checks, the community backlash will be massive, the more privacy oriented the distro is, the bigger the backlash will be. Maybe cachyOS or one of the more ‘corporate’ distros will be the first.
When will whonix announce a position ? The Brazilian proposal is already law of the land and I for one would appreciate knowing weather whonix is even considering implementing age verification of the type Brazil wants.
MidnightBSD … though not GNU/Linux … implemented it in a way:
The dangerous part is that they are conceding the premise that computers should verify the age of the user. Having a field somewhere that says you are 18+ is a sloppy way of doing this. The tyrants who are lining their pockets with big-corpo money are going to argue this as well, and say that we therefore need “better” implementations such as hardware attestation preventing the process of getting the age from getting tampered with, including remote verification against a central server.
MidnightBSD 4.0.4 with its new Aged and Agectl programs will run at start-up unless explicitly disabled via the /etc/rc.conf file with sysrc aged_enable=NO.
In my humble opinion, I would like to implement it but with limited access. Currently, it’s at planning stage. However, I would create a new repo for Qubes for this limited access API between the machines. This would take time. PS: this would be in my GitLab instance over at https://git.2b9t.xyz. Feel free to explore other repos. Also, this would be experimental.
You are assuming people would want such implementation. From what I have seen in this and similar threads, most wouldn’t. I for one, would not.
It’s not assuming since that word choice gone spin off. What I actually doing it is to use that as an experimental module and install it at your own risk. That’s the clearest way for this. For those threads, they are death threats in general due to cyber-harrasment.
Can’t wait to run my illegal OS.
A new age verification law is on the U.S. congress.gov website.
H.R.8250 - Parents Decide Act
(Bold is mine.)
To require operating system providers to verify the age of any user of an operating system, and for other purposes.
Information:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8250/all-info
Full text:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8250/text
Interesting quotes:
(Introduced 04/13/2026)
(4) OPERATING SYSTEM.—The term “operating system” means software that supports the basic functions of a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.
(5) OPERATING SYSTEM PROVIDER.—The term “operating system provider” means a person that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.
Enforced by FTA.
A violation of this section or a regulation promulgated under this section shall be treated as a violation of a regulation under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices.
Brother @Sven if you’ll do me a favor and close this thread 
anybody who still cares about this topic is really better off keeping shut about it in public. If you got time to lean you got time to shut up and clean. Not that there’s anything left to talk about anyways: big brother has spoken. At the rate things are going everyone in this thread is already risking retroactive terrorism charges from skynet herself.
(4) OPERATING SYSTEM.—The term “operating system” means software that supports the basic functions of a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.
BIOS does the same. Everything since ENIAC should obviously be remade too (including modern refrigerators).
I am afraid to imagine what is in the head of a law maker who doesn’t even know there must be a hyphen between “general” and “purpose”, yet imposes rules on people’s lives.
There is no child protection in this.
Yet another horrible bill.
That said, it’s still very early and the bill will face numerous challenges. Needs to pass both houses of congress, will be particularly hard for it to pass in the senate (60 to overcome filibusters), be signed by the president. If it somehow goes through all of that and manages to become law, it will be challenged in the supreme court and likely be struck down there. The 2025 Paxton case does not serve as precedent. It was much narrower in scope.
If it still survives court challenge, it is unlikely that non commercial, globally available (passively) OS providers from outside of the US will fall under its jurisdiction.
In any case, OS providers can always forbid american users from downloading and using their OS.
Well … yeah … sort of …
The full text of this bill states that verification of age only is required when the user claims to be under 18, and it is the parents’ age that is verified.
Text:
2(a)(1):
Require any user of the operating system to provide the date of birth of the user…
2(a)(2):
If the relevant user of the operating system is under 18 years of age, require a parent or legal guardian of the user to verify the date of birth of the user.
2(a)(3) does provide that an app/developer must be able to use this to verify a user’s age, but the language above suggests that they are merely checking it against what the OS says.
This is a best-effort interpretation subject to what will likely be much post-law ‘clarification’ and litigation. 2(d) does provide that a committee will define how it all will work, which is IMO the kicker. The law is worded vaguely enough that the commission could require OS providers conduct a rectal exam to determine your age and keep the video on file for all eternity. They’re basically writing a placeholder law that they can make whatever they want it to be after it passes.
They’re basically just writing a placeholder law that they can make whatever they want it to be after it passes.
Next step: provide a blood sample for analysis to verify that you are human, thus protecting the planet from extraterrestrial terrorists exploiting our democratic technology. Then the whole world can finally live united under one common government with the same laws and be blessed forever.
Fresh for your records:
TLDR: The EU court considers Hungary has “breached” the law (“breached the freedom to provide and receive services” and “has acted in breach of the right to human dignity”) because it has forbidden children access to LGBTI+ content. Yet, the same EU is preparing to require age verification for social media access “to protect children”.
In case anyone still has doubts about what all this is about…