Why don't more US escorts use encrypted messaging apps?

[ShortCutie7]

2 hours ago, KensingtonHomo said:

 risk a text from a provider popping up when my nephew has my phone. 

This is exactly the kind of situation I’m referring to!

 

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

WhatsApp isn't even remotely secure. Plus the app, once downloaded accesses ALL your data on your device and makes it ready for distribution.

The app is owned by Meta (Zuckerberg) who's been making his money by working with the Government to provide Metadata spying on the general population.

Exactly, and anything that sends a phone notification is inherently not secure.

[+ ThroatCummer]

18 hours ago, ShortCutie7 said:

I get that, but wouldn’t part of an escort’s business be to regularly check RM if not keeping it open?  Wouldn’t it be their equivalent of a work email?  There’s a big difference between a client’s perspective/needs and a provider’s.  As a potential client, I don’t expect an immediate response because I know that there could be a myriad of reasons the provider can’t answer right away (even via text).  

My understanding, and some other escorts can correct me, is that RM doesn't offer proactive notifications of incoming messages. It's a web app, not an installed app, that you have to manually check. Other platform show immediate notifications so when you're out and about, it may be harder to stop and think to open the RM mobile site and look for inbound messages. That's what I have heard at least. 

[+ ThroatCummer]

2 hours ago, ShortCutie7 said:

This is exactly the kind of situation I’m referring to!

 

Exactly, and anything that sends a phone notification is inherently not secure.

There's some  mis information here and in the other posts. 

At least on iOS, their sandboxing of apps and compartmentalization allows for limiting of the data (photos, texts, calls, etc.) that can be accessed by any other application.  Most people click "Allow All" and just say yes, yes, yes. But there are ways to use these apps much more securely so they don't have access to the rest of your phone, and it's proven that it works. 

As far as notifications not being inherently unsecure, I could debate that point as well. There's way to limit what is being displayed and sent/received, and even turning them off all together on a per app basis.  The architecture design of push notifications, at least on iOS, is extremely secure. 

[pubic_assistance]

55 minutes ago, ThroatCummer said:

there are ways to use these apps much more securely so they don't have access to the rest of your phone, and it's proven that it works. 

I would be interested to see that proof. Because, although I'm no professional on the issue, I've read enough to the contrary to question who is this source "proving" they don't get access when everyone is saying they can ? 🤔

The marketing and upfront impressions are selling you secure platforms ..but the tech nerds who really know this stuff all say the US Government has a back door access to all of them but one. (Which they're working on )

[ShortCutie7]

1 hour ago, ThroatCummer said:

There's some  mis information here and in the other posts. 

At least on iOS, their sandboxing of apps and compartmentalization allows for limiting of the data (photos, texts, calls, etc.) that can be accessed by any other application.  Most people click "Allow All" and just say yes, yes, yes. But there are ways to use these apps much more securely so they don't have access to the rest of your phone, and it's proven that it works. 

As far as notifications not being inherently unsecure, I could debate that point as well. There's way to limit what is being displayed and sent/received, and even turning them off all together on a per app basis.  The architecture design of push notifications, at least on iOS, is extremely secure. 

I get that, but turning off notifications for texts and WhatsApp would be detrimental to MY jobs.  

[+ JamesB]

I think we’re mixing and addressing two separate privacy concerns here.

First, there’s the issue of notifications popping up at the wrong time. This is a situational concern that depends on personal preferences. Each user must decide what works best for them, whether it’s blocking all notifications from a specific app, limiting notifications from certain contacts, or finding another workaround.

Second, there’s the concern about government actors accessing your messages. Signal is a fully encrypted messaging app, meaning that even with access to its servers via a back door or subpoena, the content of your messages cannot be retrieved or shared. If any tampering were to occur during communication, Signal’s safety numbers (cryptographic hash signatures) would change, and users would be notified immediately. These safety numbers ensure the integrity and authenticity of the cryptographic keys used. It’s virtually impossible to create a backdoor key without compromising some aspect of the cryptographic handshake, which would alert users.

However, if someone gains physical access to your device, even if it’s locked, all bets are off. Ultimately, it depends on how determined someone or an entity is to access your information.

In the context of hiring, using an app like Signal should provide all the privacy you need.

Of course, this is just my take on the subject and it’s worth exactly what you are paying for it. 😊

[+ KensingtonHomo]

6 hours ago, Kevin Slater said:

Which makes it the perfect app for anyone wanting to troll the escort by texting him all day long, asking for more pics and jack off material, setting things up, then never showing.

Not saying you do, but saying why some providers would never meet or even engage you off said app.

Kevin Slater

I don't have the time or the inclination to waste a provider's time. I suspect some providers use it because I get a green SMS response when I text them, but when I met them, we both had iPhones. 

A few months ago, a provider kind of screwed me over after I sent a deposit. He was using his personal line, which meant I could identify him by his home address and workplace. I considered letting him know how exposed he was but it felt like mutually assured destruction as I had used my primary phone. That's what made me move to Burner. My job is semi-public and - much like those who insist on cash - I don't want an electronic trail. 

