Daily Mail and others said they were on a site called anonib a week PRIOR to the 4chan posting.
But keep clinging to a myth.
I'm not the one clinging to a myth, Paradise.
It turns out the guy offering the pics had them up on 4chan for at least five days as well. But you're right. . . They were also on anon.ib. . . But the story is a lot more complex than that. Here is a blog written by a guy who dove into the cesspool of the guys who ARE behind this, including this guy. . . I just posted this on FR. Very interested reading. The people behind this had never intended it to go public. They've been finessing their way into celebrity accounts for years, which explains the strange mix of real and fake images, Apple and non-Apple photos, etc. They simply are not a dump from all iCloud accounts but some are.
That, surprisingly, turns out to be part of the proof this was not a hack of iCloud. These photos were being shown on both anon.ib and 4chan for about five days, and not getting any traction because people thought they were fakes and old stuff.
That was four or five days BEFORE IBrute was released into the wild. . . and Apple closed the vulnerability twelve hours later. With the release of iBrute, the guy pushing the sale of the pictures started claiming he'd "cracked" iCloud to steal them—a claim he'd recant when told it was a Federal crime with a five year per picture prison sentence—and the pictures suddenly had a provenance. . . and people started looking and realized they were real, or at least some of them were. . . and havoc broke out.
But the upshot is, the pics existed BEFORE iBrute was released to be used to get them.