Superficial Dating Site Rejects Ugly Applicants

Dennis Faas's picture

One of the most controversial dating sites on the web has been hit by a supposed malware attack. Critics, however, suggest that the attack is nothing more than a media stunt to garner attention to the site.

35,000 Ugly People Rejected from Superficial Dating Site, which allows only visually attractive people to join, has reportedly suffered an online 'virus attack,' allowing 35,000 ugly people to sign on in search of love. operates in a seemingly disturbing, yet straightforward fashion: members vote on whether or not new applicants to the dating site are good-looking enough to join. If they pass a certain score, they're in.

"Obviously this is a bitter pill to swallow so we've done everything we can do minimize damage," said managing director, Greg Hodge, in reference to the attack. (Source:

The attack allowed everyone who applied to the site in recent weeks the 'thumbs up.' management weren't alerted to the problem until members began to complain that the site's 'standards' appeared to be slipping.

"We got suspicious when tens of thousands of new members were accepted over a six-week period," Hodge admitted.

Attack Likely an Inside Job

In response to the attack, the 35,000 members that originally joined were subject for a re-vote. The end result: 30,000 were denied access to the site, and were refunded the money they paid -- a combined $100,000 or so. (Source:

To date, has rejected 5.5 million applicants. It was initially believed one of these many people had been responsible for the attack, but the site's management now says it believes the attack was an inside job.

Security Expert Suspects Media Stunt

Little is known about the attack, even amongst seasoned security experts.

"No one in the anti-virus business has seen this malware or heard of anything like it before," noted Sophos senior techology consultant, Graham Cluley.

Cluley suggests the whole thing could be a hoax intended to draw attention to the site. (Source:

Rate this article: 
No votes yet