Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Your sig says that 'phorm is rather good isn't it?'.

Given your support for the product, does this mean that you've tried it?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Masterful misinformation, Hamster. The survey says 'see' ads, not 'click on'. And it didn't ask people anything about *how* a webpage might work out what ads are "relevant".

The problem with Phorm is not so much that it provides relevant advertising, it's about *how* it achieves that. And the survey quoted above has nothing at all to say on the subject of *how* Phorm gathers data.

Nice try at poisoning the well, though.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Wouldn't suprise me but just how that would make the research relevent to UK public I wouldn't know since the only thing we have in common with american citizans is similar language they have a form of english language but it isn't the Queens english....


For that matter wonder what the Queen would say about being hijacked and phormed?

---------- Post added at 12:44 ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 ----------

On another note seems the government have had knuckles rapped over 90s wiretapping it has been said by EU as illegal..

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07...ipa_judgement/

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

No doubt she, and members of Parliament will not be included in Phorm's data farming. This is possibly the reason Phorm met with the Home Office, to give assurances that they, our leaders, would not be profiled.

I believe that Members of Parliament cannot be bugged or put under surveillance, so I imagine some assurances would have to be given, by the ISPs and Phorm, that our 'betters' would really be opted out..

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

yes but then again you only have the word from someone who has never shown any respect or regards for other peoples privacy, feelings or property would you trust his word that he wouldn't profile these people for monetry gain?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

It might be interesting if it wasn't quite so rigged. There's no qustion there asking how many people hate adverts that are targetted or whether they feel strongly enough about untargetted adverts to give up their privacy to avoid them.

An advert for a CPU is targetted when it appears in a computer magazine but not when it appears in What Car. It doesn't need the Royal Mail to open my copy of MicroMart every week to work that out and I don't want to see adverts in What Car for the CPU that I was looking for last week.

If you ask people "Would you like less irrelevent junk mail through your door?" then I suspect that the answer would be a resounding "yes" but if you asked them "Do you want the postman to read your letters to find out what you are interested in so that he can chose which junk mail to put through your letter box?" then I think that most normal people would say "No thank you".

It's the same as being asked "Have you stopped beating your wife?". If you say "Yes" then you have admitted that you used to beat her and if you answer "No" then you are admitting that you still do. The question is rigged such that the only possible answers are proof of a preset and prejudiced supposition.

So Hammy,

Question 1> Would you like to receive less irrelevant junk mail through your door?

Question 2> Would you like the postman to open your letters to see what junk mail is best suited to your personal needs?

Question 3> Would you like less junk mail?

Question 4> Would you like the postman to open your letters?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

A leading cable firm has abandoned plans to monitor its customers' Internet use and sell the results to advertisers.

Charter Communications, which is either the third or fourth biggest US cable company (depending on which stats you follow) announced the scheme in May. It planned to use the services of NebuAd, a California advertising firm which installs a physical device on an Internet provider's network.

http://www.infopackets.com/news/your...ing_scheme.htm

At least one company has seen the light..

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Question 1> Would you like to receive less irrelevant junk mail through your door? Don't receive much anyway so no opinion.

Question 2> Would you like the postman to open your letters to see what junk mail is best suited to your personal needs? I wouldn't mind as long as I knew he wouldn't remember what he saw - like Phorm forgets. I suspect most postmen know what is in 90% of letters anyway, most are pretty obvious.

Question 3> Would you like less junk mail? I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer to the first question

Question 4> Would you like the postman to open your letters? I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer to the second question

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I submit that if you have answered questions 2 and 4 honestly, then you do not represent the typical views of most adults in this country.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

CenturyTel did the same last week too following in Charter's shoes. Welcome to the thread.

Alexander Hanff

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Free phones already exist, see blyk in EU and sugar mama in USA - both supported by ads. Probably lots more around the world, so what is new about G joining the market?
On the other hand, I use a VoIP phone which allows me free calls without having to see the ads, so why would I go for a phone with ads?

Anyway, this is a distraction. What has viewing ads for a minute a day got to do with all your internet traffic being copied?
It would be news if the free phone came with voice recognition software that serves ads based on your conversations or text messages received or send.

BTW - the voice recognition on mobile phones is next on the list and being followed just as much as phorm. Hopefully, blocking the one will have the same effect on the other. Spyware, tracking and profiling is the same, regardless of the medium.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

There is a difference between knowing that a letter is from your bank and knowing what your income is and what you spend your money on.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Sorry Hammy, perhaps you can clarify because questions 3 & 4 are not the same as questions 1 & 2.

Are you really saying that you don't care or mind if the postman opens your mail - just because he feels like it -as long as he promises to forget what he has read?

What about some dodgy American bloke who knows your postman - can he read them as well?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Have you got a survey to prove that ?
Or is it just your opinion ?

---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:35 ----------

phorm does not remember anything - it does not store any data.

I suppose you will reply that we only have it's word for that, but that is a totally different argument. Your ISP can see what you're surfing if MI5 want to know.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Yes, because I always try to carry around a handy survey in my back pocket for occasions like this. :rolleyes:

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Was that an answer to my question cos it doesn't make sense?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Then how does it serve more relevant advertising based on what has happened in the past?

But MI5 don't want to know. They'd gain nothing from looking at my communications. Criminals however...

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

There is 15,137 signatures on the Gov site
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ispphorm/

and
Will you be opting out of the Virgin Ad Deal? Yes 958 95.51%
No, I am quite happy to share my surfing habits with anyone. 45 4.49%

On here will they do?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Hammy Chris T said "I submit that..."

Submit
to present or refer to others for decision, consideration, etc.
to offer as an opinion; suggest; propose

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I know that - I was just drawing attention to the fact that it was just an opinion.

