FFS Mumsnet HQ - illegal images on threads

[Lagirl20]

Beware, the thread “weird message from friend” has some child abuse images on it!!! @mumsnet

It definitely has been as this is the only thread I have read on this and I knew about the links.

Also, it was photos the first time it happened a couple of weeks ago. This second time it was links in order to bypass the (not very sophisticated) AI filter.

Yep. And to be clear, these weren’t little preview thumbnails or something, They were big, clear images. And it has actually been mentioned multiple times.

This is a name change for me, but I’m the poster who saw them, posted a warning thread on site stuff, and then they also posted the images on that thread too. I’m still trying to work out if I’m going to stay or not. I never want to see that again, unfortunately you can’t unsee the ones you already have done.

Agree with this. No one should be exposed to any CSA

@OverArmourer that's awful

I haven't seen any tg and I don't feel the site is particularly safe during the night as once you've seen something you can't unsee it

Apparently, users are now receiving CSA images via their PMs. Not that there has been or will likely be any official warnings or alerts to us about that hideous possibility.

Fucking hell! That's horrifying

Presumably that’s why it’s currently disabled? So much for things having been fixed MNHQ 🤬

😲

I've turned off PMs and I would urge you all to do the same. Not that we should have to, but @mnhq seem to be completely useless at getting to grips with this, or even warning their users.

I thought MNHQ had disabled them anyway. ETA I'm sure I saw an announcement.

What do you expect MNHQ to do while they're looking into what appears to be a complex attack where the tactics are shifting fairly quickly?

Is it a complex attack?

First one was photos on threads. These weren't removed as it was the middle of the night on the UK and there weren't any unpaid 'night watch' members online at the time.

Second one was links instead of photos directly on the threads. Posters have always been able to post links on threads with the link 'disguised' so you can post a link to a red coat on Zara with red coat so you can't look at a link and see if it's to Zara or not. This was over a week ago and it hasn't been altered.

Third incident was links again but on direct messages and when the poster started a thread to warn other posters images were posted on that thread, like the first time.

Where is {mention:MNHQ}@MNHQ and updates.

Surely now that this is the 3rd time something of this nature has happened, it is their duty to stop pushing this under the rug.

Why are members only finding out about this by another member updating us?

I'd forgotten one could do this so thanks for the reminder and I've just done it.

That’s terrible.
Whats being done?
Maybe everyone should report to the police if they get one if they feel mumsnet aren’t doing anything.

I think PMs are disabled for everyone at the moment.

MNHQ management are being absolutely negligent in communicating with their members on this. My take home from that, and the repeated breaches is that MN are incompetent or complacent, possibly both?

Yes, a persistant and extremely horrifying criminal attack which the site of course does not deserve and they are very much the victims in this, no question about it.

But @ilovesooty - I would expect a stickied warning about every single phase of this attack on every page, every click! If you can't get away from "Promoted by Mumsnet" these days then why not "Please read warning from Mumsnet".

I have seen no site-wide warnings in the last few days about not opening PMs, only a thread title quite fleetingly in Active Convos which I didn't open but (luckily it seems) guessed what the subject was.

It's not great is it?

That would actually be a great way to do it. I have to say, after seeing the posts in question, I don’t feel that confident that it’s not going to happen again. I’m not blaming MN for it, but I have to say it does worry me particularly when I’m scrolling outside of UK business hours. And based on that, I do keep wondering why I’m still here.

Advanced search suggests @JustineMumsnet hasn't posted on the forums in almost three weeks.
I think that probably speaks about how much concern she has about how this is affecting Mumsnet users. The concern will be purely financial.

As soon as they were aware of the messages, they disabled them so no point in warning people about something that can’t happen.

You don't need a warning about not opening PMs because they were immediately disabled.

The first lot of images were removed within minutes. People keep thinking it took hours because the attack continued for approx 4 hrs, but each incident was dealt with promptly.

It seems like MN's new image upload screening software is working (though none can be perfect) as the second attack linked to off-site images. Link previews, which were abused by the second attack, have now been disabled.

It goes without saying you should never click on a link without knowing what it is. On a desktop, hovering over a link will show the destination url in a text box (usually in the bottom left of your browser window). On mobile browsers, a long press calls up the link information. Apps vary.

More indecent photos | Mumsnet

The images of child sexual abuse reported in this thread (no images in this link) appears to have been hosted on Mumsnet for over an hour.

You do realise that the links were showing as image previews right? That people weren’t dumb enough to click on the links - it was an incredibly simple “attack” that should have been considered by the devs implementing the AI filter. What are the ways in which images can be displayed on the site - shut them all down. Instead it’s like a game of whack a mole - you shouldn’t be applauding that

03:45 - 04:05 is not over an hour. It's 20 minutes. What's the point of exaggerating?

Yes, @CarobyBlobs, I did realise which is why I said 'link previews'.
Users must have clicked on links from private messages, as images and previews were unavailable in PMs.

Jesus Christ.