AOL's Pedophile Chatroom Business

Watch your kids!

Published on June 6, 2004 By greywar In Current Events

Dharmagirl recently wrote an article dealing with her experience investigating online pedophiles in the Yahoo! chat rooms. I made a comment about the AOL version of this but I thought it warranted an article all it's own.

AOL has been attempting to turn around its flagging fortunes by promoting itself as "the kid-safe internet provider". To this end it has many parent customizable features like the ability to turn of Instant Messaging, not allowing email with files or pictures, disallowing chat room access, draconian web page filters, and the like... of course when you take a look at the above list you realize very quickly that if a parent actually used all of these simultaneously on their child’s account then the child would not actually have Internet access. Parents realize this too (right after their child logs on and complains that they are blocked from doing *everything), so they usually leave some of these features enabled. Most of the time parents at least leave the email function enabled but perhaps without the ability to receive files or pictures in them. After a few months of this the child quickly tires of email's novelty and wants to be able to chat with their friends in near real-time via the now ubiquitous IM service or in chat rooms.

Since these activities are obviously rather open-ended AOL has started a service to appeal to parents fears and ignorance. Enter AOL's Kid's Only areas. This area has thins like links to coca-cola animations, the newest Harry Potter news, and other "web-like" content that is supposed to appeal to kids. The *real* appeal for kids here are actually the Kids Only chat rooms. For the kids without the ability to send or receive IM's these rooms provide a method of near real time comms with their friends and with other kids they have not met yet. For kids with IM access they provide the same function with the added ability to converse privately one-on-one with others.

The bright amongst you will already have alarm bells ringing in your heads. This "service" actually just herds all the kids of a given age group (according to AOL 9-14 year olds) into one easily defined cyber-space. Additionally parents are lulled into a false sense of security here. After all it is "Kids Only" right? That means they don't have to read over their kids shoulder! Who wants to read 30 minutes of adolescent chat about Hillary Duff anyway? So off they go leaving their kids to chat in the safety of Kids Only. This also adds to the kid’s own natural level of gullibility. They are led to believe by the service that only kids can chat there so they will breathlessly assume that whatever line of bullshit the pedo feeds them about being their age is the gospel truth. The danger in this area is palpable.

The even darker side of this marketing ploy is it's unsubtle appeal to the pedophile demographic. AOL aggressively pushes ads regarding "KOL" to *every* account holder regardless of age or access (even to AOL instant messenger users who cannot get to KOL unless they have a paid account). AOL wants the pedophile "community to know about this area so that they will purchase AOL accounts. KOL is effectively a corral of sheep waiting for pedos to pick them off. There is no mechanism in place, (nor is one likely to ever be emplaced) to verify that the account signing in to a KOL chat room is actually a kid. Thus the wolves prowl unopposed.

The bottom line is that if a child is using AOL's Kids Only service then they are likely being chatted up by a pedophile every minute of every hour they are logged on. As you can see from some of the anti-pedo sites on the web some of these folks are very patient and will wait building a relationship online with a child for months or even years before victimizing them. Be afraid and under *no* circumstances should any parent *ever* allow their child access to a chat room or IM services without reading over their shoulder or having a keyboard logger installed to read the logs afterwards. You can *not* afford the risk.

Comments (Page 2)

kingbee

on Jun 07, 2004

icuii is a vidchat that caters to an adult crowd. at any given time, youll find a fair number of people identifying themselves as police officers or firefighters. its not unusual to find one or more adults who claim in their description to be camming with their children and looking for similar users (also women with dogs, etc.) i dont know whether they are really as decribed but im presuming its very possible based on things ive actually witnessed. the company in question (to avoid any legal problems ill just suggest you type in icuii in google and youll easily find it--theyre quite litigious) is even more clearly profiting from the situation since they charge for the client software and executives are regularly prowling the directory.

i truly hope there are no kids there, but i also wonder why there are so many cops.

