In the early 2000s I was checking out various Gnutella clients as possible Napster replacements, and when I wanted to watch a movie, I would downloaded a bunch

In the early 2000s I was checking out various Gnutella clients as possible Napster replacements, and when I wanted to watch a movie, I would downloaded a bunch of files named <movie title>.mp4 or <movie title>.mpeg. I say "a bunch" because only a few would be a watchable version of the movie. A lot of them, especially for new, popular movies, were actually zip files full of porn. Usually these downloads functioned as ads for (presumably legitimate) porn sites, with an included text file telling you where to go to get more of the same, but a few had no attribution and contained things I would rather not have seen. Each time it happened I got a little bit more scared until I finally took a sledgehammer to the hard drive and never installed Gnutella or LimeWire again. Reading the article, I guess it's still common for such content to be made available online with no security other than a bland and misleading filename. Seems like low-hanging fruit for harm reduction, if it can be done in a way that respects civil liberties. When you say something as absolute as "wiping it out" of course that suggests draconian, intrusive measures, but it would be reasonable for a service provider like Dropbox to be able to detect unencrypted child porn shared openly to the public via their service. Even if the only result is to force predators to use encryption and basic access control, that could have a disproportionate effect on how widely individual images are distributed.