Child porn found on an iPhone application

An iPhone application named BeautyMeter, approved by Apple, has been reported by Wired.com to contain child pornography.

The application allows users to upload pictures of themselves and have them rated by other iPhone users in a rating system similar to hotornot.com.

BeautyMeter demonstrates the flaws in Apple's safeguards that now allow nudity on their applications for those 18 years or older, using developer maintained servers. The image in question shows a girl from the United States, aged just 15 years old taking a picture of herself standing in the reflection of a mirror, almost completely naked. The image has been edited and censored by wired.com to prevent distribution of child pornography.

Once aware of the problem, Apple removed the application from its AppStore but not before nearly 5,000 users rated the image. The application was removed because of the image, stating that the application was in violation of the terms in the iPhone developer program.

BeautyMeter takes users iPhone device ID number when installed, allowing the developers to trace the owner of the content. Users can be banned or tracked down by their device ID.

BeautyMeters web site, hosted at funnymals.com, states in its terms and conditions that "you may not place any insults, obscene statements, or pornographic material on this site or any other materials which may offend human dignity" and "we don't review each uploaded photo exclusively but from time to time we will clean up."

This case demonstrates Apple's inability to control adult content after the application has been approved. Apple can not protect against the content if it is not present during the approval stage.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Cost of texting abroad for Europeans is lowered

Next Story

Psystar recovering from bankruptcy, still making products

82 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Neither would 99% of the free world AND most Americans who actually know the difference between stupid teenage jailbait antics and real, dangerous, sick child pornography of minors.

damn if i wasn't 40 and 15 again I'd be seriously thinking I'd TAP that to bad she's not a bottle of good wine but then she might not last 2~3yrs on my shelf

Yawn.
I thought the article meant that on the .ipw itself there was child porn. It's like saying "Virus on limewire found", or "uTorrent responsible for illegal downloads". Not Apples problem surely?
Much ado about nothing as per.

NORR said,
Yawn.
I thought the article meant that on the .ipw itself there was child porn. It's like saying "Virus on limewire found", or "uTorrent responsible for illegal downloads". Not Apples problem surely?
Much ado about nothing as per.

Well Apple are taking a line that there will be nothing available on the iphone that could corrupt minds. I don't think the developers of Utorrent or Limewire are saying the same thing.

teens are like unripened fruits. green sour and just not ready. dunno why people are interested in something so yuck! ya wouldn't eat a green banana would you? bad tummy ache.

"But the overarching question many are asking is, what is happening to kids these days? Steeley wrote on neowin , "There's a difference between being a horny 15-year-old and being a teenager that sends naked photos of themselves into the abyss. So no, I would never have done that at her age. And there's the problem -- we just say 'kids will be kids.' I tell you what, the apocalypse would come a distant second to my wrath if I ever caught one of my kids sending naked photos of themselves anywhere."

Wierd, But you should probably be giving the wrath to whats inside a mirror when you look into it. You already assumed an apocalypse and wrath are something of a justified nature since your assuming your beliefs are somehow distant to what is wrong less than that which you would judge. Get over yourself .....

I'm a little confused about laws, but say you're browsing that app and you came across that pic, could you be charged for viewing child pornography?

Also, what about those people who active "inspected" the image enough to vote for it, what happens to them?

I doubt anyone would be prosecuted, but isn't it possible that police could go after these people?

I also can't see how putting black bars on 3 locations of a picture of a underage person removes the provocative nature of the photo itself and makes it just a regular picture

You guys and gals are such hypocrites. When Apple rejects apps when they can be used to access objectionable content, everybody whines that the app and its creators nor Apple are responsible for what it may display.
Now Apple approved an app that is capable of accessing and displaying such objectionable content and everybody turns 180° and scolds them.
I'm not even gonna guess how many hypocrite whiners have tried to find the original photograph to secretly fap to it.

I don't blame Apple, I blame the idiots that abuse things like this. I am sure the creators of the app didn't intend for it to be abused maliciously, and I am sure they will cooperate with legal authorities to remove any objectional material.

What confuses me is the "almost completely naked" part. That implies it was a topless pic, and the naughty bits were still covered (otherwise, such phrasing wouldn't have been used).

