Author Topic: SS Security Issues with images (Read 16124 times)

stockyme · « **on:** September 18, 2017, 10:51 »

Yes you heard that correct, here we are working day and night for years to produce stock photos and shutterstock security is so week that you can download the image on this website by giving original image URL: shutterdowner dot kom

Is there any way to stop this nonsense?

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #1 on:** September 18, 2017, 11:06 »

This has come up many, many times. SS seems to not care about closing these loopholes.

stockyme · « **Reply #2 on:** September 18, 2017, 11:12 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 18, 2017, 11:06

This has come up many, many times. SS seems to not care about closing these loopholes.

But this is definitely costing us photographer a lot. People familiar with these sites don't bother buying the images because 100px image is more than enough for them to use on website or even in printing

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #3 on:** September 18, 2017, 11:27 »

the 1000px can be downloaded very quick and simple without watermarks, because SS adds the personalised watermark only when the preview image is viewed. So the unprotected previews sit on a server and people just download those previews. And there must be a super simple way to protect these previews from being downloaded

Brasilnut · « **Reply #4 on:** September 18, 2017, 11:36 »

I just tried it with one of my images and it works.

Although it's a small resolution file (1000px) it's still worrying.

It's like wack-a-mole...these sites just keep popping up after getting shut down.

stockyme · « **Reply #5 on:** September 18, 2017, 11:41 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 18, 2017, 11:36

I just tried it with one of my images and it works.

Although it's a small resolution file (1000px) it's still worrying.

It's like wack-a-mole...these sites just keep popping up after getting shut down.

& the 1000px version is good enough for more than 80% of users to use the image without buying. This is where artist get smashed in head..

jonbull · « **Reply #6 on:** September 18, 2017, 12:11 »

unbielevable. 1000 px is a lot to get free.

Artist · « **Reply #7 on:** September 18, 2017, 12:47 »

Quote from: jonbull on September 18, 2017, 12:11

unbielevable. 1000 px is a lot to get free.

This is even more lot when you have entire library available.
15,38,76,107 royalty-free stock images / 11,87,308 new stock images added this week

By the time SS will fix it, some a** h**e will download and use it illegally

cathyslife · « **Reply #8 on:** September 18, 2017, 15:23 »

Quote from: stockyme on September 18, 2017, 10:51

Yes you heard that correct, here we are working day and night for years to produce stock photos and shutterstock security is so week that you can download the image on this website by giving original image URL:

Is there any way to stop this nonsense?

The first thing that would help is if people would stop posting actual links to the offending site. You are just helping them!

stockyme · « **Reply #9 on:** September 18, 2017, 17:28 »

Quote from: cathyslife on September 18, 2017, 15:23

Quote from: stockyme on September 18, 2017, 10:51
Yes you heard that correct, here we are working day and night for years to produce stock photos and shutterstock security is so week that you can download the image on this website by giving original image URL:

Is there any way to stop this nonsense?

The first thing that would help is if people would stop posting actual links to the offending site. You are just helping them!

I posted this link only here to professional stock photographers but they do have a chrome extension as well and I am sure many are using it already.

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** September 18, 2017, 17:54 »

Quote from: stockyme on September 18, 2017, 17:28

Quote from: cathyslife on September 18, 2017, 15:23
...
The first thing that would help is if people would stop posting actual links to the offending site. You are just helping them!
I posted this link only here to professional stock photographers but they do have a chrome extension as well and I am sure many are using it already.

Anyone can read msg; and msg posts are catalogued by Google. Still, it didn't take me long to find similar info elsewhere, but you could change your title to SS security concern, or somesuch.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #11 on:** September 18, 2017, 22:26 »

Yeah, thanks for the link. Been looking for some decent free image sites.

Chichikov · « **Reply #12 on:** September 19, 2017, 05:59 »

DMCA Protected !!!!!

OM · « **Reply #13 on:** September 19, 2017, 06:02 »

I notified SS about this site around six weeks ago. They replied 2 weeks later to say thanks and that action was being taken....except that it's not. Same site, still there. All the hype about extra security measures with the author's name in the watermark seems designed to placate the great unwashed and unknowledgeable. SS has to change their system for (not)showing large previews.

No more uploads from me until they actually do tackle THEIR IT problem.

niktol · « **Reply #14 on:** September 19, 2017, 07:15 »

Anyone can make sense out of this?

