{
  "id": 10686698,
  "title": "Report finds that Microsoft Copilot's human reviewers can see users' uploaded photos and sexualized AI edits",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/29/report-finds-that-microsoft-copilots-human-reviewers-can-see-users",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-09-29T11:58:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "TechSpot",
    "slug": "techspot",
    "url": "https://www.techspot.com/news/114011-report-finds-microsoft-copilot-human-reviewers-can-see.html"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "A recent report reveals that Microsoft Copilot's human reviewers can view users' uploaded photographs and sexually explicit edits created by the AI. These documents indicate that some assignments contain disturbing or potentially illegal material, but the reviewers' role is not to flag the content. Instead, they are tasked with determining how well Copilot executed the user's request.\n\nTypically, a reviewer receives the user's prompt and original image, along with two edits generated by Copilot. Their assessment is based on four criteria: whether Copilot completed the requested edit, maintained the integrity of the remaining image components, avoided visible defects, and produced an overall strong image. For instance, if a user asks for a cup to be added to a table, the reviewer must ensure that cup is the only change.\n\nThe instructions provided to the contractors emphasize subjective judgment, stating that \"trust your intuition – when you glance at the two edited images side by side, which one immediately feels like the better edit?\" This approach aims to leverage human intuition, which can detect subtle quality differences that are challenging to articulate. However, many assignments involve more than routine image editing. Contractors have reported encountering requests to enlarge women's breasts, shorten skirts, reveal more leg, or place people in sexual positions. Additionally, some assignments include upskirt photos, pro-anorexia material, and fetish images involving children's cartoon characters. The contractors are not responsible for moderating these requests or deciding their appropriateness; their sole duty is to evaluate the quality of the AI's response.\n\nSome contractors expressed concerns about the nature of the prompts they received. One contracted worker, speaking anonymously to maintain their anonymity, remarked, \"How is Microsoft using my time to judge whether generating porn is the best outcome?\" Another contractor mentioned being confronted with upskirt photos and even an apparent animal sacrifice in a submitted assignment. One contractor described feeling \"recoiled\" after encountering pro-anorexia content.\n\nThe documents reveal that hundreds of human reviewers may occasionally come across Copilot submissions. This means that users' uploaded images for editing could be viewed by a contractor as part of Microsoft's evaluation process for the model. Microsoft acknowledged using customer data in accordance with their terms of use, including for improving products and enforcing their code of conduct. However, the company did not respond to 404 Media's request for comment on the specific issues raised in the report.",
  "summary": "In a typical assignment, a contractor receives the user's prompt and original image, along with two edits produced by Copilot, and must decide which version better follows the instructions. The assessment covers four areas. Reviewers check whether Copilot completed the requested edit, left unrelated parts of the image unchanged, avoided... Read Entire Article",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}