← There Are No Girls on the Internet
Loading summary
Transcript29 lines
- [00:00]
Bridget Todd
This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Did you know Tide has been upgraded to provide an even better clean in cold water. Tide is specifically designed to fight any stain you throw at it, even in cold butter. Yep, chocolate ice cream. Sure thing. Barbecue sauce. Tide's got you covered. You don't need to use warm water. Additionally, Tide pods let you confidently fight tough stains with new coldzyme technology. Just remember, if it's gotta be clean, it's gotta be tied for 100 days.
- [00:35]
Will Smith
I'm gonna cross the seven continents because the answers to everything important are at the edges of our world. Pole to Pole with Will Smith Series premiere tonight at 9 on National Geographic Stream on Disney and Hulu Introducing Family.
- [00:49]
Public Investing Representative
Freedom from T Mobile. We'll pay off four phones up to $3200 and give you four free phones, all on America's largest 5G network. Visit your local T Mobile location or learn more@t mobile.com FamilyFreedom up to $800 per line via virtual prepaid card typically takes 15 days. Free phones via 24 monthly bill credits with finance agreement eg Apple iPhone 16128 gigabyte 8 $29.99 Eligible trade in eg iPhone 11 Pro for well qualified credits end and balance due if you pay off early or cancel contact T Mobile Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On public you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year. You can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. You can Generated assets are like EFTs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures of available@public.com Disclosures.
- [02:30]
Bridget Todd
There are no girls on the Internet As a production of iHeartRadio and unbossed creative. I'm Bridget Todd, and this is There are no Girls on the Internet. In last week's News Roundup, one of the stories that we cut for Time was about the T dating app for women. At the time when we were recording, the story was still pretty simple, just that this dating app that had quietly existed for two had rocketed to the top of Apple's App Store because it was getting a ton of attention on social media from people making videos on platforms like TikTok about how the app played into gender dynamics around women who date men. I was seeing posts on TikTok about the T app from my own city here in D.C. about how some women were using it to talk about legitimately abusive behavior from men, while other women were using it to talk about sort of commonplace dating annoyances like men who don't text back or men who ghost, and how conflating those two things on one app is probably not great. According to the people who run the Tapp, all of these kinds of posts were really driving a ton of attention, which is not at all surprising because gender war stuff will always generate engagement. That attention was both positive and negative, with a lot of men complaining about how this app was unfair. But in the economy of the Internet, it really doesn't matter because it's all engagement either way. So everybody was talking about this app and it became number one on the App Store in the lifestyle category. The company said that something like 1 million people had downloaded the app in just a few weeks alone. Sensor Tower, a marketing intelligence firm that tracks app data, estimated that the downloads of the app increased 185% in the first 20 days of July compared with June of that same period. The company that makes the app said on social media that they had gotten over 4 million female users, with a waiting list of approximately 900,000 new prospective users. There's a waiting list because before women can use the app, they have to be verified. This will be important for later. So as recently as last Thursday night, when we were recording the news roundup, that was really the main gist of what was going on. So we ended up not talking about it at all because there was a lot of other important stuff going on and I kind of just ran out of time. But now I am glad that we did not talk about it, because right after we published that episode, the Tapp experienced a pretty major data breach. So let's talk about what the Tapp is. What exactly happened? The gendered history of online platforms like the Tapp and what I think it all means. So what exactly is the tapp? I want to spend some time on how it works before we get into the data breach. It's a dating app that's kind of like the Yelp if you were rating men instead of restaurants. So not a dating app that helps you match with people to date, but. But an app that tries to help you make more informed dating choices. Women can anonymously share information about the experiences that they've had with specific men to help inform other women. The key here is the anonymity. When you first join the app, you're told that it is totally and completely anonymous and that screenshotting the app is not possible. If you try to take a screenshot, you'll get a black screen, though you can obviously still take a photo of the app with an additional device, which people do pretty often. On the T app, you can even describe a guy's behavior and have other women weigh in on whether you should keep seeing him or not. Women assign men red flags for problematic behavior and green flags for good behavior. Basically, it's a digital whisper network in the form of an app for women to post photos of men and talk about whatever they might know about that man. You know, like spilling the tea. So what separates the T app from other kinds of platforms like this is that it kind of builds itself as an app for women's safety. They gave 10% of their proceeds to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. And even