The site is legal

Why shutterdowner is legal ? Because it uses Facebook Business Robot to pull images and use them in ads for Facebook ads we dont steal any pictures because its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free and shutterdowner.com create his robot to making it easy for all without facebook account, We are not responsible for any use other than Facebook Ads For [More Information Link].

angelawaye · « **Reply #15 on:** September 19, 2017, 08:57 »

This makes me sick.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #16 on:** September 19, 2017, 09:01 »

There will always be scumbags like the people behind this site. What is inexcusable is Shutterstock's lack of action.

I bet facebook is responsible for the back end and SS is too scared to kick up much of a fuss in case FB goes to competitor for a deal instead.

It makes me sick too.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #17 on:** September 19, 2017, 09:05 »

Okay I just went on the site for the first time, didn't want to give them traffic and increase their visibility.

The have Google ads still running on it!

Has no one reported the site to google ads for illegal content?
Makes me wonder if anyone has DMCA'd their host even?

There's no point trying to contact the owners of a site like this. Go after all their revenue streams and people they rely on to run their service.

Click the google ads icon and get reporting everyone please!!!

ETA you can also report them to google for encouraging clicking the ads in their terms, and for any other violations you can find.

cathyslife · « **Reply #18 on:** September 19, 2017, 09:41 »

Quote from: OM on September 19, 2017, 06:02

I notified SS about this site around six weeks ago. They replied 2 weeks later to say thanks and that action was being taken....except that it's not. Same site, still there. All the hype about extra security measures with the author's name in the watermark seems designed to placate the great unwashed and unknowledgeable. SS has to change their system for (not)showing large previews.

No more uploads from me until they actually do tackle THEIR IT problem.

Yes, you will show them! They could care less whether you upload or not. They care about making money, just like you. as long as your portfolio is there, you both have that chance. Not uploading is not the answer.

obj owl · « **Reply #19 on:** September 19, 2017, 14:26 »

Quote from: niktol on September 19, 2017, 07:15

Anyone can make sense out of this?

The site is legal

Why shutterdowner is legal ? Because it uses Facebook Business Robot to pull images and use them in ads for Facebook ads we dont steal any pictures because its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free and shutterdowner.com create his robot to making it easy for all without facebook account, We are not responsible for any use other than Facebook Ads For [More Information Link].

Sense no, they are using an illogical argument derived from the way Facebook sell their ads. If you take out a Facebook ad you can use an image within that ad which comes from Shutterstock at no extra cost, it is in the price of the ad, this is where the tiny SODs come from. Problem occurs in the way Facebook pushes this as a free stock image for your ad, but the wording is important, see https://www.facebook.com/business/a/carousel-stock-photo. It is specific in saying "Free stock images for your carousel ads" or whatever type of add it is, not as they say " its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free". Yes Facebook would have you believe it's free, but only for use in their ads, effectively a single use licence not an RF licence. By their own addmission shutterdowner are responsible for distributing stock images to non Facebook account holders who therefore cannot be using them in Facebook ads.

What to do about it? Take it up with Facebook or stop supplying Shutterstock and let them know why.

niktol · « **Reply #20 on:** September 19, 2017, 14:39 »

Quote from: obj owl on September 19, 2017, 14:26

Sense no, they are using an illogical argument derived from the way Facebook sell their ads. If you take out a Facebook ad you can use an image within that ad which comes from Shutterstock at no extra cost, it is in the price of the ad, this is where the tiny SODs come from. Problem occurs in the way Facebook pushes this as a free stock image for your ad, but the wording is important, see https://www.facebook.com/business/a/carousel-stock-photo. It is specific in saying "Free stock images for your carousel ads" or whatever type of add it is, not as they say " its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free". Yes Facebook would have you believe it's free, but only for use in their ads, effectively a single use licence not an RF licence. By their own addmission shutterdowner are responsible for distributing stock images to non Facebook account holders who therefore cannot be using them in Facebook ads.

What to do about it? Take it up with Facebook or stop supplying Shutterstock and let them know why.

Thanks. It sounds like they are in breach with Facebook terms. Anyone tried complaining to Facebook? If FB is the one leaking content, I can understand why SS would not touch it.

niktol · « **Reply #21 on:** September 19, 2017, 14:54 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 19, 2017, 09:01

There will always be scumbags like the people behind this site. What is inexcusable is Shutterstock's lack of action.

