"Sugarbabies" / "Arrangements" Amateurs or Not?

[OliverNP]

And as a picture of a picture on a screen, that breaks any metadata trail.

Except for the fact that facial recognition technologies (largely which are not yet available to the consumer but will be one day) are getting good enough that they can identify a person from a sidewalk mounted camera picking up the subject from only one angle dozens of yards away.

That's not where the real risk is. Just because the app disallows saving of the content at the user level, it doesn't mean the app vendor is truly deleting the content vs selling it for purposes of training algorithms, etc. Most of that will be stored in the cloud for some period of time because whoever is providing these apps knows it might come in handy for long-term monetization.

The power (and profit) in these apps is in the data collection they provide to the publisher. Nobody invests time and money in that game for free.

[SrUnderbridge]

If you want a really good secure way to communicate and send pics or vids, "wickr me". It's encrypted end to end, and the app disables screencapping and recording while it's running. I tried to use AZ screen record to save a pic of this girl I was chatting with and all it recorded was a black rectangle. And you can set your messages to disappear either immediately after reading or up to 24 hours after. And once they're gone they are gone. Pretty much the only way to save a pic is to use another device to physically take a pic of the screen. And as a picture of a picture on a screen, that breaks any metadata trail.

The hard part, of course, is getting your contact to also install and use the app.

[OliverNP]

The risks are real enough to warrant sensible precautions but unless there is a searchable link between my video chats and my actual ID

Technologies such as facial recognition and related AI have reached a point where establishing a link between someone's true identity and a simple image of them is much easier than it was only a few years ago.

Think about all of the violent criminals that were able to remain anonymous for three or four decades, then all of a sudden started dropping like flies into jail when DNA genetics technology hit a certain inflection point (just in the last few years) and they were identifiable through genetic association to someone else.

The state of identification through facial / voice / video recognition, digital fingerprinting, and similar techniques that result in data cross-correlation is orders of magnitude more advanced than it was in 2018. It is now on a par with DNA matching.

Not saying we can eliminate the need to take risks, but at least we can avoid the hot spot danger zones (and video chats are way up the list).

[BamBam]

I didn't say anything about hitting the news, I spoke to the potentially unwanted future availability of content. There is a reason they say don't upload anything to the Internet that you don't want to remain there forever (and when you participate in chat services you're doing just that).

If that's an acceptable risk to anyone, they have nothing to fear from video chats. Sounds like a high price to pay for chasing young pussy and being too lazy to be careful about it.

Many years ago, when I first became a monger, there were people capturing photos, names and numbers and then posting them on various websites. They got my disguised photo, a burner number and my hobby name and email. The first site was called ExposingJohns.com. They later migrated to PredatorAlert.com. I was contacted multiple times at my email by a third party offering their services to force the site (s) to remove my info. They offered to guarantee results for only $2500. The AG's of any state the gang are in will chase them but these guys just relocate and pop up in a different place using a different name. My personal life was not at risk but if any POT would search my phone number, etc one of those sites would pop up. I had to start over. Creating a new hobby persona was a lot easier back then. I am more cautious now. I still get the occasional blackmail threat but they are never a true danger. The risks are real enough to warrant sensible precautions but unless there is a searchable link between my video chats and my actual ID, I am not going to be overly worried. I do not doubt that what ONP says is true but when factored for probability it becomes less of a concern. For me.

BAM.

[OliverNP]

They might hit the news if someone is famous enough (not me) but as long as it involves consensual acts with adults they fizzle out rather quickly. The general public doesn't seem to care.

I didn't say anything about hitting the news, I spoke to the potentially unwanted future availability of content. There is a reason they say don't upload anything to the Internet that you don't want to remain there forever (and when you participate in chat services you're doing just that).

Remember the Hunter Moore case? None of those girls were famous, none of them opted in to having their photos uploaded, and many of them never even sent the pics to anyone... they thought their phone was safe.

You could get a ransomware attack email one day saying "Hello, I have all of the video chats you did with your sugarbabies and here are a couple of short clips to prove I do in fact have them. I plan to host these and ensure that the links are returned in the immediate search engine results when someone Googles your name. It will not be good for your career. I am willing to settle for $60 k payable in bitcoin to not post your videos. Such an affluent sugardaddy such as yourself should be able to afford this. Please bitcoin to XXXXXXX if you don't want the entire Internet to see these videos".

Point is, cybersecurity risks are real and getting worse by the day. Scammers are finding new ways to monetize their treasures. And these ransomware attacks usually end up one of two ways -- either the ransom is paid or the threat is followed through with (and sometimes even when the ransom is paid, follow-up blackmail attempts demand ongoing payment).

A good number of marriages even survive.

They might survive but they create a one-sided debt situation where the husband has to spend the rest of his married days kissing ass and living in the shadows of what he got caught doing.