though the app is free, users get five free searches each month. After that, they're given a Choice. Pay for tease $15 a month subscription or invite friends to keep using it for free. So basically invite your girlfriends to have their data breached as well. All kidding aside, it's actually kind of a smart strategy for a growing app, especially one that is so dependent on having a large user base of women who able to weigh in on the men in any particular area. For apps like this, users are basically as good as cash. So either pay up for the premium version or invite your girlfriends. The T app promises that women who date men can make sure your date is safe, not a catfish or not in a relationship. According to Teas Marketing Materials, the app's founder, Sean Cook, who formerly was a product manager at Salesforce and Shutterfly, launched the app because he witnessed his own mother's terrifying experience with online dating. He said she was catfished and unknowingly engaged with men who had criminal records. He teamed up with a social media creator named Daniela Satella, who came on as the Tapp, social media director who created a buzzy pink and purple Gen Z friendly social media presence for the app. The website says that T is on a mission to revolutionize dating safety by equipping women with cutting edge tools, real time insights and a powerful community to navigate the modern dating world with confidence and control. At its core, the site says T is built on one fundamental belief women should never have to compromise their safety while dating. So users anonymously post photos of men they're dating and asking others if they have any T on them. Users can also turn on notification alerts to see if a specific name is mentioned on the app. So if I meet Joe Blow on the street and I want to keep tabs on whether or not he shows up on the T app, I can set a notification alert for his name. Other tools on the app allow users to run background checks, search for criminal records, and reverse image search for photos in the hopes of spotting catfishing or people passing off photos of other people as themselves. If this premise sounds kind of familiar, it's because it's very similar to those Are we dating the same guy? Pages on social media, which you might recall sparked lawsuits Last year. Chicago man sued Meta as well as women who dated him and their parents were women who commented on Facebook posts about him in a Facebook group and the moderators of the group for defamation, invasion of privacy, doxing and more. The complaint was dismissed and similarly A man in LA filed a lawsuit against 50 women. The man, Stuart Lucas Murray, sued 50 women for defamation, libel, sex based discrimination and other allegations all stemming from their posts in the Facebook group. Are we dating the same guy? Some of the women that he sued had never even met him, only commented on the Facebook post with things like oh wow and he sued them too. This situation is pretty interesting. I would actually recommend Googling Stuart Lucas Murray because he has a pretty prolific public profile. I won't say much more than that because in my opinion he seems like a pretty litigious guy, but it is an interesting Google so One of the defendants in that suit described the accusations as baseless, emphasizing that the group serves as a platform for sharing personal experiences with men and opinions which she says are protected from defamation. Here's a little bit of their press conference as myself and my fellow co defendants were just speaking their truth and unfortunately for him it was again not favorable. So he somehow found those comments that we did make. Again, they were factual and they were based in our true experiences. He found those comments and decided to come forth with this lawsuit with his claims of defamation, which we feel are invalid because there is no evidence that we know of that would exist in support of his claims. So just like that Chicago case, this case was also dismissed. But even still, Facebook really started cracking down on those are we dating the same guy? Pages where women would dish about men on Facebook. Which is pretty ironic considering Mark Zuckerberg originally conceptualized the idea of Facebook to rate the looks of the women that he called dogs in his college dorm. But in any event, a lot of those groups are being pushed off of Facebook, which is why apps like the T app have popped up in their place. This kind of yelp for people thing may seem novel, but it's actually not a new idea at all. There was an app back in 2012 called Lulu which integrated with Facebook to let you rate men that you dated and judge them on what other women say about them. It was actually pretty similar to the t app in that when a Facebook user joined lulu, it pulled the names of the men that they knew in their network. And if a user decided to rate them, it would generate a public facing page announcing that that man had been reviewed. Originally, that page featured that man's name and photograph pulled from his Facebook account. So lulu is kind of similar to the tf, but it was really more about rating men in bed, Like a cheeky way of being like, oh, this guy has big feet, and less about trying to keep women safe from abuse. Lulu was eventually acquired and shut down. Its Wikipedia page says it was described in popular press as sexist and objectifying, non consensual and shallow and mean. I also remember way back in the early 2000s, there was this big splash about a site called Girl, don't date him that advertised itself as a kind of credit report for men. The site's founder, Tasha Joseph, was kind of a fast talking lady, and she was always going on entertainment news shows to talk about dating. And I actually remember that site got quite a