greywar

on Jun 07, 2004

Another good example is Paltalk... I was introduced to this service as a means of OSINT (open source intelligence) but when I observed our attempts to use it as such there were routine incidents of obviously undrage boys and girls nude online. Did the service do anything to stop this? no way.. they were using it as a tacit *sales* technique. (hell i probably just boosted their business posting that fact)

kingbee

on Jun 07, 2004

yeah thats another one altho im not sure its still in existence. i only know of a couple that are actively moderated to prevent kids from appearing on cam. i would have considered paltalk to be a more likely means of osunint..

greywar

on Jun 07, 2004

King - it does have or *had* a large quantity of Arab patronage both here at home and in the Middle East. Terror groups have latched onto things like this service as a virtually unbreakable private comms system. They simply get lost in the crowd.

greywar

on Jun 07, 2004

Should they be allowed online (without direct over-the-shoulder supervision) if they are too little to do so, Grey?

Umm no they shouldn't, that is the point I was making in the article. The Net as a people medium is *adult* when they are 16 or 17 and are regularly out of yoru control in the real world then let them chat. Before then unless you sit right there the whole time so they *know* up front that you are monitoring their chat they should not be allowed to use it as a chatting medium at all IMHO.

greywar

on Jun 07, 2004

Helix - I appreciate the support:)

greywar

on Jun 07, 2004

Actually, some pedophiles will pose as chat room moderators in order to groom the kids they're preying on.

Additionally the ability to IM allows these folks to use a technique known a "decoying" the room. They will log into the chat room with one screenname and say nothing, simply watching the chat and noting which screennames are kids while using another screenname to IM or email the kids. This removes the "moderator"'s already pathetic control measures. Google for info on this topic and you will find a disturbing amount of info. There are even sites out there dedicated to teaching effective stalking techniques! (yes NAMBLA is one of them)

Poetmom99

on Jun 07, 2004

As for keeping track of what your child does on the internet, sure..go for it, warden. Children feel betrayed if they found out you read their diary, Or their email. When do you start to trust them to make the best decisions? Should they be allowed online (without direct over-the-shoulder supervision) if they are too little to do so, Grey?

As I've said on several other occasions over the weekend, I have two daughters who are 14 and 11....their chat capabilities are disabled completely on AOL, and their instant messages and email are set up so that they can only communicate with family and friends...and those preferences can't be changed without my knowledge, because I am the only one with their passwords, and after I sign them on, I sit right here with them, or at least in the same room where I can see the computer screen at all times. I did the same with my son, and began to ease the controls off when he turned 16, giving him total access somewhere after his 17th birthday. Now he's over 18, and I simply trust that all the conversations we've had, and the things he's seen happen to others, have been enough to keep him safe.

Atmos42

on Jun 07, 2004

you would have me beleive that *I* am able to see the problems in this system and AOL can *not*

Can't see the forest for the trees perhaps? I really don't know. I do believe that part of their business model is to attract more family business, but I can't believe that they are naive. Your points in the article are very good, don't get me wrong, I simply have a problem with your statement that they want the pedophile business.

or they are slack-jawed booger eaters

No comment. Maybe there is room for an investigative report onthis subject? Hmmm?

Shutup dumbass.

Trolls. Taste just like chicken.

messybuu

on Jun 07, 2004

A sleazy young man who posts here as "Saiyan Robot" tried to seduce my underage daughter. Thankfully, she was too put off by his body odor, obesity, and greasy, patchy facial hair to be lured into his pickup. Still, I lay in bed at night and worry what might happen if a less repulsive pedophile were to try to victimize my daughter.

I had a feeling you'd say something, qpt. That'll teach me not to link you to where I venture!

kingbee

on Jun 07, 2004

private comms system

paltalk doesnt log? its not p2p by any means so id think it would (whether they check logs is another question) im positive icuii does but they do it selectively.

kingbee

on Jun 07, 2004

poetmom...i saw your comments and in my opinion (for what its worth) youre a responsible poetmom whos handling things the way they should be handled.

