Revenge Porn and the Legal Dilemma of Encrypted Messaging

Introduction

In the shadowy corners of encrypted apps, a new kind of digital crime has been flourishing; non-consensual pornography, popularly dubbed as “revenge porn.” While once limited to public forums or social media, it has now slithered into private group chats and disappearing messages. Victims could have their photos uploaded to commonly used websites such as Facebook or Instagram, social apps including Snapchat, or even put on websites that exist for the sole purpose of revenge porn, from such, myex.com was the bigger sample although it is no longer in operation, this website allowed individuals to post pictures and videos along with the personal information of the victim. This personal information included “full name, age, address, employer, phone number, social media account information, and email address.” under encryption disguise the platform can subsequently require victims to pay hundreds of dollars get their pictures, videos, and personal information removed from their web. Sadly, most of the published posts have digitally altered makings, victimizing any individual at any desired moment and it is no surprise that myex.com is not the only revenge porn website. Websites such as Anon-IB and AnonMe are similar revenge porn liners. Like myex.com these websites allow users to upload pornographic images and include personal information such as the name, age, and location of the victim. Users are as such able to anonymously post comments on the uploaded images, not only that but the inclusion of such personal information allows for the images to pop up when you google a person’s name, which is clearly detrimental to the victim in a variety of ways, from shattering their dignity to extreme endings and what’s more concerning is that the legal systems still struggles to catch ghosts in this machine.

As such despite the rise of laws addressing sexual privacy and online abuse, the architecture of encrypted communication platforms which are meant to shield privacy has learned to become the perfect smokescreen for perpetrators. Along that emerges inquires that address visible law enforcement inabilities; can the law keep up when evidence self-destructs?

Legal Framework

• The Laws vs. The Loopholes

Globally, revenge porn laws are patchy at best. Some countries treat it as a criminal offense (like the UK under Section 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015), while others classify it under civil invasion of privacy or defamation.

In the USA, 48 states have specific revenge porn statute; Texas’s revenge porn statute was adopted in 2017 and it prohibits the “unlawful disclosure or promotion of intimate visual material.” on proxy is Puerto Rico’s revenge porn statute that got enacted in August 2021, the statute is titled 2021 P.R. H.B. 547, prohibiting “any unauthorized distribution or publication of explicit material of an intimate nature.” while specifically defining what ‘explicit material’ is in the entailed case. For India, there is no standalone law, but Section 67 of the IT Act and Section 354C of the IPC (voyeurism) are constantly applied. Additionally, Ethiopia’s 2021 Computer Crime Proclamation criminalizes “dissemination of private sexual material without consent,” but the enforcement has proven to be inconsistent. Indeed, what can be seen in most cases is that; laws were not designed for end-to-end encrypted environments, where evidence disappears and platforms claim non-liability due to ‘posed’ “zero access.”

Analysis

• The Collision of Privacy, Platform Immunity, and Victim Rights; encryption as a Blessing or a Curse?

An end-to-end encryption (E2EE) ensures that only the sender and recipient can view messages which is vital for political dissidents, journalists, and activists. However, for revenge porn victims this feature hides the crime, erases the evidence, and more over shield the perpetrators.

Nonetheless a visible failure in the system, platforms usually play the neutral host card as we often see tech companies claiming Section 230-type immunity (as in the U.S. case), under a disguise of being a platform and no publisher. While this companies aren’t directly responsible for user content, critics argue they should do more to prevent weaponization of their tools.

Some platforms like WhatsApp test their client side detection, but this sometimes comes with another issue such as uncomfortability about the presence of a body behind a screen (surveillance creep) by clients. Once more here the question that is constantly getting thrown is ‘who decides on what gets flagged?’

• Victim Justice vs. Data Privacy

If governments force platforms to scan encrypted content for illegal material, does it make it a violation of user privacy, the question then in turn enforces to push touch lines on the observable ethical tangle, but on the other hand if they don’t, can we say victims were abandoned without legal proof?

Thus, such seeking calls for legal fork in the road: 1, crack encryption and catch the abusers. 2, protect the privacy and let attackers vanish. 3, make a legal innovation as such for it to balance digital rights with individual (victim) protection.

Case Snapshots

• In 2023, a 17-year-old Ethiopian girl had intimate photos leaked via a Telegram channel run by students in her school. The police could not access the channel’s data due to encryption. The platform denied assistance without a court order from an international jurisdiction. The case was dropped with no consideration made to repair the victim mentally or physically. (uncovered cases in Ethiopia)
• A student at Lincoln University, charged under s 33(1) of Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (UK). In April 2018, a female university student was accused by a former boyfriend for using a picture of his naked torso in an art project, without his consent. Despite his face being heavily obscured, the police charged the girlfriend. (‘University of Lincoln Student’s Revenge Porn Charge over Art Dropped’, The Times (14 April 2018)).

Recommendations

• New Legislation: Countries should pass laws that specifically target encrypted abuse without outlawing encryption altogether.
• Safe Reporting Tools: Encourage platforms to create anonymous victim hotlines and metadata trails that can be triggered with consent.
• Judicial Cooperation: Establish a cross border emergency response systems for encrypted abuse.
• Digital Consent Education: Embed legal awareness in schools and digital platforms.

Conclusion

A clear see through is how encrypted messaging is serving as a triumph of privacy. however, when it gets used as a weapon, it becomes a sanctuary for abuse making revenge porn no longer just a digital scandal but a legal blind spot. For such matters bold legal reforms and platform accountability have to be made a first must dos. Unless otherwise justice will remain out of reach for victims whose pain is being hidden behind those vanishing messages and privacy will have to remain being the enemy of protection.

Citation