[moonlight]

2 hours ago, JamesB said:

 

In the context of hiring, using an app like Signal should provide all the privacy you need.

 

Which makes me wonder why Signal isn't the default.

I think there's a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation when it comes to this topic. And probably, lots of guys for whom that level of privacy isn't a priority.

[nate_sf]

8 hours ago, ThroatCummer said:

My understanding, and some other escorts can correct me, is that RM doesn't offer proactive notifications of incoming messages. It's a web app, not an installed app, that you have to manually check. Other platform show immediate notifications so when you're out and about, it may be harder to stop and think to open the RM mobile site and look for inbound messages. That's what I have heard at least. 

That’s correct. In theory it’s supposed to provide push notifications but that only happens about once every four blue moons. 
 

There’s an app for just the messenger, but it does not have push notifications, or if it does it doesn’t work. I check it manually a few times a day. It’s a bit faster and more convenient than opening up the site on a browser. 

[pubic_assistance]

12 hours ago, moonlight said:

Which makes me wonder why Signal isn't the default.

I think there's a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation when it comes to this topic. And probably, lots of guys for whom that level of privacy isn't a priority.

Exactly.

Other apps are marketed as safe but the techies will tell you that's not true.

As of RIGHT NOW Signal is the only one.

But the Federal Government is process of suing for access. It's all wrapped into their (supposed) anti-terrorism policies.

Zuckerberg and his Meta company have provided a massive storage resource where any need to question someone's integrity affords a massive pile of personal information to be scrutinized. Not only can they review your communjcations...but apps like whats-app attach itself to ALL you data, and links every single thing you've ever done including talking in a room while your phone is next to you. Everything is recorded by your phone now.

[marylander1940]

On 1/5/2025 at 5:39 PM, moonlight said:

Apps like Signal, Whatsapp, Telegram. 

Many clients prioritize discretion and privacy (as do providers), and end-to-end encrypted messaging greatly helps facilitate that instead of regular texting. Why isn't this common in the US? Whatsapp at least is more common abroad.

Maybe the risk is already perceived as so low that most just don't care. If I were retired or close to it I wouldn't care, but I'm not, and these apps seem to offer a big upside with little downside.

If you text them on WhatsApp they're likely to understand that's how you want to communicate and reply on that app. Some escorts prefer using it only for international numbers. 

[nate_sf]

2 hours ago, marylander1940 said:

If you text them on WhatsApp they're likely to understand that's how you want to communicate and reply on that app. Some escorts prefer using it only for international numbers. 

That’s my experience. I have WhatsApp for those who want to use it, but within the US it’s pretty much only scams and flakes. I don’t think I’ve ever had a legit client contact me through WhatsApp in the US. Clients contact me either through regular SMS/MMS text or by phone. 
 

But when traveling overseas, WhatsApp is the primary mode and is used by legit clients. 
 

My guess is the primary privacy concerns clients have are to not reveal their true name to the escort, and not commingle their “hobby” with their regular stuff. So a virtual number or burner app is fine for that. I think there is less concern about communication being breached by others. But clients please chime in if I’m mistaken!

[Colton]

On 1/5/2025 at 6:24 PM, ShortCutie7 said:

This is why I’ll never understand providers who insist on moving communication from RM messenger to texting… why?  Isn’t RM messenger more private/discreet than someone’s personal phone number?  Like if a boss or coworker has to use my phone, they would see a text coming in; they would not see a message on a site that one has to log into.

I work under the prediction that at some point in the future, RM’s offices will be raided (like RB’s) and all of the RM messages will be leads for investigation.  

[marylander1940]

36 minutes ago, nate_sf said:

 

But when traveling overseas, WhatsApp is the primary mode and is used by legit clients. 
 

 

Yes, most guys have a personal number and a business one, possibly more, they also have a WhatsApp account for friends and family using their personal number and another one for business using their advertising number. 

Here the logos of WhatsApp and WhatsApp business. 

[marylander1940]

2 minutes ago, Colton said:

I work under the prediction that at some point in the future, RM’s offices will be raided (like RB’s) and all of the RM messages will be leads for investigation.  

not as long it remains in Europe!

[Colton]

1 minute ago, marylander1940 said:

not as long it remains in Europe!

If Europe has to pick between giving up Greenland or giving up RM data, which will they pick?

yes Europe has stronger data privacy laws, but I’m not convinced RM data is completely untouchable.

[Colton]

21 minutes ago, marylander1940 said:

Yes, most guys have a personal number and a business one, possibly more, they also have a WhatsApp account for friends and family using their personal number and another one for business using their advertising number. 

Here the logos of WhatsApp and WhatsApp business. 

Good to know - I didn’t know there was a way to have two WhatsApp numbers on one device.  