lot of good press, but it went just about as well as you might expect. The Miami New Times wrote an interesting piece in 2006 about how somebody fabricated a very sensational story about a horrible man who sexually assaulted a woman that later led to her death by suicide. The story was completely fabricated, but posted on the site without proof, and it kind of went proto viral. But the torrid tale was a total lie. Just to prove a point. The person who wrote that fake post said, the bottom line is that this website is dangerous, and the chances of a visitor reading some bullshit story like the one that I posted about someone they know are great. The Miami New Times also profiled a man on the site who was accused of sexually assaulting a woman, but later it's revealed that he's actually never had sex with a woman because he's gay, and that the person who wrote that post was actually a former coworker of his who was making false reports on the site to harass him. In 2006, a Pennsylvania attorney filed a suit against the website's owner, as well as two alleged posters and five unidentified women for various claims that they made about him that he asserted were false and defamatory. The suit was initially dismissed in Pennsylvania for lack of personal jurisdiction, but in 2007, that man brought a second lawsuit in federal court in Florida, which was settled after the judge refused to dismiss the new case. The terms of a settlement were not disclosed. Girl Don't Date him eventually pivoted to publishing articles about safer dating practices until it was shut down entirely. So if you're wondering, wouldn't a similar platform like the T app just potentially turn into a breeding ground for defamation and harassment? I had the very same thought. Because you don't actually need any proof about what is being posted to the app. Anyone can basically say anything about anyone, though we do know that statistically speaking, it is quite rare for women to lie about abuse. T's support team stresses that they have a zero tolerance policy for defamatory content and that they ask anyone on the receiving end of this to get in touch with them. But of course they would say that. I actually haven't seen much about how they handle it when someone does get in touch about alleged defamation. I would be curious to know and I think given the popularity and the attention of the tapp the I would guess that that's probably something we'll be hearing more about in the next coming weeks or months. Let's take a quick break.
- [14:10]
Will Smith
For 100 days. I'm going to cross the seven continents because the answers to everything important are at the edges of our world. Pole to Pole with Will Smith Series premiere tonight at 9 on National Geographic Stream, on Disney and Hulu.
- [14:25]
Public Investing Representative
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI, it all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work you. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index, and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like EFTs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, llc SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures available@public.com disclosures so you want.
- [15:35]
Walton Goggins
To start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills. But you don't. You just need godaddy Arrow I'm Walton Goggins, and as an actor, I'm an expert in looking like I know what I'm doing even when I don't. And I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins Goggle Glasses But I'm an actor. I don't know what I'm doing. I needed help. GoDaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you, and even set you up with a social media calendar. I didn't even realize I needed a social media calendar. GoDaddy Arrow will take your idea that sounds good and make a business that looks like you know what you're doing. GoDaddy Arrow can get your business up and running in minutes. You know what that sounds like? It sounds like a plan. Get started@godaddy.com Arrow that's godaddy.com Airo hi.
- [16:29]
Bridget Todd
I'm Angie Hicks, co founder of Angie. When you use Angie for your home projects, you know all your jobs will be done well, from roof repair to emergency plumbing and more done well. So the next time you have a home project, leave it to the pros. Get started@angie.com. And are back. Listeners probably know that I have kind of a complicated relationship with section 230 of the Communications Decency act, the controversial law that says that social media platforms are not liable for the content posted by users. Now we have had experts on the show who have both defended Section 230 as a critical law for protecting the open Internet, and we've had other experts on the show, who have argued that it should be repealed because it lets people platforms off the hook for hosting things like hate speech. So needless to say, it's complicated. But as of today, Section 230 is still the law of the land. So thanks to Section 230, the Tapp itself is protected from being liable for the content posted on the platform. And according to Elliot Williams, a former deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department and current legal analyst for cnn, in the case of individual users, establishing malicious intent, which is required in a defamation lawsuit, might be kind of tricky because they can always argue that their A was to protect other women and not to harm someone. But as you might imagine, the app's premise was immediately polarizing along the lines of gender war stuff. Some praised it as a useful way to warn women about the dangerous behavior of men, while others called it divisive and a violation of men's privacy. Here's what the CEO had to say on the release podcast we receive probably.