This brings us to a rather amusing way of looking at the female form: a topless 5-year-old at the beach isn't child porn, because she hasn't yet begun developing breasts, but a topless 15-year-old IS child porn, because she has. This is ironic, because the development of breasts is part of the process of turning into an adult.

In other words, breasts are the single most un-childlike features of a teenage girl, and are entirely associated with adulthood, and it's completely illogical to call developed breasts 'child porn'.

But that's just my two cents. When it comes down to it, these laws are usually fuelled by obsessively protective parents who are terrified of the thought that their kids may have had an orgasm.

Joshie said,
What confuses me is the "almost completely naked" part. That implies it was a topless pic, and the naughty bits were still covered (otherwise, such phrasing wouldn't have been used).

This brings us to a rather amusing way of looking at the female form: a topless 5-year-old at the beach isn't child porn, because she hasn't yet begun developing breasts, but a topless 15-year-old IS child porn, because she has. This is ironic, because the development of breasts is part of the process of turning into an adult.

In other words, breasts are the single most un-childlike features of a teenage girl, and are entirely associated with adulthood, and it's completely illogical to call developed breasts 'child porn'.

But that's just my two cents. When it comes down to it, these laws are usually fuelled by obsessively protective parents who are terrified of the thought that their kids may have had an orgasm.


+1
like i said before where did 18 become the age of consent for girls

See my note above. Under NO circumstances should ANYTHING be called "child porn" or pedophilia unless the child is PRE-pubescent. That's the scientific and legal definition of pedophilia.

This is JAILBAIT, pure and simple.

I believe it is illegal for a minor to be photographed with their breasts showing, it doesn't just apply to hard porn where everything is on view, not sure what goes for pics taken in bras and underwear

People need to realize this kinda stuff is all over the net already and easily viewable. Hell you just need to google topless teen or the like and it will be in your face.

She shouldn't of done it, but hey what's done is done. Build a bridge and get over it, or in the case of that application if you still have it, rate her, and move on.

This is how backward and retarded most of my fellow Americans are. A minor cannot in anyway be a pedo. Now if that person turns 18 and they go for a 9 year old that's a different story. In America there are I believe 3 cases n progress and a few that are already in the books of where people who posted pics of them selves or took videos of them selves are now on the sex offenders registry because they were minors. STUPID STUPID STUPID. I'm Sorry but America needs to pull it's prude head out of its buttocks.

To add that pic was of a nude girl not sex there is a difference again stupid America is as stupid America does. Case in point in my town a photographer had a gallery for her work. She was arrested and charged, personal property taken, and gallery closed down because of child pornography. What was this horrid thing. One of her photos was of her son naked with a cowboy hat on and a gun/gun belt done in black and white. As a parent may such scenes happen when kids are like 2-5. Eventually the charges were dropped but if she were in Alabama who knows.

Oh see also the Elton John incident which I would link the article and photo but in some states they may be that very kind of stupid I am talking about and give this site some BS.

The laws are definitely strange there. Some guy was arrested for having pictures of his daughters newborn taking a bath! I mean, come on, we all have nude pics of ourselves that our parents took and sent to all our relatives. In some countries, it is considered a tradition to do this.

Likewise, in the case you mentioned pornography != art. There is a huge difference between the two. Pornography depicts a sexual act purely for sexual purposes, which the pictures on the wired article in no way does. It could be considered more artistic and a self-portrait before it is considered pornography.

Likewise, the definition of pornography is not the same everywhere. For example, I've seen people let their 10 year old go nude on a huge public beach in Europe and nobody really cares (as it is commonplace there)...while this would be considered heretical in the US. As you said in the gallery example, that sort of thing would never happen in most of the world. It sounds more like what would happen in Saudi Arabia or some other really non-secular conservative country.

zivan56 said,
The laws are definitely strange there. Some guy was arrested for having pictures of his daughters newborn taking a bath! I mean, come on, we all have nude pics of ourselves that our parents took and sent to all our relatives. In some countries, it is considered a tradition to do this.

Likewise, in the case you mentioned pornography != art. There is a huge difference between the two. Pornography depicts a sexual act purely for sexual purposes, which the pictures on the wired article in no way does. It could be considered more artistic and a self-portrait before it is considered pornography.