[Oakman]

Can anyone cite a single arrest and conviction in their city or state (in the US) for solicitation involving two adult men using an app like RM where trafficking, theft, violence, or coercion wasn’t a factor? Please don’t respond with hypotheticals or arguments. I understand what risks are involved. I am genuinely interested to see if there is any record of a law enforcement agency that pursues these kinds of infractions. Again, not picking a fight here, just looking for enlightenment. 

[marylander1940]

Just now, Colton said:

Good to know - I didn’t know there was a way to have two WhatsApp numbers on one device.  

Yes, give it a try and let us know if you have any issues. 

Try to download WhatsApp Business 

[+ ThroatCummer]

1 hour ago, Colton said:

I work under the prediction that at some point in the future, RM’s offices will be raided (like RB’s) and all of the RM messages will be leads for investigation.  

You highly overestimate the amount of resources that law enforcement have. They don't have the time, energy, money, or people to pursue all of this. 

Perfect example:  As part of my day job, I meet regularly with some of the letter agencies as it relates to fraud/scams in the finance/money transmission world. They don't even open a case for anything unless the loss is over $250,000 these days. Just no resources. 

You really think they're going after man to man "consensual" sex where there is no human trafficking or forced rape or other violent crime? 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

1 hour ago, Oakman said:

Can anyone cite a single arrest and conviction in their city or state (in the US) for solicitation involving two adult men using an app like RM where trafficking, theft, violence, or coercion wasn’t a factor? Please don’t respond with hypotheticals or arguments. I understand what risks are involved. I am genuinely interested to see if there is any record of a law enforcement agency that pursues these kinds of infractions. Again, not picking a fight here, just looking for enlightenment. 

Exactly! 

If an escort or client is involved with a sting by law enforcement, then the undercover officer who has been messaging the client or escort directly will have access to the messages using whatever method they chose, encrypted or not.

I have an escort friend whose text message trail saved him in a lawsuit.  The client tried to claim rape after a massage session, but the escort provided the text messages which showed the client specifically asked for sex before and after the session.

[+ DrownedBoy]

6 hours ago, Oakman said:

Can anyone cite a single arrest and conviction in their city or state (in the US) for solicitation involving two adult men using an app like RM where trafficking, theft, violence, or coercion wasn’t a factor? Please don’t respond with hypotheticals or arguments. I understand what risks are involved. I am genuinely interested to see if there is any record of a law enforcement agency that pursues these kinds of infractions. Again, not picking a fight here, just looking for enlightenment. 

Georgia, 2019. They stung gay men on Grindr. They claimed an offer of a joint constituted prostitution.

Edited January 8 by DrownedBoy
2020, not 2019

[Oakman]

11 minutes ago, DrownedBoy said:

Georgia, 2019. They stung gay men on Grindr. They claimed an offer of a joint constituted prostitution.

Thanks. Just read about that one. Yikes! I feel so badly for those men. But also six years ago? I don’t know much about Dawson County GA. I suppose men in rural/conservative regions have a greater need for precaution. The PD and DA in SF would never do that. 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

1 hour ago, DrownedBoy said:

Georgia, 2019. They stung gay men on Grindr. They claimed an offer of a joint constituted prostitution.

So... Using an encrypted app wouldn't have prevented this.  The undercover officer who who messaged via Grindr would have had access to the same conversation history even if the officer and the gentlemen had met on Grindr then subsequently communicated by encoded apps to each other.

If you're communicating directly with undercover law enforcement, no amount of "privacy" settings are going to help you.

Police arrest nine queer men in Grindr sex sting operation

WWW.THEPINKNEWS.COM

---

Georgia police have been accused of "cataclysmic failure" by activists after cops arrested...

Quote from article: 

"According to authorities, seargent Dereck Johnson – under the user name “Charlie [looking for] 420” – initiated the conversation and offered to host at Dawsonville Quality Inn and Suites."

It had nothing to do with authorities accessing a private conversation from the app company.  The cop was one of the men in the conversation, so he was already privy to the entire conversation.

Therefore, @Oakman's challenge still stands.

 

Edited January 8 by Vegas_Millennial

[moonlight]

8 hours ago, Oakman said:

Can anyone cite a single arrest and conviction in their city or state (in the US) for solicitation involving two adult men using an app like RM where trafficking, theft, violence, or coercion wasn’t a factor? Please don’t respond with hypotheticals or arguments. I understand what risks are involved. I am genuinely interested to see if there is any record of a law enforcement agency that pursues these kinds of infractions. Again, not picking a fight here, just looking for enlightenment. 

I can't. It really is the hypothetical that nags at me. Because a single issue would put my ability to earn my income at risk.

It's like, if there's a 0.1% chance of something happening, and if it does happen it could really ruin your life, does it make sense to take some extra steps to protect yourself? For me, in my situation, yes. An app that makes communication secure provides that extra assurance for me and probably for others too.

I just want to cover my tail risk, which in my experience is something that most people don't take seriously or even think about.