- [18:10]
Will Smith
About three legal threats a day from different men that are disappointed that women have told largely true stories about them on these apps. And so they are they are upset that they've done something bad to a woman and that a woman has told people about it. And we have a full legal team that helps us navigate those situations. And all of the way that we operate is well within legal guidelines. And then, you know, there's there's also a whole men's rights activism community that doesn't like what we're doing. And so they're constantly trying to tear us down and organize, you know, mass petitions to take us down and mass reporting of us on the App Store to try to take us down. So, you know, we a lot of people that are unhappy about what we're doing and, and that's okay with us. You know, we believe that women deserve to be able to share their stories and to be able to have safe, you know, relationships.
- [19:05]
Bridget Todd
So I obviously don't disagree with him that women should be able to have safe relationships, but it really highlights the question. Are apps like the T app, the digital version of a whisper network, and a way for women to inform each other about potential abusers, stalkers, and catfishes? Or is it an app for women to gossip about men, potentially defame them and put those men at risk? Here's how Dazed puts it in a piece that was written before news of the data breach, which we'll get to in a moment. For some, the app is a vital resource, a way to alert other women to the predators and abusers lurking undetected in the dating pool. Unlike anything else out there, this is an app designed with women's safety, awareness and empowerment as its top priority, reads one review on the App Store. It goes beyond basic dating protection and truly provides a layer of defense against liars, cheaters, scammers, and even predators. Another reviewer says they're glad to have a means of warning other women about her abusive ex. He's attractive, smart and charming. You'd never know it for so long I was hoping for a way to warn other women off of him. So I do think this is legitimately very important, and I don't want to dismiss this. Marginalized people especially have been making use of whisper networks since forever. Gossip and information sharing can be a real tool for women to keep ourselves and our community safe when it doesn't always feel like we have access to more traditional forms of safety. So I get it. There is a real need for this kind of information sharing, and I think the popularity of the TAPP shows that women really do feel like they need ways to arm themselves with information to feel safer when dating. When you think about how common things like sexual abuse actually are, it makes complete sense to me why women would flock to something that says that it's offering them a feeling like they can put their safety in their own hands by searching a guy on the T app before they let him into their lives. But an app offering women safety, then lying to them and betraying those women by failing to follow the most basic steps at keeping them safe is not it. And when you look at what happened with this breach, we really are talking about women's actual safety here, not just theoretically. So let's talk about the breach I mentioned. The app is only for women, so in order to verify your gender, anyone signing up to the app needs to submit a selfie. But in earlier iterations of this app, in addition to a selfie, women also had to submit their driver's licenses. One of my big questions was how the app deals with trans women or non binary people. The app does not disallow trans women. I'm not totally sure about non binary people, and let's not dive too much into the binary of the app, verifying one's gender to keep men out. But if this is something that you've had experience with, please let me know. You can shoot me a DM or email us@helloengoti.com so once your information is submitted to the TAPP, then there is a waiting period up to 17 hours or more if a lot of people are trying to sign up for the app at the same time as you. Now, T said that in 2023 it removed the requirement for photo ID in addition to the selfie. So now you just submit a selfie. But that bit about having to submit your driver's license is going to be pretty key here. So on Friday night, after the news roundup is published and live in the world, your girl is happily two margaritas deep at the bar and the folks who run the TAPP said that there had been a data breach of a legacy storage system holding data for its users. This came after the app angered some men and prompted a thread on the extremist troll message board 4chan, in which users called for a hack and leak campaign of the tapping. A spokesperson for the TAPP confirmed all of this to Lifehacker, saying T identified unauthorized access to one of its systems and immediately launched a full investigation to assess the scope and impact. The initial results of this effort suggest that the incident involved a legacy data storage system containing information from over two years ago. Approximately 72,000 images, including approximately 13,000 images of selfies and photo identification submitted during the verification, and 59,000 images publicly viewable in the app from posts, comments and direct messages were accessed without authorization. So yeah, that includes about 13,000 images of women's driver's licenses that they submitted back when that was a requirement to join the app, and also posts, comments and direct messages in the apps were also part of this breach. Now here's kind of a key detail. According to T's privacy policy, the selfies that it requires from people signing up for the app are deleted shortly after those users are verified. But that obviously was not happening. Or at least it wasn't happening