If that's an acceptable risk to anyone, they have nothing to fear from video chats. Sounds like a high price to pay for chasing young pussy and being too lazy to be careful about it.

[TheHobbyLobby]

Are you still able to get OneVanilla prepaid card? Thought they phased it out and replaced with SecureSpend.

Was able to use SecureSpend on SA earlier but it seems I couldn't a few weeks back. So was looking for alternatives. Someone suggested Reloadable OneVanilla card is going through.

Not sure what the deal is at SA, LOL.

Last month I used a SecureSpend prepaid card. However, it wouldn't go through when I tried to use it I had to call customer service and have them process it.

[RegularJoe1985]

I have just paid up another month on SA using a OneVanilla prepaid debit card. I phoned in and entered a zip code for the card, that the phone tree says is necessary to use the card for pay-at-the-pump and online purchases. I waited about half an hour after that, and the charge went right through on SA.

I sometimes have a hard time locating that specific card. Last week I bought a SecureSpend card, it has no means to associate the card with a zip code, and I was unable to use it to pay for a seeking membership.

Are you still able to get OneVanilla prepaid card? Thought they phased it out and replaced with SecureSpend.

Was able to use SecureSpend on SA earlier but it seems I couldn't a few weeks back. So was looking for alternatives. Someone suggested Reloadable OneVanilla card is going through.

Not sure what the deal is at SA, LOL.

[Zerry]

And that's the key differentiator in deciding your level of risk.

If you don't care that every word you say on the video could arise anywhere on the Internet some day when someone Googles your name (even if there are multiple videos with different girls across many months or years that need to be explained), then I don't think you have anything else to worry about.

Anyone else, who does not have 25+ years experience with cybersecurity matters and a deep understanding of content delivery networks and cloud infrastructure, please be aware that your content could potentially be hacked and made public at any time and the possibility of that content ending up where you did not intend it at some point in the future is much greater than you realize.

If its a matter of her on cam only, and the only things being said are in typed chat, that's a bit less attached to ones persona, easier to explain away that someone has forged the content, and less likely to be held against you at some point in time.

For me, a level of risk I'm willing to take is that I'm willing to send girls non-sexual photos of myself (at least initially. Once I know her well, I sometimes send her pics or videos we made while fucking but my face is never shown). I will not discuss anything other than standard dating talk on the website. I quickly take those detailed arrangement conversations offline to another means of communication, and I switch means regularly so its not all in one place.

They might hit the news if someone is famous enough (not me) but as long as it involves consensual acts with adults they fizzle out rather quickly. The general public doesn't seem to care.

A good number of marriages even survive.

[Psnuse77]

I am FB friends she quoted me 150 meet and greet and 500 fc.

150 just to meet?

[OliverNP]

At the end of the day if I'm ever "caught" on seeking I feel comfortable saying, "Yeah I tried it out, but it turned out to be sex workers or scams and not what I thought. ".

And that's the key differentiator in deciding your level of risk.

If you don't care that every word you say on the video could arise anywhere on the Internet some day when someone Googles your name (even if there are multiple videos with different girls across many months or years that need to be explained), then I don't think you have anything else to worry about.

Anyone else, who does not have 25+ years experience with cybersecurity matters and a deep understanding of content delivery networks and cloud infrastructure, please be aware that your content could potentially be hacked and made public at any time and the possibility of that content ending up where you did not intend it at some point in the future is much greater than you realize.

If its a matter of her on cam only, and the only things being said are in typed chat, that's a bit less attached to ones persona, easier to explain away that someone has forged the content, and less likely to be held against you at some point in time.

For me, a level of risk I'm willing to take is that I'm willing to send girls non-sexual photos of myself (at least initially. Once I know her well, I sometimes send her pics or videos we made while fucking but my face is never shown). I will not discuss anything other than standard dating talk on the website. I quickly take those detailed arrangement conversations offline to another means of communication, and I switch means regularly so its not all in one place.

[Zerry]

I don't video chat with SBs for so many reasons that I won't even go into in this particular post other than to say that anyone who needs to keep their sugaring activity separate at all, whether from SO or career, is making a mistake to do so if their cam is on.

Question for those who do, especially using the ones built into sugar dating sites. Do you turn on your cam as well? And if so, do you also post photos of yourself to your profile? For those who answer yes to the first question and no to the second, I'm trying to think of the best way to explain what a mistake it is without going into the depths of technical expertise around cloud infrastructure security and so on, but I'm genuinely curious.

For those that do not turn on your cam and only require the girl to turn hers on, does this not turn the girl off or make her more likely to flake prior to the M&G? I've always felt that saying "let me see you but you cannot see me" is broadcasting the wrong kind of message before the M&G and would undermine the level of trust that I build as part of the way I play the game. I get shit tons of free or cheap high quality pussy through sugar sites, and a lot of my methods require certain approaches. I personally cannot see how that dynamic would work well with my methods, but I'm always curious to hear what works for others.

