San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu has put Apple and Google on notice, demanding they remove so-called "nudify" apps from their stores. The letters argue that both companies have long known these apps violate state law, specifically around nonconsensual deepfake pornography. This is not a surprise, and it is not a moment for performative hand-wringing from Silicon Valley. It is a direct challenge to the hands-off approach that has let harmful tools fester in plain sight.
For our readers, this is about the practical reality of what you can and cannot trust in an app store. If you are a professional managing sensitive data, or a creator whose likeness could be weaponized, the presence of these apps has always been a quiet threat. The fact that Apple and Google have reportedly been aware of this for some time, and only now face legal pressure, should make you ask a sharper question: if they missed this, what else are they missing? The answer matters because your workflow, your reputation, and your peace of mind depend on the gatekeepers actually gatekeeping.
This is where the story gets interesting. Chiu is not asking for new legislation or a novel standard. He is pointing to existing state law and saying, "You are already in violation." That is a powerful lever, because it shifts the burden from users policing their own safety to platforms taking responsibility for what they host. It also signals a growing impatience with the "we are just a neutral marketplace" defense. When a city attorney has to send letters about apps that exist solely to strip clothing from photos without consent, the neutrality argument collapses under its own weight.
What would we tell a reader who asks us about this? We would say: do not wait for the next headline. Start by auditing your own digital ecosystem. If you use spreadsheets to manage client data, vendor lists, or internal communications, ask yourself whether your tools are built on the same indifferent infrastructure that allowed these apps to thrive. The same logic applies to your software choices as to your app store habits: if a platform is slow to act on clear harms, it is not a partner, it is a liability. And when you evaluate new tools, look for ones that treat safety and transparency as core features, not afterthoughts.
The concrete point to watch is whether Apple and Google actually comply, and how quickly. Chiu has given them a clear path, but the timeline is vague and the enforcement mechanism is untested. If they resist, we will learn something important about their priorities. If they comply, we will learn that pressure works, but only when it is public and specific. For now, the real test is not whether these apps disappear, but whether the companies behind them finally start treating the law as a floor, not a ceiling. That is the standard worth holding them to, and the one you should apply to every tool you choose going forward.