I wonder how many children know workarounds to AOL's features. I'm sure they exist..hmm

in less than 20 minutes im sure i can find several sites full of all kinda tweaks and tools for any chat client going--most of them written by kids who are in jr high or high school. hell i even know where you can buy and sell 5,6 and 7 digit icq uid#s (theyre apparently a status symbol in some weird galaxy)

kingbee

on Jun 07, 2004

yup...and very insightful observation helix.

Poetmom99

on Jun 08, 2004

poetmom...i saw your comments and in my opinion (for what its worth) youre a responsible poetmom whos handling things the way they should be handled.

Thanks King....I'm doing the best I can. And really, what else can any of us do?

ShadowWar

on Jun 08, 2004

Maybe this will help.. This is from a US Department of Justice survey on Children as victims of Internet crime.

Crimes Against Children Research Center staff interviewed a nationally representative sample of 1,501 youth, aged 10 to 17, who used the Internet regularly.
“Regular use” was defined as using the Internet at least once a month for the past 6 months on a computer at home, at school, in a library, at someone else’s
home, or in some other place.

Statistical Findings
The survey results offered the following statistical highlights:

One in 5 youth received a sexual approach or solicitation over the Internet in the past year.
One in 33 youth received an aggressive sexual solicitation in the past year. This means a predator asked a young person to meet somewhere,
called a young person on the phone, and/or sent the young person correspondence, money, or gifts through the U.S. Postal Service.
One in 4 youth had an unwanted exposure in the past year to pictures of naked people or people having sex.
One in 17 youth was threatened or harassed in the past year.
Most young people who reported these incidents were not very disturbed about them, but a few found them distressing.
Only a fraction of all episodes was reported to authorities such as the police, an Internet service provider, or a hotline.
About 25 percent of the youth who encountered a sexual approach or solicitation told a parent. Almost 40 percent of those reporting an unwanted exposure to sexual material told a parent.
Only 17 percent of youth and 11 percent of parents could name a specific authority, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), CyberTipline, or an Internet service provider, to which they could report an Internet crime, although more indicated they were vaguely aware of such authorities.
In households with home Internet access, one-third of parents said they had filtering or blocking software on their computers.

Other Findings

The survey results confirm what is already known: although the Internet is a wonderfully fun and educational tool, it can also be very dangerous. According to the survey, one in five youth who
regularly use the Internet received sexual solicitations or approaches during a 1- year period. The survey also found that offenses and offenders are more diverse than previously thought. In addition
to pedophiles, other predators use the Internet. Nearly half (48 percent) of the offenders were other youth, and onefourth of the aggressive episodes were initiated by females. Further, 77 percent of
targeted youth were age 14 or older—not an age characteristically targeted by pedophiles. Although the youth stopped most solicitations by leaving the Web site, logging off, or blocking the sender,
the survey confirmed current thinking that some youth are particularly vulnerable to online advances. Most youth reported not being distressed by sexual exposures online. However, a significant 23 percent reported being very or extremely upset, 20 percent reported being very or extremely embarrassed, and 20 percent reported at least one symptom of stress. These findings point to the need for more research on the effects on youth
of unwanted exposure to sexual materials and the indicators of potentially exploitative adult-youth relationships. The large number of solicitations that went unreported by youth and families
was of particular interest. This underreporting is attributed to feelings of embarrassment or guilt, ignorance that the incident was a reportable act, ignorance of how to report it, and perhaps resignation
to a certain level of inappropriate behavior in the world. Possibly due to the nature and small sample size of the survey, there were no reported incidences of traveler cases.6 The
survey also revealed no incidences of completed Internet seduction or sexual exploitation, including trafficking of child pornography. Despite the findings of this survey, law enforcement agencies report
increasing incidents of Internet crimes against children.

You can find more infor at
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office for Victims of Crime
Feb 2001 OVC Bulletin.

I hope this helps you have now idea how bad this really is, until you try it out. I suggest going into a teen or sexually oriented chat room and pose as a teen and see what happens, if you survive mentally then you may have a greater appreciation for the dangers our children face. Also if you have specific questions as to how, where or who let me know, I know a little about this subject..

For the children of the world..

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!