I bet facebook is responsible for the back end and SS is too scared to kick up much of a fuss in case FB goes to competitor for a deal instead.

It makes me sick too.

It is probably something from the former SU, judging by the fact that they use Yandex mail (a Russian company) for "demonstration materials". Not sure how easy it is to go after those jurisdictions.

OM · « **Reply #22 on:** September 19, 2017, 19:27 »

Quote from: cathyslife on September 19, 2017, 09:41

Quote from: OM on September 19, 2017, 06:02
I notified SS about this site around six weeks ago. They replied 2 weeks later to say thanks and that action was being taken....except that it's not. Same site, still there. All the hype about extra security measures with the author's name in the watermark seems designed to placate the great unwashed and unknowledgeable. SS has to change their system for (not)showing large previews.

No more uploads from me until they actually do tackle THEIR IT problem.

Yes, you will show them! They could care less whether you upload or not. They care about making money, just like you. as long as your portfolio is there, you both have that chance. Not uploading is not the answer.

True. It's a meaningless token!

mrgoal · « **Reply #23 on:** September 19, 2017, 19:56 »

i think the problem from SS its sell's our images to facebook thats why SS cant stop this

k_t_g · « **Reply #24 on:** September 19, 2017, 22:35 »

Stupid question. Is it just Shutterstock or is it also other MS sites too?

obj owl · « **Reply #25 on:** September 19, 2017, 23:21 »

Quote from: k_t_g on September 19, 2017, 22:35

Stupid question. Is it just Shutterstock or is it also other MS sites too?

Facebook name Shutterstock and no one else as the supplier of images for their ads in the link that I posted above.

Chichikov · « **Reply #26 on:** September 20, 2017, 00:46 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 19, 2017, 09:05

Okay I just went on the site for the first time, didn't want to give them traffic and increase their visibility.

The have Google ads still running on it!

Has no one reported the site to google ads for illegal content?
Makes me wonder if anyone has DMCA'd their host even?

There's no point trying to contact the owners of a site like this. Go after all their revenue streams and people they rely on to run their service.

Click the google ads icon and get reporting everyone please!!!

ETA you can also report them to google for encouraging clicking the ads in their terms, and for any other violations you can find.

What Google Add?
Sorry I don't see it.

mrgoal · « **Reply #27 on:** September 20, 2017, 09:39 »

there are not only that website there keepshutterstock and mmo-tool[dot]com/shutter $:-\$ $:-\$ $:-\$ $:-\$ $:-\$ $:-\$ $:-\$ $:-\$

ravens · « **Reply #28 on:** September 20, 2017, 10:08 »

Quote from: obj owl on September 19, 2017, 14:26

Quote from: niktol on September 19, 2017, 07:15
Anyone can make sense out of this?

The site is legal

Why shutterdowner is legal ? Because it uses Facebook Business Robot to pull images and use them in ads for Facebook ads we dont steal any pictures because its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free and shutterdowner.com create his robot to making it easy for all without facebook account, We are not responsible for any use other than Facebook Ads For [More Information Link].

Sense no, they are using an illogical argument derived from the way Facebook sell their ads. If you take out a Facebook ad you can use an image within that ad which comes from Shutterstock at no extra cost, it is in the price of the ad, this is where the tiny SODs come from. Problem occurs in the way Facebook pushes this as a free stock image for your ad, but the wording is important, see https://www.facebook.com/business/a/carousel-stock-photo. It is specific in saying "Free stock images for your carousel ads" or whatever type of add it is, not as they say " its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free". Yes Facebook would have you believe it's free, but only for use in their ads, effectively a single use licence not an RF licence. By their own addmission shutterdowner are responsible for distributing stock images to non Facebook account holders who therefore cannot be using them in Facebook ads.

What to do about it? Take it up with Facebook or stop supplying Shutterstock and let them know why.

Thank you. But how about the Gettydowner beta version of this thief site? And editorial images, which are not allowed for (Facebook) advertising?

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #29 on:** September 20, 2017, 12:55 »

Quote from: ravens on September 20, 2017, 10:08

Quote from: obj owl on September 19, 2017, 14:26
Quote from: niktol on September 19, 2017, 07:15
Anyone can make sense out of this?

