Most mainstream social media platforms have strict guidelines preventing the dissemination of nonconsensual intimate images (NCII), or sexually explicit photos and videos. But a new report finds that many social media platforms directly refer users to such content.
The report from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), an anti-extremism organization, analyzes the online ecosystem that enables the proliferation of so-called “nudify” apps and websites, which allow users to digitally undress people without their consent.
The study, which was published on Monday, looked at the top 10 apps and websites used to make nonconsensual explicit deepfakes, as well as how people are finding them. It found that a surprising amount of referral traffic comes not from small, poorly regulated online communities like 4chan but from mainstream social media platforms.
According to the ISD report, social networks drove more than 5.7 million visits to nudify sites between December 2025 and March 2026. The top driver of this traffic was YouTube, which was responsible for 1.82 million site visits, more than 30 percent of the referrals.
Such videos, which resulted from searches for keywords like “undress app” or “nudify app,” ranged from reviewing and promoting specific apps to linking to promo codes to provide free credits. X was the second most prominent source of traffic to the sites, accounting for over 1.3 million visits, according to the study.
The study’s authors wrote that these findings appear to be in “direct conflict” with YouTube’s policies, which prohibit sexually explicit content. “This should logically include nudify websites or tools that generate nonconsensual explicit imagery,” the report reads. “However, content violating these policies was easily discoverable and accessible on the platform, effectively turning it into a gateway to nudify websites.”
“It wasn’t just that YouTube was a passive source” of referral traffic, Melanie Smith, the senior director of research and policy for ISD, tells WIRED. “In a lot of these cases, it was facilitating the use of these tools as well.”
Interestingly, Smith notes, YouTube’s policies don’t just prohibit posting sexually explicit content, they also prohibit posting links to or advertising for sexually explicit websites (say, linking to an OnlyFans). “In theory that should cover nonconsensual imagery and revenge porn, or nude photo leaks, but it doesn’t seem like that’s being enforced comprehensively,” she says.
In response to WIRED’s request for comment, YouTube spokesperson Boot Bullwinkle says the company has “strict policies prohibiting content that includes unwanted sexualization, such as nonconsensually shared intimate imagery.” He noted that these policies apply both to content on YouTube itself and to external links, and include “altered or synthetic content that realistically simulates nudity.”
The study also looked at the pricing and accessibility of nudification tools, with some apps and websites allowing users to generate sexually explicit content for as little as $1 an image. Despite the relatively low cost of using the platforms, they can be extremely profitable, with a recent WIRED report finding they may be generating as much as $36 million in collective revenue per year.
Common targets of nudification apps include current and ex-girlfriends, as well as (disturbingly) relatives such as sisters and cousins, the study found. The authors were also surprised to find that the motivations of people who use nudify tools are not even necessarily “sexual in nature,” says Smith: “A lot of the requests were about getting people fired from jobs and compromising their livelihoods and lives in nefarious ways.”
Nudify apps have become a major scourge on many social media platforms. Sometimes, however, a platform will not only allow these AI-generated images to spread but also help people make them.
