Skip to main content

Here’s yet another app that’ll keep you from sending NSFW Snapchats

heres yet another app thatll make you wish didnt use snapchat snaphack

Snapchat is an insanely popular instant messaging service because it provides a unique feature of making your texts and photos disappear after a short period of time. Of course, users who are accustomed to receiving potentially embarrassing messages from their unwitting friends can always opt for taking screenshots and have blackmail material live on forever in their phones. If you don’t want to gunk up your smartphone’s gallery with saved screenshots, you can use SnapHack instead.

For 99 cents, this iOS app sort of acts like a mirror to your Snapchat client – after you log into SnapHack using your Snapchat credentials, you will see a listing of all your newest messages … provided that you haven’t accessed them yet through the original Snapchat app.

snaphack-2 snaphack-1

While already-opened messages are not save-able through SnapHack, once you start using it to check out your future Snapchat messages, you can always come back to the app, either to re-read or save attachments onto your phone, without Snapchat’s signature time limitation. Snaps reportedly remain viewable through SnapHack even after deleting it on Snapchat. The person who sent you the message will never know that you backed their photo or video up.

snaphack-3 snaphack-4

Since its launch last night, SnapHack has been making waves on the Web. Developer Darren Jones has already pushed out an update as well, so SnapHack is on the rise folks.

At this point, if you’re still on Snapchat because you think it’s the best option for your privacy stickler ways, you are sorely mistaken (and seriously deluded). Even Snapchat’s own app write-up warns people that they can’t prevent people from taking screenshots and can’t do anything more than delete snaps from their servers. Unless you don’t mind becoming the next Starbucksdrakehands, just make it a point to think twice before sending that sexy pic, OK? 

Editors' Recommendations