Which privacy objectives apply to an age assurance system?
The published framework sets objectives for not disclosing the date of birth or the exact age, for unlinkability, untraceability, attributes minimisation, user awareness and conditional attribute exchange. A comparison should test what the relying party receives, what is retained and what can be linked across transactions.
Disclose the result, not the birth date
The framework's first privacy objective is that the date of birth is not disclosed to the relying party. The age attribute can be delivered without it. A test should inspect the delivered fields, not only the policy.
Collect only what the decision needs
Minimisation is measurable: list the fields captured, the fields used and the fields retained. The gap is the finding. An exact date of birth retained for a binary over-eighteen decision is a clear example.
Keep the person unlinkable where the service allows
Unlinkability and untraceability ask whether a stable identifier or a log lets an observer follow a person across transactions. Test it across two sessions or two services, and record what retention justifies.
Make the notice understandable
User awareness is not the presence of a notice. It is whether the person, including a child, can understand what is checked and what is disclosed. Test comprehension with representative users.
Not legal advice; does not certify. The draft is a guidance document in ballot. Check the published text before a decision depends on it.