with the images that were included in that breach, according to the New York Times. Rather than being deleted like the privacy policy said would happen, that data was stored, quote, in compliance with law enforcement requirements related to cyberbullying prevention, T said in a statement, and that data was not moved to newer systems that T said were better fortified. So basically the TAPP lied to its users about the privacy policies that it was taking. It's also not clear what law enforcement requirements are talking about. I've got to admit, it kind of sounds like a pretty convenient dodge to me, but I'm not totally sure when the breach initially happened. The company said that the only people impacted were those who signed up before February 2024. But on Monday, 404Media reported that there was a second major security issue impacting women who had signed up and used the app much more recently. Basically, the TAPP exposed much more user data than was initially reported, with an independent security researcher now finding that it was possible for hackers to access really sensitive direct messages between users. Kashra Varjardi, the researcher who flagged the issue to 404 Media, sent a database of more than 1.1 million messages they said stretched from early 2023 to as recently as last week. And some of the private Messages viewed by 404 Media that hackers could have had access to included very sensitive stuff. Conversations about having had abortions, information about cheating partners, and even messages that included people's phone numbers. Despite T's initial statement that the only thing impacted was information from over two years ago, the researcher also said that they found the ability to send a push notification to all of T's users. Like it is hard to overstate how bad this is. So just to be clear, I am not a software developer, so I'm not an expert in this. But doing some research, it sounds like the company has a lot of the blame here, to the point where I'm not even sure that it's fair to call this a hack or a leak because they were just that sloppy with user data. Like, it truly sounds like these women had photos and their driver's license photos posted to 4chan because the tapp just didn't bother to take basic security steps. 404 Media, one of my favorite tech outlets was the first to break the story of what happened, which is that users from 4chan claim to have discovered an exposed and unsecured database hosted on Google's mobile app development platform Firebase, belonging to the Tapp. On 4chan, folks were bragging that this let them rifle through women's personal data and selfies that were uploaded to the app. Then, of course, they posted that data online. Over on 4chan, users exclaimed, yes, if you sent TAPP your face and driver's license, they dox you publicly. No authentication, no nothing. It's a public bucket. Driver's licenses and face pics. Get the fuck in here before they shut it down. Now, the thread says that the issue was this exposed database that allowed anybody to access this material. And 404 Media confirmed a voluminous list of specific attachments associated with the tapp. Eventually, that page was locked down. The 4chan post includes a photo of four women's driver's licenses that the 4chan user says they redacted. But the comment on that 4chan thread indicates that many more photos of T users have been exposed with one person claiming that they downloaded thousands 404 Media saw 4chan users share dozens of photos of women that they claim were downloaded from the database, which all shared the same image dimensions and file naming format that they saw on the list in the exposed Google Firebase bucket. Initially, the person who discovered all this says they tried to report it to Google, but ended up reporting it to 404 Media instead. So let's break this down because it's basically like if your doctor stored your private personal medical records in an open crate in the back alley behind the clinic, or like if your bank stored all of your money in an open shoebox in the bank's lobby. Obviously it's pretty fucked up for 4chan to access this, but it is even more fucked up that the T app, this app that is getting away with billing themselves to be about women's safety is letting this level of sensitive information just essentially be publicly accessible. I cannot overstate what a massive, massive fuck up this is because both because of the very serious harm that has been done to these 13,000 women and also because it happened because the developers just left this information sitting out there unsecured for anybody to just come and get it. More After a quick break.
- [28:14]
Will Smith
For 100 days, I'm going to cross the seven continents because the answers to everything important are out there at the edges of our world. I'm stepping into the unknown. Where are we going to see our plan Planet? This is amazing as it's never been seen before. From pole to pole, Pole to Poll with Will Smith Series premiere tonight at 9 on National Geographic stream, on Disney plus and Hulu.
- [28:42]
Bridget Todd
Show Me the Way.
- [28:43]
Public Investing Representative
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like efts with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you try transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, llc SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures available@public.com disclosures so you want.
- [29:53]
Walton Goggins
To start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills, but you don't. You just need godaddy Arrow I'm Walton Goggins and as an actor I'm an expert in looking like I know what I'm doing. GoDaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you, and even set you up with a social media calendar. Get started@godaddy.com Arrow that's godaddy.com Airo hi.
