EDIT: A possible way, https://european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/write-us_en
The non-EU Serbia has the equivalent app, but also you might be able to get individual/personal e-certificate (for logging into e-government or signing e-documents) added into smart card chip of your ID. But in practice it seems thats only used for business purposes, like CEO/Accountants/etc to sign/submit business records/taxes.
It's one of the only things that Belgium does right.
And on top of that you add stuff like sim cloning, and all the other things that one gets by having a direct SS7 connection (there were blog posts/YouTube videos - IIRC Linus Tech Tips calls/SMS got routed to Australia).
Using SMS for 2FA or anything similar is my last resort.
Granted I stopped working there 15+ years ago - but I imagine that the basic economy reasoning where it's impractical for every mobile operator to have a direct peering contract with every other operator in the world - is still the same.
And messages originating from non mobile users/operators (like DigiD 2FA) always start at one of these messaging gateways/SMSCs (e.g. InfoBip.com), and often go through a few different ones before reaching your mobile operator.
Yes, in https://ageverification.dev/av-doc-technical-specification/d..., section 2.3 User Journey says
“To enable online age verification, the User is required to install an AV app on their mobile device”
but section 3 Architecture says
“The solution relies on a device-based proof of age model, leveraging widely available mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets to store age attestations. This approach supports the goal of rapid deployment and broad accessibility. Alternative mechanisms for storing and presenting proof of age may be considered for future versions of the solution.”
and
“It is also recognised that devices may be shared among multiple users, for example, when a child has access to a parent’s mobile phone”
That indicates the child may not need to have a smartphone.
I think the vast majority of cases where this will be used it with users wanting to run smartphone or tablet apps, though. For those cases, requiring the user to own a smartphone isn’t problematic.
There's been extensive discussion about this, but the developers refuse to even fully acknowledge the problem.
And yes, it remains to be seen whether, as they say “alternative mechanisms for storing and presenting proof of age” that “may be considered for future versions of the solution” actually will actually surface, but their argument “The solution relies on a device-based proof of age model, leveraging widely available mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets to store age attestations. This approach supports the goal of rapid deployment and broad accessibility.” has merit.