I have not had much problems with scammers or cat fishers, but I see the value of the use of video for verifying the girl... if it can be done without portraying me as sketchy. Professional cam girls would be okay with that I'm sure, but I don't know about many of the girls I meet.

My OPSEC starts with choosing who to even talk to in the first place. To over simplify I don't pursue anything with anyone who doesn't have their own image to uphold. Or in other words I stay protected by "mutually assured destruction. " Beyond that I doubt the kind of low level scammer would actually have to ability to carry out the threat. If I every somehow landed in a blackmail situation, I'd just block the person without responding and move on. But again, with women going to college or with actual jobs and families and friends, they don't want to be outed either, so I just don't have to worry about it.

That said I usually just go directly to a meet and greet, but sometimes due to scheduling I'll use video calls and when I do I use snapchat to do my video calls, and that's because I don't trust seeking, or someone hacking seeking, not to be recording.

What if a woman is lying about being in school, or having a job? So far, it has been very easy to spot the red flags. So again I'm not worried about it. In fact most scammers will refuse to video call, because they are using stolen photos, or are otherwise not able to use video without blowing their cover.

At the end of the day if I'm ever "caught" on seeking I feel comfortable saying, "Yeah I tried it out, but it turned out to be sex workers or scams and not what I thought. ".

I don't care if this is sex work or not, but there are several women on seeking who do not consider it sex work, or illegal. So short of them wanting to blackmail a marriage they don't even know there is something to blackmail. And that's not going to come from a video call, that's going to come way down the line after they develop an actual relationship with you and get jealous or something.

[OliverNP]

I don't video chat with SBs for so many reasons that I won't even go into in this particular post other than to say that anyone who needs to keep their sugaring activity separate at all, whether from SO or career, is making a mistake to do so if their cam is on.

Question for those who do, especially using the ones built into sugar dating sites. Do you turn on your cam as well? And if so, do you also post photos of yourself to your profile? For those who answer yes to the first question and no to the second, I'm trying to think of the best way to explain what a mistake it is without going into the depths of technical expertise around cloud infrastructure security and so on, but I'm genuinely curious.

For those that do not turn on your cam and only require the girl to turn hers on, does this not turn the girl off or make her more likely to flake prior to the M&G? I've always felt that saying "let me see you but you cannot see me" is broadcasting the wrong kind of message before the M&G and would undermine the level of trust that I build as part of the way I play the game. I get shit tons of free or cheap high quality pussy through sugar sites, and a lot of my methods require certain approaches. I personally cannot see how that dynamic would work well with my methods, but I'm always curious to hear what works for others.

I have not had much problems with scammers or cat fishers, but I see the value of the use of video for verifying the girl... if it can be done without portraying me as sketchy. Professional cam girls would be okay with that I'm sure, but I don't know about many of the girls I meet.

[PPJones]

Isn't supported on Chrome.

I don't use safari on my phone because my wife thinks that's the only browser in existence and I don't want her snooping the history and me be careless.

Google in Private mode works great for everything but seeking video.

If I could put my. 02 in. I don't know you and I don't know your wife, but for your own safety sake, I wouldn't go assuming that your wife is only EVER going to know safari. I would CERTAINLY NOT be surfing ANY sites on ANY phone that was registered to me. I don't know you're level of mongering / daddying, but I'm assuming it's at least in the mid tier, if your on some of the sugaring sites. I would CERTAINLY recommend getting a burner phone and keeping it SAFE, SAFE, SAFE!. LOCK SCREEN and ALL. I would hate to see someone get jammed up for lack of what is it they call it? Op sec? Not sure if that's the term. But I think you know where I'm going.

I haven't tested, but yes, I think the mobile chrome version is what is the issue there as compared to PC or Mac.

If the vid absolutely HAS to happen, I would probably say Snapchat. Or, maybe discord?129300;I think that's fairly anonymous.

Good luck, stay safe, and happy hunting.

[BamBam]

Isn't supported on Chrome.

I don't use safari on my phone because my wife thinks that's the only browser in existence and I don't want her snooping the history and me be careless.

Google in Private mode works great for everything but seeking video.

I use Chrome on my Mac; it works for me. Maybe it's an issue on the mobile version.

BAM.

[Ernest Ll]

Are you on Seeking or WYP? If you met the POT on either of those just use the video chat option on the site. It's free, easy and totally anonymous. If you have any other questions, send me a PM.

Isn't supported on Chrome.

I don't use safari on my phone because my wife thinks that's the only browser in existence and I don't want her snooping the history and me be careless.

Google in Private mode works great for everything but seeking video.