Copy article

Apple and Google's £95M Nudify App Economy: When Platform Profits Beat Ethics

ended 29. January 2026

A Tech Transparency Project investigation published 27 January 2026 found 102 nudify apps across both platforms, 55 on Google Play, 47 on Apple's App Store. Together, these apps have been downloaded more than 705 million times and generated £95 million in revenue, with both Apple and Google taking commission cuts of up to 30%. 

Both companies have explicit policies banning these apps. 

Google's Developer Policy Centre for sexual content and profanity guidelines state: it doesn't allow “Apps that degrade or objectify people, such as apps that claim to undress people or see through clothing, even if labelled as prank or entertainment apps. ”

Apple's guidelines  ban objectionable content under Section 1.1.4: "Overtly sexual or pornographic material, defined as 'explicit descriptions or displays of sexual organs or activities intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.'"

It was only after journalists contacted them that Apple removed 25 according to TTP and Google removed 31 apps, still less than those identified by TPP.

In 2025, the US National Association of Attorneys General wrote to Apple Pay and Google Pay requesting removal of non-consensual image services. 

This investigation drops days after the European Commission opened an investigation into X over its Grok AI tool generating sexualised images. 

The human cost

This matters because your teenager's photo from Instagram, your colleague's LinkedIn headshot, and your own Facebook profile picture can be fed into apps that use AI to generate fake nude images.

According to a CNBC investigation published September 2025, in Minnesota last September, over 80 women discovered their public social media photos had been used to create pornographic deepfakes. Because the victims were adults and the perpetrator didn't necessarily distribute the images, no crime was committed under current US law. The women were violated. The law took no punitive action and had no answers.

We'd like your views:

  • Platform accountability: If investigators found these apps by searching "nudify," why couldn't Apple and Google's approval processes catch them before 705 million downloads, and should platforms face financial liability for profiting from policy-violating apps?
  • Legal vacuum: When 80 women in Minnesota were victimised but no crime occurred because images weren't distributed, should creating non-consensual intimate images be illegal regardless of whether they're shared?
  • Age ratings failure: Apps rated suitable for 9-year-olds (Apple) and "all ages" (Google) successfully generated nude images with zero restrictions in testing, what does this say about the effectiveness of current age-rating systems?
  • Data sovereignty risks: With China-based apps storing intimate images where governments can compel data access, should platforms be legally required to disclose data jurisdiction risks before users upload sensitive content?
  • Governance patterns: From Grok to app stores to the Minnesota case, we're seeing the same violations across platforms, what does this reveal about whose interests current AI governance frameworks actually protect?

4 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Star Quote
Copy

Colette MasonVerified
AI Ethics Consultant at Clever Clogs AI
This isn't theoretical harm. It's happening at industrial scale, monetised through the world's most trusted app stores.

TTP's testing also revealed multiple China-based apps can be forced to share user data with the Chinese government, meaning intimate images generated through these apps could be accessible to a foreign government.

TTP's analysis revealed these apps had 705 million downloads. The apps worked instantly with no warnings and no restrictions, despite terms of service prohibiting such use.

The pattern is clear: platforms respond to pressure, not policy violations.
Copy

Editor
Samuel Mather-HolgateVerified
Managing Director & IFA at Mather and Murray Financial
Big tech firms are taking no accountability for their actions when it comes to apps that cause harm. Their moral responsibilities are obvious to everyone apart from the corporate entities themselves. The only way to fix this is global regulation, but getting world leaders to see eye to eye on anything is seemingly impossible at present so it wouldn’t be surprising if there’s an accountability gap for the next decade.
Copy

Rohit Parmar-MistryVerified
Founder at Pattrn Data
The 30% commission makes them accomplices, not bystanders.

Let’s cut the "oops, we missed it" act. Apple and Google didn't accidentally host apps explicitly called "nudify", they monetised them.

In our AI Audits, we frequently see firms claim "oversight" failed, but when we look under the hood, it's usually a choice, not a bug. If a basic keyword search by a journalist can find 102 apps, the most sophisticated tech companies on earth didn't "miss" them. They chose to ignore them until the bad PR outweighed the revenue.

Taking a 30% cut of proceeds from non-consensual image generation isn't negligence; it's a partnership. We advise firms on ethical AI governance, and rule one is: if you profit from the harm, you own the liability.

Until these platforms face financial penalties that dwarf the commission they made, this cycle of "apologise, delete, repeat" will never end.
Copy

Mashood Ahmad0
Founder at Gigabit IQ
The Tech Transparency Project findings aren’t shocking, they’re revealing how big tech has profited via 30% commissions. Over 100 “nudify” apps reached 700m+ downloads and £95m in revenue despite being explicitly banned by Apple & Google’s own policies. This isn't a detection failure, It’s a priorities failure.

The human cost is real. Ordinary photos from Instagram, LinkedIn or Facebook, can be turned into non-consensual sexual imagery in seconds.

Government action matters, but it’s slow and in most cases unenforceable. We know that online safety act only targets 20% of harmful content via age-verification, and that social media bans whilst appealing can also be bypassed with VPN's.

That's why, as CEO of Gigabit IQ, the UK's Safest Broadband ISP, we've already created parental controls to block any app, any social media, and even block VPNs. To truly enforce online safety, Ofcom should push all ISPs to provide similar digital seatbelts for parents to protect their families online.