userdb: add birthDate field to JSON user records by dylanmtaylor · Pull Request #40954 · systemd/systemd
github.com
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 xdg-desktop-portal project is addi...

Fork time? Maybe all the anti-systemd zealots were right all along…

Edit: To address whether it is likely that this change will affect users: Gnome is planning a stronger dependence on userdb, the part of systemd where this change is being implemented. https://blogs.gnome.org/adrianvovk/2025/06/10/gnome-systemd-dependencies/

Final Edit: The PR has been merged into main.

  • amadaluzia@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    142·
    2 days ago

    I’ll start off my comment with something everyone can agree on: the age verification laws absolutely sucks. It’s a surveillance law masquerading as a means of “protecting” children. It also completely undermines free and open source projects, and therefore, protected speech. The fact systemd had to add a BirthDate field is unfortunate, however, I would blame the lawmakers for creating the law that the developers of systemd now have to comply with.

    I’m okay with the implementation. It is an optional (meaning you have to add it yourself) field which only specifies the date of birth. It doesn’t seem to be at all invasive, nor does it attempt to “verify” it at the moment. Granted, anything is possible, but I don’t think there’s a good enough reason why systemd would EVER feel the need to add age verification. Before you say anything regarding corporations, please answer this: why would a corporation add age verification to a system manager their servers depend on? How will that profit them?

    I get why people are angry, but I think this anger should be funneled towards the lawmakers pulling off nonsense like this. Fight those who are actively trying to take your rights away. Bullying software developers for complying to international laws will lead to nothing but hate.

    • Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works
      12·
      1 day ago

      Yea, fucking americans supposed democracy ruining the day again, thanks guys for freeing us all once fucking again

      Then come the script kiddies hating on systemd for doing the actual work necessary for not getting linux banned in the “free” word and acting like this is some kind of gamestop organization action.

    • Internet@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      82·
      2 days ago

      Nah this is more systemd bloat and certainly invites criticism. Other inits aren’t even commenting, let alone complying.

      • Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works
        21·
        1 day ago

        Other inits are not relevant, because of their own choice to not do the job correctly last time they had a chance to

        • amadaluzia@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          3·
          1 day ago

          I believe those other init systems we’re in the right to, but that’s only because they are JUST init systems. systemd can because it doesn’t just provide an init system, it provide a suite of tools for Linux system management. Something like userdb would have to be implemented by another tool, where they could actually implement BirthDate if they so choose to (and probably should for it’s continued existence).

      • amadaluzia@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        5·
        2 days ago

        Other inits aren’t even commenting, let alone complying.

        This would be a fair point, if systemd wasn’t more than an init system. While a service manager (init system) is included, systemd is a system manager. OpenRC, runit, and other init systems do not need to comment because their only task is to mount the necessary file systems, setup the device manager, and start daemons1. systemd as a system manager not only needs to manage services, but it also needs to manage devices, logs, the hostname, etc.

        Does this mean systemd is not bloat? Not at all, but it is not as fat as you think it is. Your system could honestly be fatter without systemd if you try to replicate everything it does with external applications. Does this mean systemd should also be justified to add an optional field for your date of birth? I guess I would say it’s weird on it’s own. However, given the context, I believe they are doing what they can.

          • amadaluzia@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
            2·
            1 day ago

            Unfortunate. However, it seems that is snapd’s fault. Here’s the important part from the article:

            Ubuntu automatically deletes old files from the /tmp directory after a certain number of days. During this cleanup, an important directory used by snap-confine may get removed.

            Ubuntu configured systemd-tmpfiles to clean out /tmp after some days. That’s why the issue is only present in Ubuntu systems. Therefore, systemd was doing it’s job, and it just so happened to create the perfect conditions for a vulnerability in Ubuntu.