Likewise, the definition of pornography is not the same everywhere. For example, I've seen people let their 10 year old go nude on a huge public beach in Europe and nobody really cares (as it is commonplace there)...while this would be considered heretical in the US. As you said in the gallery example, that sort of thing would never happen in most of the world. It sounds more like what would happen in Saudi Arabia or some other really non-secular conservative country.


Actually there are many Nudist in the USA. And many public beaches for them especially in Florida and Cali. In fact where I live a river and falls area it is common to find nudist running around because there is not statue saying you cant on federal land and most will post little notices just in case someone wonders into the area. But yeah thank you so much puratians for messing up the place ;-)

SoulEata said,
The almost 5000 people rated her 4.8/5 on face, clothes, and body according to the photo at wired.

about a hundred or two ago it was normal for grown men to marry 14year olds, why because most girls are fully developed by that age. Where did 18 become the age of consent?

It became the age of consent during the child worker rights movement of the late 19th century.

In a post Victorian morality, for some reason the US started extending childhood to a new category called "teenager". This gray area between childhood and adulthood never existed before. It was always defined by puberty.

In fact until 100 years ago you HAD to marry as soon as you hit puberty, because women DIED around 24ish. And life expectancy was so bad, women had to have kids as soon as they could, and as many as they could, since many of them would die too.

There was rarely any divorce because DEATH ended relationships. If you were one of the "lucky" ones to live into your 60's or so, you were guaranteed to have buried 3 or 4 spouses along the way, etc.

All of this has happened in the past 100 years...changing the very definition of "child." Very curious on so many levels.

Even though you are physically developed at 14 or so, you are not mentally developed. You are easily swayed and manipulated and you lack the ability to make sound judgements, so you will take big risks with your entire future and health.

Manipulation of their victims is how most paedophiles get their kicks and remain undetected. The age of consent laws are designed to protect young people from such things, as well as, in part, themselves and their own risk taking.

Obviously everyone varies in their development, I'm sure that there are plenty of 14 year olds with better judgement than many 21 year olds .. but the law has to try and fit everyone. I think there could be more common sense used when applying it.

Actually, current science has revealed we aren't TRULY mentally developed until around the age of 25. So I wouldn't advise anyone settling down until after 25 haha.

But you are right that maturity varies widely. And now that our species does not HAVE to procreate so "forcefully" (as less children are needed overall AND we are living MUCH longer lives), this sort of discussion is necessary.

But just for clarity, here's the definition of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

Law enforcement is having the same problem we as a society are, mixing "jailbaiters" in the same term as child molesters, and yet, psychologically and socialogically, they are two completely distinct behavioral phenomena.

Shiranui said,
Since when does a 15 girl taking pics of her self constitute child porn?

Im not sure if you are serious or not...

lylesback2 said,
It is illegal for anyone to share or take photos of 15 year old girls in any sexual way.

unless 15 is or above the age of consent in that country. i think 16 is the age of consent in parts of Canada.

Nose Nuggets said,
unless 15 is or above the age of consent in that country. i think 16 is the age of consent in parts of Canada.

It's not the age of consent though, it's the pornography age. In the UK, the AOC is 16 (or 15), but the porn age is 18.

Either way, this isn't porn...and it CERTAINLY isn't "child porn".

It's "stupid teenager" jailbait pix.

Can't we focus our attention and police officers on REAL dangerous child molesters and pedophiles and not on stupid teenager antics?

excalpius said,
Either way, this isn't porn...and it CERTAINLY isn't "child porn".

It's "stupid teenager" jailbait pix.

Can't we focus our attention and police officers on REAL dangerous child molesters and pedophiles and not on stupid teenager antics?


You keep telling yourself that when the police come a knocking at your door and arrest you for child porn offences

Shiranui said,
Since when does a 15 girl taking pics of her self constitute child porn?

Since when half naked girl photo is a porn??

akav0id said,
You keep telling yourself that when the police come a knocking at your door and arrest you for child porn offences

Excuse me? Where does me trying to get everyone ACCURATE and making sure our legal and moral perspective is clear somehow equate to me being a child pornographer?!!

Being a man of education and intelligence, I don't feel I need to be a murderer on death row or a victim of a capital crime to discuss the pros and cons of the death penalty in an open discussion forum, for example.

coth said,
Since when half naked girl photo is a porn??

Only here in the US of A. Oh, and Muslim fundamentalist countries...ahem.

excalpius said,
Either way, this isn't porn...and it CERTAINLY isn't "child porn".