- [30:23]
Bridget Todd
I'm Angie Hicks, co founder of Angie. When you use Angie for your home projects, you know all your jobs will be done well. Roof repair done well Kitchen sink install done well Deck upgrades done well Electrical upgrade done well. Angie's been connecting homeowners with skilled pros for nearly 30 years, so we know the difference between done and done well. Hire high quality pros@angie.com. Let's get right back into it. So what in the ever loving fuck happened here? We don't actually know. A lot of my cybersecurity friends that I talked to about this said that the site might have been vibe coded, which is when someone who doesn't know any better or is just careless and sloppy and lazy just uses AI to help them put together a site and they don't really know the things they should be asking for, so it comes out really janky. But other friends have suggested this could also just be a careless person. There's also the idea that this kind of fuck up is unfortunately not super uncommon. Just a few weeks ago, the insurance company Alliance Life disclosed a breach through a third party cloud vendor affecting most of its 1.4 million US customers, including financial professionals and employees, and all of their personal data was accessed. And due to a Google Analytics misconfiguration on their site, up to 4.7 million individuals had their names, insurance details, zip codes and patient identifiers shared improperly. So as shocking as this is, this kind of breach is not terribly uncommon. There was also such big fervor around the TF breach. An interactive Google map was circulating online purporting to show where all the different women's addresses included in the breach were located. This even got to a point where a fake story emerged on social media using an AI generated news broadcaster warning women about the so called Teabag killer who the fake report said was killing the women whose addresses were exposed in the breach. Now this is not true. Controversy clinging to it in the form of an AI generated newscast.
- [32:36]
Will Smith
This week, police are investigating a string of murders linked to the tapp where women who exposed men were later found dead.
- [32:44]
Bridget Todd
Detroit police say there was absolutely no truth to the so called T bag kill.
- [32:50]
Will Smith
I stuffed their throats with teabags.
- [32:52]
Public Investing Representative
The post even had a name of a DPD investigator. There's no one by that name that works for the department.
- [32:59]
Bridget Todd
But if you're not looking, these deep fakes can be tricky to spot. So thankfully we don't have to worry about the Teabag killer. But we cannot not talk about the gender dynamics at play here because something that almost feels a little, I don't know, kinky about this entire thing is that it fits so squarely and neatly into a gender wars framework. You know, women using an app that they believe to be anonymous to share pictures of men and gossip about men, men saying this is doxxing. And then those same women getting doxed by the really sloppy privacy protocols and their images being posted all over the Internet. Like, it almost seems like a tailor made kind of gender wars. Just so story. To the point where when I first heard about this breach, I almost wondered if it was some kind of a setup. And of course, those women's images were floating all over the Internet with men making fun of them with all kinds of sexist, misogynistic barbs. And just a few days after the breach, someone made a site that ranks the looks of the women featured in the breached images, which, hey, I thought Mark Zuckerberg already had that idea. And some of those photos have been ranked tens of thousands of times. And I think that really demonstrates why women would flock to an app like the Tapping. You know, an app that is promising, even falsely, to help women have safer experiences with men. The fact that Men on 4chan would do this kind of thing kind of proves their point. When I went to see what people were saying about this online, I found a lot of women upset at the idea that men would be so bothered that women would have a space online to discuss the behavior of men. One Instagram comment on the T app's Instagram page reads, wow, it's crazy how some men are genuinely upset about this app, mainly because it disrupts their ability to move in deception and avoid taking accountability for their actions. The Tapp's Instagram page is littered with stories purporting to show women who have used the app to find out their husbands or the fathers of their kids are running around on them, though it's not clear to me if these are actually real stories or just more marketing from the app. And again, I don't want to discount that women should have a space to talk about their experiences in dating, and I don't want the survivors of abuse to go unheard. But I have to admit that I am personally very uncomfortable with apps like this, even while I understand why women might feel empowered by what these apps are selling. And of course there's already calls and online forums to make a version of the T app for men to rate women as payback, even though men kind of already have this. Like men don't really need a dedicated app to rate women. One such app, called TBorn, according to NBC News, quickly ignited backlash after its creator called out users for posting revenge porn. Wow, what a shocker. Who could have seen that coming? The Tborn app has now been removed from the App Store and there are men all over men's rights Reddit communities saying that this is evidence of anti male bias, that the T app for women to rate men