HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
yahoo
open_nsfw
Python2016–2025
yahoo / open_nsfw · Archived

open_nsfw

Not Suitable for Work (NSFW) classification using deep neural network Caffe models.

14Distinct people
14Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
6KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Not Suitable for Work (NSFW) classification using deep neural network Caffe models.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year14 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2016-09-30 19:09:50 UTC to 2025-09-13 17:22:12 UTC.

0123452016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 3 submissions, 2 comments20162017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20202021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC532
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

14 sources
AFAIK Discord's NSFW filter is not a perceptual hash nor uses the NCMEC database (although that might indeed be in the pipeline elsewhere) but instead uses a ML classifier (I'm certain it doesn't use perceptual hashes as Discord doesn't have a catalogue of NSFW image hashes to compare against). I've guessed it's either open_nsfw[0] or Google's Cloud Vision since the rest of Discord's infrastructure uses Google Cloud VMs. There's a web demo available of this api[1], Discord probably pulls the safe search classifications for determining NSFW. 0: https://github.com/yahoo/open_nsfw 1: https://cloud.google.com/vision#section-2
In The Problem with Perceptual Hashes
It would be nice if someone could compare these commercially available APIs with Yahoo's open_nsfw model in terms of accuracy: https://github.com/yahoo/open_nsfw I'm currently building an API wrapper around it and running it on a Hetzner server with a GTX 1080 - prediction takes about 0.25 seconds and while I haven't optimised it for parallel execution, I think it should be able to handle at least +10 images/sec comfortably. I'm also testing video moderation by using ffmpeg to slice the video into screenshots and predicting the min/avg/high scores. Moderating 25 million explicit images using Google Cloud Vision would cost around $19,500/mo vs €99/mo on Hetzner.
In Comparison of image moderation APIs
By malicious, do you mean inappropriate, or containing a malicious metadata inside the image? The images are probably stripped and/or compressed, removing any malicious metadata. You can use machine learning to classify images of various categories to detect inappropriate images. For example, this is what Yahoo open sourced: https://github.com/yahoo/open_nsfw Additionally, user-generated content sites will almost always have a way for users to flag inappropriate content. If something's flagged disproportionately, it will be removed.
In Ask HN: How do Imgur.com and others check that images are not malicious?

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.