# Reporting Non-Consensual Intimate Media: An Audit Study of Deepfakes

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.12138 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12138/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 18 Sep 2024.

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [XAttnMark: Learning Robust Audio Watermarking with Cross-Attention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04230/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Non-consensual intimate media (NCIM) inflicts significant harm. Currently, victim-survivors can use two mechanisms to report NCIM - as a non-consensual nudity violation or as copyright infringement. We conducted an audit study of takedown speed of NCIM reported to X (formerly Twitter) of both mechanisms. We uploaded 50 AI-generated nude images and reported half under X's "non-consensual nudity" reporting mechanism and half under its "copyright infringement" mechanism. The copyright condition resulted in successful image removal within 25 hours for all images (100% removal rate), while non-consensual nudity reports resulted in no image removal for over three weeks (0% removal rate). We stress the need for targeted legislation to regulate NCIM removal online. We also discuss ethical considerations for auditing NCIM on social platforms.