4 ms·

Seems some simple filters on their reporting tools could help them more easily deal with inaccurate reports. They note: "Do report only once for each web addre

Seems some simple filters on their reporting tools could help them more easily deal with inaccurate reports. They note: "Do report only once for each web address – or URL. Repeat reporting of the same URL isn’t needed and wastes analysts’ time." Well, surely they could implement a filter to only allow reporting the same URL once. Further they note: "non-criminal adult material from pornographic websites" Surely, there could a be a whitelist for major legitimate porn sites with an automated response that those sites are legitimate businesses not hosting illegal material.

asfginmionio 6y ago
>Surely, there could a be a whitelist for major legitimate porn sites with an automated response that those sites are legitimate businesses not hosting illegal material. Pornhub is currently in hot water over allegations that they have been negligent in keeping child porn off the site. I don't know whether or not those allegations have merit, but it is certainly the case that child porn crops up on mainstream sites from time to time. Here's one relevant article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-51391981 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-51391981
- timwells3 6y ago
  While that article references an incident from 10+ years ago, agreed, CSAM can be on any website with UGC. I’m sure a large amount of false reports is from legal adult performers that appear to look young though.
curryst 6y ago
> Surely, there could a be a whitelist for major legitimate porn sites with an automated response that those sites are legitimate businesses not hosting illegal material. That probably only works for sites that are run by producers. They're already required to keep extensive documentation of the actors' ages. The content is also curated (i.e. it is only their own catalog). That doesn't work for the YouTube style sites where videos are uploaded by random people, with (I'm guessing) no verification of age. As an aside, I am curious how much of the CP they can actually check just from a URL. I know nothing of the practice, but I would have assumed most of it was locked behind private forums or the like where you need a username and password to actually see anything. Maybe CP opsec is just much worse than I imagined

asfginmionio 6y ago

>Surely, there could a be a whitelist for major legitimate porn sites with an automated response that those sites are legitimate businesses not hosting illegal material. Pornhub is currently in hot water over allegations that they have been negligent in keeping child porn off the site. I don't know whether or not those allegations have merit, but it is certainly the case that child porn crops up on mainstream sites from time to time. Here's one relevant article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-51391981 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-51391981

timwells3 6y ago
While that article references an incident from 10+ years ago, agreed, CSAM can be on any website with UGC. I’m sure a large amount of false reports is from legal adult performers that appear to look young though.

curryst 6y ago

> Surely, there could a be a whitelist for major legitimate porn sites with an automated response that those sites are legitimate businesses not hosting illegal material. That probably only works for sites that are run by producers. They're already required to keep extensive documentation of the actors' ages. The content is also curated (i.e. it is only their own catalog). That doesn't work for the YouTube style sites where videos are uploaded by random people, with (I'm guessing) no verification of age. As an aside, I am curious how much of the CP they can actually check just from a URL. I know nothing of the practice, but I would have assumed most of it was locked behind private forums or the like where you need a username and password to actually see anything. Maybe CP opsec is just much worse than I imagined