Meta ran more than 25,000 ads for AI nudifiers in 2025.
Despite promising to crack down on such ads in June of last year, the company has failed to stop the flow, according to the latest audit by Indicator.
I identified at least 4,431 nudifier ads that have appeared across Meta’s platforms since December 4. The ads promise to turn any photo into a pornographic video and point to 13 different websites and 6 apps. But in an interesting twist, some ads appear to send users to services that fail to deliver the promised nudes, suggesting that scammers have jumped on the nudifier trend. (Go here to read all of Indicator’s coverage of AI nudifier apps.)
One of the apps advertised, Swap Faces in Videos - FaceAi, had more than 100,000 downloads on the Google Play store. A recurrent ad among the hundreds it ran on Meta is a video where Sydney Sweeney’s face is swapped onto a woman that is about to perform oral sex. (Nearly identical ads previously targeted Emma Watson.) The app was rated “E” for everyone by Google.
One user review even claims that the app used their likeness in YouTube ads:
Google deleted Swap Faces and two other apps we identified from the Play store following our outreach. A spokesperson said that they violated Play’s sexual content policy. Apple did not respond to our request for comment on three related apps available on its own store.
The nudifier ads identified by Indicator typically promote smaller websites and apps that have tens of thousands of visits per month or a similar number of app downloads. The most popular services in this abusive category often rely on referrals from adult websites and content creators to drive user acquisition, rather than ads on social media. They also appear to have a reliable stream of repeat customers.
One of the nudifiers in our sample seems to be trying to leverage this popularity by impersonating pornworks[.]com, a large nudifier and AI porn generator (see below). The same website put a big orange P**nworks logo on some of its ads on Meta.
Spoof websites of big brands like major news outlets or e-commerce sites are common. The fact that impersonators are starting to crop up in the AI nudifier space suggests that some of the services are big enough to be recognizable by users. According to Similarweb, Pornworks got almost 10 million visits in December 2025.
The nudifiers in our sample are operated by an overlapping group of businesses with little online presence (or at most, AI-generated corporate websites with unclickable menus).
One group of identical sites use the “Soul Love” brand across domains like get-hotgirl[.]com, fun2love[.]com, soulaigf[.]com. Soul Love’s approach evokes that of Joy Timeline HK, the company behind the Crush AI nudifier network that Meta sued last summer. Commonalities include creating an ever-expanding set of cookie-cutter websites and dozens of advertiser accounts to evade the company’s moderation, suggesting bad actors advertising on Meta have developed a standard playbook to push their products.
I shared all the ads in my sample with Meta on Monday. A spokesperson told me that the company is reviewing them and will enforce its policies against any violative ads. (At publication time on Wednesday morning, approximately half of the advertisers were no longer active, though some of those had been deleted by Meta before we reached out).
Some of the nudifiers in our current sample appear to share infrastructure with seemingly unrelated AI undressers from previous audits. For example, several use identical profile pictures in their Meta advertiser accounts even though they have different names and promote different nudifiers. One stock photo of three women holding aloft their shopping bags has been used at least a dozen times across the four nudifier ad audits Indicator ran over the past twelve months.
Many of the Facebook pages used to run the new set of nudifier ads appear to be managed from Vietnam, use GAN-generated profile pictures, and have three-part names. Examples include Valentina Boddorff Principe, Daniel Smith Nicole, and Kucharski Scully Setting. (This too is consistent with ads found in previous audits.)
I searched the ad library for advertiser accounts that share at least two names with the pages in my sample. That returned dozens of additional sketchy pages. The name combinations are unusual enough that the accounts appear to be mass-generated by the same actors. I can’t at this stage tell whether the pages are created by a party that rented or sold them to nudifier apps or if the pages and apps are run by the same entity.
Either way, accounts that fit this pattern ran thousands more ads on Meta since January 1. Most of them were for scam-friendly verticals like the lottery, loans, and drop-shipping services. For the scammers that have fueled billions in Meta ad revenue, AI nudifiers are just another way to lure targets.
The nudifier scams appear to work by tricking users into forking out money for a deepfake nude that doesn’t get delivered.
The 42 reviews for Guru Video - AI Maker — a Play Store app promoted by ads promising faceswapping images of people you know into sex videos – are equally divided between “1” and “5.” This suspicious bimodal distribution could be driven by deceptive positive reviews and real negative ones. (Craig wrote about this in a previous investigation into fake reviews.)
One review calls the app “fraud and entrapment;” another says it “takes your money doesn't give you anything! its a SCAM !!! DO NOT USE!!!!!!”
Another said: “i was rejected by the AI for trying to make content inappropriate by its AI standards. -- Gothic art work, Greek art works, or any ‘sexual’ images don't work.”
The results on other services appear to vary. Our tests on one website returned a nude person that looked nothing like the original, while other websites were more true to the uploaded images. (We did not pay to use any of these services and used a synthetically-generated image of a woman. Researchers are working on better testing protocols leveraging donated data but our method is in line with current academic audits.)
Online, users expressed frustration that some services promise deepfake nudes for free but actually require paid subscriptions ranging from $9.99 per week to a one-off fee of $2500 for 373 videos.
The below flow, where users are invited to “Try Free - Guest Mode” but are ultimately sent to a payment screen when they try to upload an image to nudify, is a pretty typical dark pattern. But in this case, it’s hard to feel bad for the would-be consumers.
This pattern is a helpful reminder, however, that these operations are run like businesses. Indicator estimated in May that the nudifier ecosystem brings in millions of dollars in revenue.
The revenue sometimes flows through mainstream platforms like Amazon, PayPal, and Stripe, which are used to accept payments on several of the websites in the latest audit sample. (I reached out to all three companies for comment and will update this article if I hear back.)
Nudifiers cause significant harm to the people who are being “undressed.” They are also an entrenched element of the online grift ecosystem, circumventing platform moderation and extracting maximal revenue from users.