The site is legal

Why shutterdowner is legal ? Because it uses Facebook Business Robot to pull images and use them in ads for Facebook ads we dont steal any pictures because its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free and shutterdowner.com create his robot to making it easy for all without facebook account, We are not responsible for any use other than Facebook Ads For [More Information Link].

Sense no, they are using an illogical argument derived from the way Facebook sell their ads. If you take out a Facebook ad you can use an image within that ad which comes from Shutterstock at no extra cost, it is in the price of the ad, this is where the tiny SODs come from. Problem occurs in the way Facebook pushes this as a free stock image for your ad, but the wording is important, see https://www.facebook.com/business/a/carousel-stock-photo. It is specific in saying "Free stock images for your carousel ads" or whatever type of add it is, not as they say " its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free". Yes Facebook would have you believe it's free, but only for use in their ads, effectively a single use licence not an RF licence. By their own addmission shutterdowner are responsible for distributing stock images to non Facebook account holders who therefore cannot be using them in Facebook ads.

What to do about it? Take it up with Facebook or stop supplying Shutterstock and let them know why.
Thank you. But how about the Gettydowner beta version of this thief site? And editorial images, which are not allowed for (Facebook) advertising?

Nice 1024 x 682 images to steal, anything on Getty. I tried an editorial and it said no longer available. Make this Getty Security Issues and more to come.

mrgoal · « **Reply #30 on:** September 20, 2017, 22:36 »

yeey its closed

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #31 on:** September 21, 2017, 01:28 »

Quote from: Chichikov on September 20, 2017, 00:46

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 19, 2017, 09:05
Okay I just went on the site for the first time, didn't want to give them traffic and increase their visibility.

The have Google ads still running on it!

Has no one reported the site to google ads for illegal content?
Makes me wonder if anyone has DMCA'd their host even?

There's no point trying to contact the owners of a site like this. Go after all their revenue streams and people they rely on to run their service.

Click the google ads icon and get reporting everyone please!!!

ETA you can also report them to google for encouraging clicking the ads in their terms, and for any other violations you can find.

What Google Add?
Sorry I don't see it.

The advertisements on the site are provided by google ads. It's is how they make their money for the site. If you click the little arrow in the corner of one of the ads you can report the site for violating Google ads policy.

ShadySue · « **Reply #32 on:** September 22, 2017, 09:45 »

Shutterdowner now seems to map to xdownder dot com

"Why xdownder is legal ? Because it uses Facebook Business Robot to pull images and use them in ads for Facebook ads we dont steal any pictures because its free in facebook and anyone can get the pictures for free and xdownder.com create his robot to making it easy for all without facebook account, We are not responsible for any use other than Facebook Ads"

Chichikov · « **Reply #33 on:** September 22, 2017, 13:09 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 21, 2017, 01:28

Quote from: Chichikov on September 20, 2017, 00:46
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 19, 2017, 09:05
Okay I just went on the site for the first time, didn't want to give them traffic and increase their visibility.

The have Google ads still running on it!

Has no one reported the site to google ads for illegal content?
Makes me wonder if anyone has DMCA'd their host even?

There's no point trying to contact the owners of a site like this. Go after all their revenue streams and people they rely on to run their service.

Click the google ads icon and get reporting everyone please!!!

ETA you can also report them to google for encouraging clicking the ads in their terms, and for any other violations you can find.

What Google Add?
Sorry I don't see it.
The advertisements on the site are provided by google ads. It's is how they make their money for the site. If you click the little arrow in the corner of one of the ads you can report the site for violating Google ads policy.

Thank you for the answer.
I don't see the ads: I use Add Block, Add Block + and Ghostery…
So I will disable them and report the crime to Google

ravens · « **Reply #34 on:** September 25, 2017, 14:00 »

Check out the discussion on Shutterstock Contributor forum about this issue. Also, if you make the youtube search mentioned on the discussion I guarantee you'll free sick. There are hundreds of thief links and instructions on how do d.load ss img. w/out watermk. Scary!!

Please be careful with direct links, Google grabs and distributes them.

I have stopped uploading to SS for the time being.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #35 on:** September 25, 2017, 21:42 »

Quote from: k_t_g on September 19, 2017, 22:35

Stupid question. Is it just Shutterstock or is it also other MS sites too?

