Skip to content

Apple bans apps that pose as ordinary during review and then make nude images of people: San Francisco ordered a clean-up back in July

1 min read
Share
Apple bans apps that pose as ordinary during review and then make nude images of people: San Francisco ordered a clean-up back in July

Over the weekend, Apple tightened the rules for App Store developers. Banned are apps that use artificial intelligence to create offensive content, as well as those that present themselves as ordinary during review and, once approved, turn into "undressing" tools - apps that take an ordinary photo of a person and produce a fake nude image - or that prominently advertise such features.

The company called the tactic by its real name. "Apps that contain hidden or undocumented features are also prohibited on the App Store, including apps that misrepresent their purpose during review and only reveal harmful capabilities, such as 'undressing', after approval, a tactic known as bait-and-switch," Apple wrote on its blog. Apps that add features not present in the version submitted for review will be removed.

The rules explicitly require apps with user-generated content to filter inappropriate material, let users report offensive content and block abusive accounts. In the legal section, Apple further stressed that it will not let through apps that promote human trafficking or the exploitation of children.

Sounds firm. But Apple's own figures raise a different question. The company says review last year blocked more than 150,000 apps and deleted 193,000 developer accounts over fraud and abuse. With a filter like that, the "undressing" apps still made it onto the shelves. In April a report by the Tech Transparency Project showed that both Apple's and Google's stores were offering several such apps, some rated as suitable for minors. In July the city of San Francisco ordered Apple and Google to clean them out, and City Attorney David Chiu accused them of profiting from them through store commissions.

Whether the rules were changed by conscience or by pressure, Apple does not say. But the sequence is clear: first the report in April, then the San Francisco order in July, then the new rules now. A parent in Skopje or Tetovo who trusts that the age rating in the store means something has every right to ask how many such apps passed review before anyone thought to look for them.