It's "stupid teenager" jailbait pix.

Can't we focus our attention and police officers on REAL dangerous child molesters and pedophiles and not on stupid teenager antics?

Exactly!

Um, pedobear is a pedophile, meaning he likes REAL child porn, prepubescent children.

Isn't a better, more ACCURATE designation for "stupid teenagers/dumb almost adults" JAILBAIT?!

A 15 year old is NOT a child in the pedobear sense of the word. She is jailbait.

Don't get me wrong, I lol at the mighty pedobear logo, but I'm just trying to make things accurate. This unverified (by Wired no less) article is calling jail bait "child porn" and that's just bull**** IMHO.

What is causing this phenomenon of kids sending nude pics through their phones? It's like kids are all sexed up these days!

Steeley said,
What is causing this phenomenon of kids sending nude pics through their phones? It's like kids are all sexed up these days!


You weren't at that age?

There's a difference between being a horny 15 year old and being a teenager that sends naked photos of themselves into the abyss. So no, I would never have done that at her age. And there's the problem - we just say "kids will be kids". I tell you what the apocalypse would come a distant second to my wrath if I ever caught one of my kids sending naked photos of themselves anywhere.

Well a lot of the time it wasn't sent into the abyss but someone they thought they could trust who then sent it on to others.

Not like this exact same thing isn't happening to adults of all ages. It's hardly a phenomenon among kids.

Steeley said,
There's a difference between being a horny 15 year old and being a teenager that sends naked photos of themselves into the abyss. So no, I would never have done that at her age. And there's the problem - we just say "kids will be kids". I tell you what the apocalypse would come a distant second to my wrath if I ever caught one of my kids sending naked photos of themselves anywhere.

More like you couldn't have done it when you were at that age simply because the technology didn't exist or wasn't too friendly to use. Back then it was easier to transfer porn of bitmap images over floppy than it was to download something from the internet.

It must be nice to be a perfect person all your long lived life. And, remember it was Socrates who said, "I will never understand the younger generation." So if you understand it then there are schools out there that could use your help. Would even bet your mother and father at one point in your life said, "Kids will be kids." LOL

Pam14160 said,
LOL. . .like you never thought about sex at 15. Come on be truthful. Kids will be kids, it has always been that way.


Yeah, I hear that. I was masturbating like a spider monkey when I was 15. Then 16 hit and I was still masturbating with great vigor. However, at 17... after sex, all I could think about was the next time. Never was I dumb enough to send a ****-shot with my face. If a girl asks, don't take the pic in the mirror... and make her send first.

The article actually says "A photo ostensibly showing a 15-year-old nude girl...", no-one knows for sure. So all of this presumes that she didn't lie about her age.

They should seriously shut down Apple for such behavior. LOL. The title and title image is just bad Neowin, even for this MS fanboy.

Very, very true.

It's sad to see that the headlines title is directly related to the iPhone, but oh well... it DID arrive on an iPhone. I believe people will think exactly like us on this one, so I don't really mind :P

Rudy said,
Could have happened anywhere, I could do the same thing on Facebook, Myspace etc etc

yeah, its stupid to think Apple should be responsible for this stuff. if you have beef take it up with the guys who run the app. if they aren't actively peddling child porn i dont think they should have to go out of their way to filter every picture. if they get complaints or are suspicious take the individual pic down. i dont see the big deal.

I would bet anyone that Apple had no intention of allowing something like this to happen. As people like to say **** happens. Now that it has it can be corrected.

Rudy said,
Could have happened anywhere, I could do the same thing on Facebook, Myspace etc etc

Whilst that is true, Apple does spend a ridiculous amount of time approving applications (I only got a Tweetie update last night, which took two weeks and included a small fix), so you'd think they'd be pretty tight

Sam Symons said,
Whilst that is true, Apple does spend a ridiculous amount of time approving applications (I only got a Tweetie update last night, which took two weeks and included a small fix), so you'd think they'd be pretty tight :p

but any application that loads data from the internet can one day become an application that would have been rejected.

I can submit a "rate this flower" application but if after it's released I replace all the flower pictures with something else (say porn or even hate propaganda). It's impossible for Apple to monitor this (they would have to check EVERY app at least once a day etc etc)