Getty also, and why fish in the little pond when these thieves can go to the biggest and best? iStock and Shutterstock. Who wants to steal from places with nothing to offer like 123RF, DP or DT, when all the same images are everywhere, including SS and IS, plus IS exclusives. Do you think Bigstock has anything better or different from SS or IS? They steal our work from the biggest and best.

ravens · « **Reply #36 on:** September 27, 2017, 01:13 »

This stealing site is alive and well at xdownder dot com

I reported this to SS but I'm done, I will not upload to SS. People not uploading may be the only thing SS will understand. Stop uploading, upload to other sites only, and let SS know why.

WE contributors are what makes the stock sites "good". SS is not a "good site" without our content, so lets show them!

k_t_g · « **Reply #37 on:** September 27, 2017, 22:35 »

Quote from: ravens on September 27, 2017, 01:13

This stealing site is alive and well at xdownder dot com

I reported this to SS but I'm done, I will not upload to SS. People not uploading may be the only thing SS will understand. Stop uploading, upload to other sites only, and let SS know why.

WE contributors are what makes the stock sites "good". SS is not a "good site" without our content, so lets show them!

I'm with you. Taking a break from them until they can truly clean up this trouble and not drag their feet.
I have nothing to loose. $:-\$

unnonimus · « **Reply #38 on:** September 28, 2017, 07:10 »

it is easy to fix these type of problems. use a command in the http server config to deny any access from the given URL. might be more difficult to do with a CDN from a third party because they won't offer it as a feature, but easy to do in house.

ravens · « **Reply #39 on:** October 03, 2017, 08:27 »

There was a thread on SS contributor forum "Stealing SS images big time", but can't find it any more. What's happened, have they removed it?

obj owl · « **Reply #40 on:** October 03, 2017, 11:34 »

Quote from: ravens on October 03, 2017, 08:27

There was a thread on SS contributor forum "Stealing SS images big time", but can't find it any more. What's happened, have they removed it?

Eradicated from all threads that even mentioned it.

"Sorry, we can't show this content because you do not have permission to see it."

max headroom · « **Reply #41 on:** October 03, 2017, 17:09 »

cathyslife · « **Reply #42 on:** October 04, 2017, 01:44 »

Excellent! Keep adding more links. Let's keep helping the freebie sites!

EDIT: my response was to max headroom...he posted yet another link to the thieves site. But he has now removed it, thank goodness.

max headroom · « **Reply #43 on:** October 04, 2017, 06:20 »

Quote from: cathyslife on October 04, 2017, 01:44

Excellent! Keep adding more links. Let's keep helping the freebie sites!

Since SS took action to stop xxxdowner, I have removed the link.

obj owl · « **Reply #44 on:** October 04, 2017, 08:52 »

Quote from: max headroom on October 04, 2017, 06:20

Quote from: cathyslife on October 04, 2017, 01:44
Excellent! Keep adding more links. Let's keep helping the freebie sites!
Since SS took action to stop xxxdowner, I have removed the link.

They haven't stopped xdownder they just shut down their domain name site. As far as I know their facebook page is still giving out instructions on how to download images for free, I can't check because someone removed the link. You can also download from their blog or use the extention in chrome.

derek · « **Reply #45 on:** October 04, 2017, 15:13 »

Just for the record! they steel images all the time from SS! and there is fat all SS can do anything about it!

max headroom · « **Reply #46 on:** October 08, 2017, 06:34 »

I have found many many shutterstock hacking methods explanation in very popular site. I have reported to SS and the site. The site did not take my complaint serious but Shutterstock made some of the links removed. Now I am trying for the rest of the links.
I believe the major drop of recent sales are also result of this popular and public thieving methods.

ravens · « **Reply #47 on:** October 10, 2017, 11:11 »

Checked today and the sites x*downder and sh*tterdowner are both functioning. Both.

SS is well aware of them (also, notified them again about these sites) and let people steal our work.

I have not uploaded to SS for a couple of weeks. If more people stopped uploading, SS would actually had to DO SOMETHING.

Cathyslife here is right, functional links to these crap sites help thieves. Google will find these discussions anyway, so please do not post direct links.

It is strange though that SS have removed discussions about stealing our work. By that, they're saying that it is worse for us, copyright holders, to complain about stealing, than for these scumbags to actually steal!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: SS Security Issues with images (Read 16124 times)

Justanotherphotographer

Semmick Photo

Chichikov

niktol

Justanotherphotographer

Justanotherphotographer

niktol

niktol

Chichikov

Justanotherphotographer

Chichikov

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors