Case: Motherless.com – NRC Media Inquiry (May 2026)

Summary
NFOrce was contacted by journalists regarding its infrastructure services provided to a customer operating a user-generated content platform.

The inquiry focused on:

The nature of NFOrce’s business relationship
Historical involvement of Securest
Abuse handling procedures
Legal and regulatory responsibilities

Key Clarifications

NFOrce provides colocation, IP transit, and hardware-related infrastructure services
NFOrce does not operate, manage, or control customer websites or their content
Responsibility for content lies solely with the website operator
Abuse reports are handled through formal legal and procedural frameworks
Customer identities and contractual details are confidential under Dutch and EU law
Industry-standard reseller structures are common and not intended to obscure relationships

Full email correspondence
We received the email with questions from NRC on 04-05-2026.

Hi Simon,

As Carola told you, we are reporting on NFOrce's customer Motherless.com.

Motherless.com was recently investigated by CNN and acussed of hosting thousands of adult "sleep videos" where it is not clear whether consent for the sexual acts depicted was given.

Ofcom also recently fined Kick Online Entertainment SA, the company that claims ownership of Motherless, 800.000 British pounds for violating UK law. Motherless.com has also been sued for copyright infringment. The Lumen Project, a database with DMCA-complaints, has over 10.000 claims citing an infringing url on Motherless.com. Motherless.com has also hosted CSAM in the past.

A company you own, Securest, has ties to Motherless.com that we hope to understand. Sources with knowledge of these matters say that Securest hosted Motherless.com before you acquired NFOrce. The email adres admin@securest.biz is indeed listed on its DNS-record. Securest LTD is a Bulgarian company you founded in 2020. On older blocks of ip-adresses (going back to 2007), securest.biz is explicitly linked to your RIPE-handle ('se3315-ripe') and claims to handle abuse.

Our questions are as follows:

Can you explain your business relation to Motherless? How are you involved?
Can you explain the business relationship between Securest, Motherless.com and NFOrce?
Why is Securest listed on the DNS record of Motherless.com?
Given these DMCA complaints, fines and the nature of the content Motherless.com apparantly attracts, can you explain why NFOrce has provided hosting services to this site since at least 2015?
What's your response to people online calling on NFOrce to stop hosting Motherless.com?
How many abuse notices do you receive for Motherless.com? How are they handled generally?
Is Kick Online Entertainment SA indeed the customer that operates Motherless.com?
NFOrce claims no responsibility for providing networking for so-called "unmanaged hosting". On its abuse page NFOrce writes "...you must understand we do not operate our servers, our only purpose is to service the internet connection and the server hardware to support this."
How is this true for Motherless.com, given Securest seems actively involved in the hosting of Motherless.com? At the very least, hosting is managed by you or Securest. Do you feel responsible for the content hosted on the site?
I'll be blunt here so bear with me: can you explain why you maintained this client-of-client-structure after VNET acquired NFOrce? Did you do this to increase the distance between yourself, NFOrce and Motherless.com?

Could you answers these questions within 24 hours, or before Tuesday (May fifth) 17:35 CET. Feel free to reach out by phone or mail if our questions need clarification.

Kind regards,
Carola and Rik

Our reply on 05-05-2026

Hi Carola & Rik

We have reviewed your questions and provide our responses below.

We have responded to your previous questions and have invited you to our office to discuss our operations further. That invitation remains open.

Given that several questions include assumptions or characterizations, we have focused on clarifying the underlying facts as precisely as possible. Our responses are limited to factual information regarding our role as an infrastructure service provider.

Question 1:
Can you explain your business relation to Motherless? How are you involved?

Answer:
NFOrce provides infrastructure services to the customer operating this website, specifically colocation, IP transit connectivity, and occasional hardware rental.

Beyond these infrastructure services, NFOrce has no involvement in the operation, management, or content of the website.

Question 2:
Can you explain the business relationship between Securest, Motherless.com and NFOrce?

Answer:
Securest previously acted as a service provider to this customer, including in periods prior to and around NFOrce’s acquisition, including coordinating infrastructure-related services such as DNS (name server) configuration, domain registration support via third-party registrars, and hardware and connectivity services.

In that context, Securest functioned as a reseller of infrastructure services, including services provided by NFOrce and other providers.

NFOrce’s role has been limited to supplying infrastructure services, either directly or indirectly through such reseller arrangements.

Question 3:
Why is Securest listed on the DNS record of Motherless.com?

Answer:
Securest is not listed as an operator or controller of the domain.

The domain uses authoritative name servers (ns11, ns22, ns33, ns44.godns.com), which are part of a DNS service provided by Securest. This reflects the provision of DNS infrastructure only and does not indicate that Securest operates, manages, or controls the website or its content.

Question 4:
Given these DMCA complaints, fines and the nature of the content Motherless.com apparently attracts, can you explain why NFOrce has provided hosting services to this site since at least 2015?

Answer:
NFOrce provides infrastructure services subject to strict terms and conditions, including clear requirements regarding legal compliance and the handling of abuse reports.

As with many large user-generated content platforms, third parties may upload content that can give rise to complaints. In such cases, the responsibility to assess and act on content lies with the operator of the website.

NFOrce requires that its customers respond appropriately to valid legal notices and abuse reports. Where complaints are submitted through the proper channels, they are processed in accordance with applicable laws and our abuse policies.

Question 5:
What's your response to people online calling on NFOrce to stop hosting Motherless.com?

Answer:
NFOrce understands that online discussions can raise concerns about certain websites and the content they may host.

As an infrastructure provider, NFOrce does not make decisions based on public opinion, but on applicable laws, regulations, and our contractual obligations.

We assess situations based on applicable legal frameworks and formal notifications from competent authorities.

Where abuse complaints are submitted through the appropriate channels, they are handled in accordance with our established policies and procedures.

Question 6:
How many abuse notices do you receive for Motherless.com? How are they handled generally?

Answer:
We do not disclose customer-specific data, including volumes of abuse notices, as this falls within confidential provider–customer information.

In general, NFOrce maintains established procedures for handling abuse reports. Complaints submitted through the appropriate channels are assessed and processed in accordance with applicable laws and our abuse policies.

Where action is required, cases are addressed within appropriate timeframes in cooperation with the customer.

Question 7:
Is Kick Online Entertainment SA indeed the customer that operates Motherless.com?

Answer: NFOrce does not disclose customer identities or contractual relationships publicly.

As a service provider, we are bound by applicable data protection, privacy, and confidentiality obligations under Dutch and European law. These obligations restrict the disclosure of customer-related information to third parties.

Customer information may only be shared with competent authorities where there is a valid legal basis, such as a formal legal request or court order.

Question 8:
NFOrce claims no responsibility for providing networking for so-called "unmanaged hosting". On its abuse page NFOrce writes "...you must understand we do not operate our servers, our only purpose is to service the internet connection and the server hardware to support this." How is this true for Motherless.com, given Securest seems actively involved in the hosting of Motherless.com? At the very least, hosting is managed by you or Securest. Do you feel responsible for the content hosted on the site?

Answer:
We do not recognize the characterization in the question.

NFOrce provides infrastructure services, including datacenter facilities, IP transit, and related connectivity services. These services do not involve operating, managing, or controlling the customer’s servers, applications, or content.

Securest’s role, where applicable, has been limited to that of a service provider and, historically, a reseller of infrastructure services. At present, its involvement is limited to DNS name server services.

Neither NFOrce nor Securest are involved in the operation or management of the website, nor do they have any control over the content hosted on it.

Responsibility for the operation of the website and the content it contains lies solely with the website operator.

Question 9:
I'll be blunt here so bear with me: can you explain why you maintained this client-of-client-structure after VNET acquired NFOrce? Did you do this to increase the distance between yourself, NFOrce and Motherless.com?

Answer: We do not recognize that characterization.

NFOrce operates as an infrastructure service provider. The structure referenced reflects standard commercial arrangements in the industry, including the use of resellers and intermediaries.

These types of structures are standard in the industry and are not intended to obscure relationships. NFOrce’s role has consistently been limited to providing infrastructure services, without involvement in the operation or content of customer websites.

Closing statement
We trust that the above clarifies NFOrce’s role.

To avoid any misunderstanding, we emphasize that NFOrce’s involvement is strictly limited to infrastructure services. NFOrce does not operate, manage, or control customer websites or their content.

As a service provider, we operate within applicable legal frameworks and do not make determinations based on external opinions or public discourse, but on legal obligations and established procedures.

We trust that our responses will be reflected accurately and in their full context.

Followup questions from NRC on 06-05-2026

Hi Simon,

Thanks for your quick reply. Thanks for your invitation, which we will consider.

Two questions.

Why did you (Securest) stop from acting as a service provider to Motherless and only supplied DNS name server services afterwards? When did this shift happen? And why?

You own Securest and you own NFOrce. Motherless (and its owner) does business with Securest for quite some years now. In all those years, abuse reports have been issued and there were lawsuits. Now there is the CNN investigation. Why do you keep Motherless as a customer all those years in two ways?

Can you answer these questions before tomorrow 10 am?

Thank you so much in advance,
Carola Houtekamer

Our reply on 06-05-2026

Hi Carola,

Here are our responses to your follow-up questions:

Question 1
Why did you (Securest) stop from acting as a service provider to Motherless and only supply DNS name server services afterwards? When did this shift happen? And why?

Answer
Securest has historically operated as a reseller of infrastructure services since approximately 2006, including services provided by NFOrce and other providers.

Following the operational transition under VNET Group in 2018, this reseller model remained in place. In the years thereafter, a gradual strategic shift was implemented to enable customers to contract infrastructure services directly with NFOrce. This approach was intended to streamline operations, improve support response times, and reduce operational overhead.

This transition accelerated during and after the COVID period, when demand for more direct and responsive support increased.

In the specific case referenced, the customer requested more direct access to NFOrce’s infrastructure and support systems, including integration with control panel environments that were not part of Securest’s service scope. As a result, the customer transitioned to a direct relationship with NFOrce in 2023.

Since that time, Securest’s involvement has been limited to the provision of DNS (name server) services. These services are ancillary in nature and reflect a technical function only, as NFOrce does not typically provide standalone DNS or domain registration services for larger infrastructure setups.

For clarity, although both companies share common ownership, Securest and NFOrce operate as separate legal and operational entities with distinct service scopes and customer relationships.

For completeness and transparency, we have included an overview of historical name server changes associated with the domain. This illustrates that DNS configuration has changed over time and operates independently from the underlying infrastructure services.

Question 2
You own Securest and you own NFOrce. Motherless (and its owner) does business with Securest for quite some years now. In all those years, abuse reports have been issued and there were lawsuits. Now there is the CNN investigation. Why do you keep Motherless as a customer all those years in two ways?

Answer
With regard to your question, NFOrce provides infrastructure services within a defined legal and regulatory framework that applies consistently across all customers.

As an infrastructure provider, NFOrce does not operate or control customer websites or their content. Responsibility for content moderation and day-to-day operations lies with the website operator.

Like other providers in this sector, NFOrce relies on established legal processes and formal abuse reporting channels to address concerns. Where valid notices are submitted through the appropriate channels, these are assessed and handled in accordance with applicable laws and our internal policies. Where required, we engage with customers to ensure that appropriate action is taken.

The existence of complaints, legal proceedings, or public reporting does not in itself constitute a legal basis to suspend or terminate infrastructure services. Decisions in that regard are based on compliance with applicable laws, contractual obligations, and formal determinations by competent authorities.

At the same time, we continuously assess our services and customer relationships against these frameworks. In light of recent reporting and the broader context referenced, we have reiterated our expectations to the customer regarding timely handling of abuse reports and proactive compliance measures.

We will continue to monitor this closely. As with any customer, failure to meet contractual or legal obligations may lead us to reassess the continuation of services.

This approach is applied consistently across our customer base and is not specific to any individual customer or website.

As a final point, to ensure we can properly review and follow up where appropriate, we would like to ask whether, in the course of your research, any formal abuse reports were submitted to NFOrce through our designated channels, or directly to the website operator.

If such reports were submitted and did not receive a response, we would appreciate any details you are able to share. This would allow us to review the matter internally and, where necessary, follow up with the customer to ensure compliance with our procedures.

Kind regards,
Simon

Followup questions from NRC on 06-05-2026

Hi Simon,

Thank you again for your quick reply. We are not aware of specific abuse reports submitted to Nforce about Motherless that have not received an answer.

I have one last questions. Is it correct [redacted personal information] deals with the abuse reports?

Kind regards,
Carola Houtekamer

Our reply on 06-05-2026

Hi Carola,
We do not comment on private personal matters relating to employees or individuals, as these are unrelated to the subject of your inquiry and fall outside the scope of NFOrce’s business operations.

What we can confirm is that NFOrce maintains strict abuse handling procedures and works closely with relevant authorities, industry organizations, and trusted reporting channels to ensure that reports are handled appropriately and without delay.

Our abuse processes cover a broad range of categories, including:

CSAM-related reports
phishing and malware activity
copyright infringement notices
DDoS and network abuse
court orders and law enforcement requests
reports relating to potentially unlawful or non-consensual content

NFOrce does not provide services under any pretense of shielding customers from legitimate abuse enforcement or legal obligations. During onboarding, customers are clearly informed of our abuse policies, compliance expectations, and escalation procedures.

Where valid reports are received through the appropriate channels, cases are assessed and processed in accordance with applicable laws, internal procedures, and established escalation protocols. Customers who fail to comply with these obligations may face temporary suspension or termination of services where appropriate.

In severe categories such as CSAM-related reports, our internal escalation timelines are stricter than legally mandated maximum response windows, reflecting the seriousness with which these matters are treated internally.

Our role as an infrastructure provider is to enforce compliance within the scope of applicable legal frameworks and our contractual policies. We do not take positions based on public discourse or external pressure, but we do take abuse handling and legal compliance extremely seriously.

We believe we have now answered your questions regarding NFOrce’s role and involvement comprehensively.

Kind regards,
Simon

Followup questions from NRC on 08-05-2026

Hi Simon,

We read that the public prosector’s office has forced Motherless.com offline.

Any comment?

Kind regards,

Rik

Our reply on 08-05-2026

Hi Rik,

The specific matters referenced in your email, including questions regarding NFOrce’s role, abuse handling procedures, and our position in relation to recent developments, were addressed earlier today in detail in our responses to NOS.

As these topics have already been answered comprehensively and are now publicly available, we would advise you to review the information published on our transparency page before drawing conclusions or requesting additional comment.

NFOrce Transparency Page

Kind regards,
Simon

Our request for data (Reminder) on 13-05-2026

Dear Rik and Carola,

We would like to kindly follow up regarding our previous requests of 8 May 2026 concerning the specific URLs and related identifying information referenced in your reporting and investigations concerning Motherless.com.

To date, NFOrce has still not received the URLs referenced in the various publications, nor confirmation that these were submitted to NFOrce, the website operator, or the relevant authorities for assessment and follow-up.

As previously explained, access to the specific URLs and related information is important in order for the matters referenced in the reporting to be properly reviewed and assessed.

We would therefore appreciate if the relevant URLs and associated identifying information could be shared with us so that they can be reviewed further with the website operator where required.

In addition, we would like to clarify that any suggestion that NFOrce has not responded to your inquiries is factually incorrect. Since the start of your inquiries, we have consistently replied to your questions, provided detailed written responses, remained available for further communication, and publicly published extensive clarifications and supporting information through our transparency page.

We are aware that questions regarding our responsiveness and cooperation have also been raised with employees and third parties.

For the avoidance of any misunderstanding, we respectfully request that any characterization of our communication and cooperation remains accurate and reflects the factual course of correspondence between the parties.

Kind regards,
Simon

Reply from NRC on 15-05-2026

Hi Simon,

You requested specific URL’s from us.

We have no reason to share this kind of information with you. We described a particular type of content we have found in abundance on Motherless, content you and any of our readers can find as well. It is not our task to clean up Motherless.

We have not accused NForce of not following up on NTD’s. We have not included a judgement in our articles on the illegality or criminal liability of the material we found on Motherless. We therefore see no need to share url’s.

We do not understand your remark about the characterization of your responsiveness. We have included your comments in our article.

Kind regards,
Carola and Rik

New questions from NRC on 27-05-2026

Hi Simon,

Here Carola Houtekamer again from NRC, together with Rik and our colleague Georgia Oost. We monitored Motherless since it came online half May, a website NForce still hosts.

We have a few questions.

Soon after Motherless came online again, we noticed an account, Private Profile | MOTHERLESS.COM ™. At that time it was public, right now it is private. The account tries to look like it has been taken offline, which is not the case, because the user has been online recently.

This account was posting AI-generated child pornography. Offlimits analyzed the images for us and judged they were indeed illegal. Right now, the images have been taken offline. Thirty uploads have been removed.

Our question: how is it possible that immediately after Motherless came back online, illegal material could be found on it? How can this specific account still be active? What does Nforce do to prevent this material from being posted on Motherless?

While investigating the username, we found a similar account on a different website hosting exactly the same material. This was a video containing the images that were previously posted on Motherless. The name of the website is moviefap.com. This website is also hosted by NForce. Offlimits analyzed this video and also classified it as illegal material. The URL is this: https://www.moviefap.com/videos/4e46d8887278564ad46d/lentekriebels-beach-festival-myo21-netherlands.html Our questions: is it correct you are hosting / providing services to moviefap.com? Why do you do this, when this kind of material is posted on it? Why can the same user post illegal material on two websites hosted by Nforce? Are you taking countermeasures to prevent these kind of actors posting illegal material on websites on your servers?

While investigating the username, we found a third account from the same actor on a different website hosting exactly the same video - the video Offlimits classified as illegal. It was posted on May 2. We have reasons to think this is the same user as described above. This video can be found on imagefap.com, a website also hosted by Nforce. The URL is this: https://www.imagefap.com/video.php?vid=901607 Our questions: : is it correct you are hosting / providing services to imagefap.com? Why do you do this, when this kind of material is posted on it? And: why can the same user post illegal material on three websites hosted by Nforce? Are you taking countermeasures to prevent these kind of actors posting illegal material on your servers?

One last questions: you asked for a strict procedure to keep these kind of images offline. Do you think the current procedure is enough to keep these websites clean?

Can you please reply to us before tomorrow 3 pm?

Thank you so much in advance

Carola, Rik and Georgia

Our reply on 29-05-2026

Dear Carola, Rik and Georgia,

Thank you for your patience.

We have reviewed your questions and provide our responses below.

Before addressing the individual questions, we believe it is important to clarify the role of NFOrce as an infrastructure provider.

Several of the questions below appear to assume that an infrastructure provider should proactively identify, review, and monitor content uploaded by users to third-party platforms. That is not how internet infrastructure services operate, nor is it the role assigned to infrastructure providers under the applicable legal framework.

NFOrce provides infrastructure services. We do not operate these platforms, do not have access to their moderation systems, user databases, internal records, uploaded content, or account management systems, and therefore cannot determine what individual users upload, how platform operators moderate content, or whether accounts across different websites belong to the same person.

For readers seeking a clearer understanding of the distinction between infrastructure providers and website operators, we have published the following resources:

Infrastructure overview:
https://nforce.com/images/how-internet-infrastructure-works.png

Transparency statement:
https://nforce.com/transparency?case=nforce-statement-11-05-2026

Question 1
How is it possible that immediately after Motherless came back online, illegal material could be found on it? How can this specific account still be active? What does NForce do to prevent this material from being posted on Motherless?

Answer
NFOrce is not involved in the operation or moderation of Motherless.com and does not have access to user accounts, uploaded content, moderation queues, or internal platform systems.

As a result, NFOrce is not in a position to determine how a specific account was handled, whether content was uploaded, reviewed, removed, or when particular moderation actions were taken.

The fact that content may be uploaded to a user-generated content platform does not mean that the infrastructure provider has knowledge of, control over, or involvement in that content.

