Yeah, I went and read their FAQ, and I'm struggling to see how this tool isn't equally useful to target sex workers.

I'm perfectly willing (in my ignorance) to believe that sex trafficking is a problem worth tackling (in scale, in urgency, etc). But I also (already) believe that anti-sex-work laws act to oppress and victimize already-marginalized women, with dubious benefit (without taking a side on whether this effect is deliberate).

For example, in my jurisdiction (IANAL), although I understand that prostitution itself is not illegal as such, the following things are illegal:

    * posting/negotiating prices openly
    * operating a place of business for prostitution (a "bawdy house")
    * living "off the avails"

This last law is supposed to allow the prosecution of pimps (yay!), but it also means that sex workers cannot hire bodyguards or accountants. The second law is presumably supposed to keep "decent" neighbourhoods "decent", but it also results in more streetwalkers, and more liaisons in minimum-price hotels, and so lowers safety.

It seems sort of obvious that the right direction is to have better laws, and then enforce them. I'm not holding my breath.

And, to return to TFA, in the mean time, what stops LEAs from using Rescue Forensics to pad their docket by harassing already-oppressed sex workers who are not victims of trafficking, merely victims of being poor and desperate.

PS: I salute and hugely respect people tackling social justice problems, and I want to emphasize that I'm not condemning Rescue Forensics, I'm expressing a concern.