would be able to remain on the App Store, but the app for men to rate women was taken down. I think what makes me the most angry about this entire thing, Honestly, isn't the 4chan goons responsible. It's the fact that this app would purport to give women a space to keep themselves safe and betray them so cruelly by putting them at risk. I guess fucked up as 4chan is for circulating these images and this data, who expects anything other than this kind of behavior from the guys who hang out on 4chan? If anything, the fact that these kinds of threats exist for women should mean that the people who run apps like the Tapp have an even bigger responsibility to protect those women that they have attracted to their platform with the promise of caring about their safety. Or at the very least, they ought to not be outright lying to those women about what steps they're taking to keep them safe so they can make up their own minds about whether or not they're going to trust this platform. The Tapp issued an apology for the breach, but it kind of doesn't matter. They had a responsibility to protect their users and they failed hard. And fuck ups like this are not a force of nature. They happen because somebody somewhere in the company decided that this amount of security was good enough, they could have hired additional software engineers or contracted with an outside company to do a security audit. But they didn't. They decided to spend money on other stuff and it's obvious that they did not invest enough in security to keep their users safe. The Tapp's security practices, or lack thereof, make me think that this app that was started by a man or was never really invested in women's safety at all because if they were, they would have had better security practices. I think that what they were actually interested in is just capitalizing on the inevitable online engagement from the promise of women telling each other juicy stories about men. Cover that with a little splashy pink influencer style social media presence and you've got a solid business plan to capitalize on the unpleasant experiences of women. Who cares if you put those women at risk? I mean, this is just my personal take, but I think the Tapp was basically quickly and sloppily thrown together with security and privacy obviously as an afterthought just to generate and make use of gendered rage bait in order to garner attention for the app. And the sad thing is, this is effective. I just checked and the Tapp is currently the number two app on the entire app store. To put that in perspective, right now the number one app is ChatGPT. And I guess ultimately I simply do not trust a lot of for profit apps that are selling and packaging safety to women. Because real safety is not someone telling you on an app that a guy is a red flag. It's having safer communities, healthier relationship dynamics, avenues for meaningful accountability. It's about being able to communicate on platforms that aren't just lying to us and exploiting us and putting us at risk. So yeah, I guess I just don't like the idea of safety being sold to us as a for profit app. And I think it also creates a dynamic that puts the burden on keeping yourself safe on women. Like we should be able to have safe dating experiences without relying on apps that ultimately exploit us. And honestly, what makes me really sad is that on the Tapps Instagram post about the breach, a lot of the comments are from women who do not seem to care about the breach. They just want to know when their verification to sign up for the app will be approved. And it makes me sad that the state of gender in dating is so bad and that even on a post about the app admitting how carelessly it treated very sensitive information of their users, people are still just clamoring to get on the app. Like it makes me think we really are cooked. And I think the TAPP is a bit of a harbinger of things to come, bad things to be clear, because we've talked a lot about the rise of age verification laws and laws that would require folks to submit their government ID to access different corners of the Internet. I am very personally against laws like this for several reasons. But what happened with the TAPP reach is an excellent example of one of those reasons. A lot of what keeps us secure online comes down to shared norms. Like we learn not to click those suspicious links and not to give away our two factor authentication codes or how to spot a scam or a spoof call. But when apps and websites start asking for more and more sensitive information, like Social Security numbers, face scans or photo IDs, it trains us to just hand over our data without really thinking twice about it. Sharing this kind of information can start to feel as automatic as just hitting agree on a terms of service without thinking much about it. And that is no good. The more apps and services that require us to give up our personal information, the more opportunity there is for that information to fall into the wrong hands. Cybersecurity experts sometimes call this expanding the surface area of risk. And the real problem is, is that we don't have any real way of knowing how our data will be stored or used once we hand it over. The TAPP said they were deleting verification selfies and government IDs, but we can see that they clearly did not, because that information is now floating all over the Internet. So a company might say, oh yeah, we're following very strict privacy policies, but that doesn't mean they actually are. And the TAPP obviously wasn't even Companies with solid security protocols can still get hacked. Hacked. And when the stakes