Responsibility for content moderation, user management, content review, and enforcement of platform rules lies with the website operator.

That said, following your inquiry, we requested clarification from the website operator regarding the account referenced in your questions.

The operator informed us that the account was originally created in May 2024, and that the account has now been terminated and that the content referenced in your inquiry has been removed from the platform.

Any further questions regarding moderation decisions, user accounts, content review processes, or actions taken by the platform operator should be directed to the website operator through its designated contact channels, including dmca@motherless.com.

NFOrce cannot prevent users from uploading content to websites that it does not operate. Our role is limited to providing infrastructure services and handling matters that are properly reported through applicable legal and abuse reporting procedures.

Question 2
Is it correct that NFOrce is hosting or providing services to Moviefap.com? Why do you do this when this kind of material is posted on it? Why can the same user post illegal material on two websites hosted by NFOrce? Are you taking countermeasures to prevent these actors from posting illegal material?

Answer
Questions regarding the operation, moderation, and handling of content on Moviefap.com should be directed to the website operator.

We understand that the operator has already provided a detailed response directly to you regarding its services, infrastructure, moderation procedures, and compliance measures.

As an infrastructure provider, NFOrce has no visibility into the users of independent customer platforms and is therefore not in a position to determine whether accounts on different websites belong to the same individual.

We also cannot independently verify assumptions regarding relationships between accounts maintained by separate website operators.

NFOrce cannot prevent users from uploading content to websites operated by third parties. Responsibility for reviewing and moderating user-submitted content lies with the website operator.

Where matters are properly reported through applicable channels, NFOrce expects its customers to review and address such reports in accordance with their legal and contractual obligations.

Question 3
Is it correct that NFOrce is hosting or providing services to Imagefap.com? Why do you do this when this kind of material is posted on it? Why can the same user post illegal material on three websites hosted by NFOrce? Are you taking countermeasures to prevent these actors from posting illegal material?

Answer
The same principles apply.

NFOrce is not involved in the operation, moderation, or management of Imagefap.com and has no visibility into its user accounts, moderation systems, or content review processes.

We are therefore not in a position to determine whether accounts on different websites belong to the same person, nor can we independently verify assumptions regarding relationships between accounts maintained by separate operators.

As with any customer, NFOrce expects compliance with applicable laws and the appropriate handling of abuse reports and other lawful notifications.

Question 4
You asked for a strict procedure to keep these kinds of images offline. Do you think the current procedure is enough to keep these websites clean?

Answer
No platform, service provider, or intermediary can realistically guarantee that unlawful content will never be uploaded to a user-generated content platform.

The challenge of unlawful user-generated content is not unique to any particular website. It exists across the internet, including on some of the largest platforms in the world. The relevant question is not whether a bad actor may attempt to upload prohibited content, but whether appropriate procedures exist to identify, review, remove, and respond to such content when it is discovered or reported.

Prior to the return of Motherless.com, the website operator informed us that substantial changes had been implemented to improve moderation procedures, abuse handling, and response times. We reviewed these changes and requested additional measures before services resumed.

We have also made clear to the operator that we expect continued improvement, proactive cooperation, and timely handling of abuse reports. These expectations remain in place.

At the same time, no platform operator can realistically guarantee that every potentially problematic upload will be identified immediately or prevented entirely. Content moderation on large user-generated platforms remains an ongoing challenge across the industry.

From NFOrce's perspective, our role is to maintain clear abuse handling procedures, require customers to comply with applicable laws and contractual obligations, and take action where legally required and appropriate within our role as an infrastructure provider.

As we have explained previously, NFOrce does not monitor customer content, does not perform content moderation on behalf of customers, and does not have access to customer systems. Responsibility for those functions lies with the website operator.

We continue to expect all customers to maintain effective compliance procedures and to respond appropriately to valid reports and lawful requests.

We hope that continued developments in technology, including AI-assisted moderation and detection systems, will further improve the speed and effectiveness with which unlawful content can be identified and removed in the future.

Kind regards,
Simon

Back to transparency reports