are this high, you know, when what's being collected is tied to your government name and identity and address. These risks are not theoretical. As more platforms require ID uploads and facial recognition, I think we're only going to see more problems with this. And weak security practices are not just inconvenient, they're dangerous. Not just for women, for all of us. Last year, 404 Media reported that a company that verifies the identities of TikTok, Uber and X users, sometimes by processing photographs of their faces and pictures of their driver's licenses, exposed a set of administrative credentials online for more than a year, potentially allowing hackers to access that sensitive data. And this is happening as more social networks and pornography sites move toward an identity or age verification model in which users are required to upload their real identity documents to access certain services, usually because laws require it in a misguided effort to protect children. The T breach highlights that identity services are themselves a prime target for hackers and a major threat to all of our safety. So if these are the same companies that we might all be using if age verification becomes more widespread across the country, we could all very well be at risk. So as for the tapp, in the wake of the breach, they say they have engaged third party cybersecurity experts and are working around the clock to secure systems. In a statement they said, at this time we have implemented additional security measures and have fixed the data issue. We are currently working to determine the full nature and scope of the information involved in the incident. Protecting our users privacy and data is our highest priority. We are taking every necessary step to ensure the security of our platform and prevent further exposure. This is tale as old as the Internet itself. Company rushes to build sloppy software, pushes it to users with weak security, gets burned by a data breach, and then, and only then, invest in resources that actually protect their users. But it shouldn't take a disaster like this one for a company to do the right thing and prioritize user safety. And this kind of thing honestly tells you a ton about a company's values and the values of the people who work there. So not to put too fine a point on it, but I think if you currently have the tapp, you should delete it. I don't think that any company that lies to its users while purporting to be all about keeping themselves is a company that you can trust. Even if they do clean up their act. Women deserve so much better. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech or just want to say hi. You can reach us@helloangodi.com you can also find transcripts for today's episode@tengodi.com there are no Girls on the Internet was created by me, Bridget Todd. It's a production of iHeartRadio and unbossed creative. Jonathan Strickland is our Executive producer, Tari Harrison is our producer and Sound Engineer Michael Amato is our contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts for more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [44:11]
Walton Goggins
Everyone deserves to be connected.
- [44:13]
Will Smith
That's why T Mobile and US Cellular are joining forces. Switch to T Mobile and save up.
- [44:18]
Public Investing Representative
To 20% versus Verizon by getting built.
- [44:21]
Will Smith
In benefits they leave out. Check the math@t mobile.com switch and now T Mobile is in US cellular stores. Savings versus Comparable Verizon plans plus the cost of optional benefits, plan features and.
- [44:34]
Bridget Todd
Texas and fees vary.
- [44:35]
Will Smith
Savings with three plus lines include third line free via monthly bill credits. Credit stop if you cancel any lines.
- [44:39]
Bridget Todd
Qualifying credit required.
- [44:41]
Will Smith
This is Julian Edelman from Dudes on Dudes with Gronk and Jewels Sunday mornings I've got my game day ritual, coffee, lucky socks and now new Morning Uncrustable Sandwiches. It's all about that 12 gram protein boost with the new Uncrustables Bright Eyed Berry or up and apple flavors. Bright Eye Berries got a feisty receiver energy up an apple. Your classic do it all tight end, soft, pillowy, packed with protein and easy enough for Gronk to grab from the freezer. Whether you're on the couch, driving to the tailgate or heading to the locker room, New Morning Uncrustable Sandwiches are the MVP of snacks. Your new Sunday kickoff ritual starts here with new Morning Uncrustable sandwiches packed with 12 grams of protein. If you're the purchasing manager at a manufacturing plant, you know having a trusted partner makes all the difference. That's why, hands down, you count on Grainger for auto reordering. With on time restocks, your team will have the cut resistant gloves they need at the start of their shift and you can end your day knowing they've got safety well in hand. Call 1-800-GRAINGER click granger.com or just stop by Grainger for the ones who get it done. Owning a home is full of surprises. Some wonderful, some not so much. And when something breaks, it can feel like the whole day unravels. That's why HomeServe exists for as little as $4.99 a month. You'll always have someone to call, a trusted professional ready to help, bringing peace of mind to four and a half million homeowners nationwide. For plans starting at just $4.99 a month, go to homeserve.com that's homeserve.com not available everywhere. Most plans range between $4.99 to $11.99 a month. Your first year terms apply.
- [46:41]
Bridget Todd
Uncovered repairs this is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.