---------- Post added at 13:49 ---------- Previous post was at 13:48 ----------

I submit (to use the vernacular) that that is hardly a representative sample !

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

yep, every single web server of any type weather its a full blown Apache install with all the trimmings, or a 10 kilobyte *Rebol web server script, no matter were its housed, is subject to being Phormed, as the BT lads and ladys here and betaBT have already stated , even the ISP's minimal included webspace (its not "free" as you have to pay for the ISP service first before you get even that) will be subject to Phorm interception.

any ISP given webspace, any home server running on your end user connection, of any type that uses http in any way will be subject to being phormed.

if you sent any http://myhomeServer/passwordProtected.html page, it cant help but be intercepted and collected, then processed to see if it matches whatever purposes they like, "derivative work","blacklist",whitelist" etc,some sites might find themselves in the ISP/Phorm blacklists..., but most likely, only those that can easly afford the upfront court fees to take the ISP/Phorm to court (anyone can take them to court and get the outlayed costs returned after they win OC,but chancers like these ISP/Phorm executives hope you wont take them there to begin with, or those silly enough to provide personal proof of ownership and website addresses to BT etc).

i never really gave it much thought ,but it seems any end to end tunnel might give you as end users server users, some form of protection, and as i advocate Multicasting ;) then i wonder if peter barnes simple and free java based Multicast client/server tunnel will inadvertently protect you as an end user, accessing your own home LAN contents remotely.

and as an extra bonus if its setup right,save you some bandwidth if your for instance remotely watching your Multicast streamed TV/content through it.

http://www.cdt.luth.se/~peppar/progs/mTunnel/
"The mTunnel is an application that tunnels multicast packets over an unicast UDP channel.

Several multicast streams can be sent over the same tunnel while the tunnel will still only use one port.

This is useful if tunneling through a firewall.


The applications primary goal is to allow for easy tunneling of multicast over for instance a modem and/or an ISDN connection.

The mTunnel has a built in Web-server allowing for easy access to information about current tunnels.

This server listens by default on port 9000 on the machine where started.

The mTunnel also listens on session announcements for easier tunneling of known sessions.

If you download and install this package please send me an email! :-) (peppar@cdt.luth.se.invalid )
The latest public version is 0.3 released 980102.
README Changelog
Download: Windows UNIX
This version is NOT compatible with earlier versions of mTunnel! I have also written two papers about this application: Paper1 - 1998 Paper2 - 1997
"

*hell even a one liner rebol script
http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap...er-webserver.r
Purpose: {Webserver serving files from the current directory.}
One-liner-length: 308
Author: "Cal Dixon"

or any of the many here
http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap...erver&form=yes

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

OK I got a few things sorted out now. I am meeting with CoL Police Operational Planning on Wednesday afternoon, then straight on to the House fo Lords for a meeting with the Earl of Northesk.

If anyone has any questions they would like me to ask the Earl of Northesk on their behalf, please let me know by PM in good time so I can get everything prepared.

Thanks

Alexander Hanff

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

A pretty good one though given the laws in this country are determined by a democratically elected government.

Postal Services Act 2000 (c. 26)
Part V Offences in relation to Postal Services
Offences of interfering with the mail

(1) A person who is engaged in the business of a postal operator commits an offence if, contrary to his duty and without reasonable excuse, he�

(a) intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post

...and you still haven't answered my question.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

So how does phorm not store my details, how is the information disposed of and which method is used to destroy the data, do not keep saying it does if you cannot provide evidence to the contrary, lets see some facts, not opinion.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Another survey -

"eMarketer cited a TrustE study which found that 70.5 percent of Internet users polled seemed to be decently aware that their browsing activity could be tracked by third parties for advertising. But only about 23 percent of them said that they were OK with having their behavior monitored, even if they were assured that the data would not be shared and no personal information would be divulged."

Taken from here -

http://www.webware.com/8301-1_109-9983177-2.html

Dave.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I like the bit at the end of that report...

The TrustE numbers cited by eMarketer said that only 12.6 percent of respondents said that more than a quarter of the targeted ads they were delivered were relevant.

I just spent a month chosing a guitar - I researched various models online and I checked lots of stores for availability, price and their customer service policies. I travelled a lot of miles to various stores until I found THE guitar. It was time consuming but it was also a part of the fun and along the way I joined a couple of forums and now have some new friends in America, Canada, Sweden and the UK who I am in touch with regularly.

In Phorm's version of the future I would have been told which guitar to buy, which shop to buy it from and how much to pay. I would not have uncovered any of the wonderful shops and websites that I found by chance or by following random links and I would have had a lot less fun then I did by "window shopping" the net.

To then find out that Phorm had been pushing me towards buying (cos that's what it's all about) the most unsuitable guitar from the dearest shop with a six month back-order and no returns policy would be rather annoying.

I like serendipity and I don't want to see the internet turned into just another High St with the same old shops and the same old coffee houses and absolutely no character. I certainly don't want to sit around waiting to be told what to think.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Just to clarify regarding questions for the Earl of Northesk.

I see this meeting very much as me representing all you guys (and everyone else elsewhere who has concerns) so whereas I have my own questions I don't want them to dominate the meeting, I would rather everyone gets an opportunity to have their concerns addressed and I will add my most important questions to whatever time is left.

I would prefer it if people could give me their first and last name with their questions as I am going to ask Earl of Northesk for permission to record the meeting with a dictaphone which I would then like to publish on the web. if people give me their names I will make sure the questions are asked with the appropriate name of the person who submitted it.

Please also try and keep questions in line with what he may be able to answer. For example, there is no point in me asking him questions about the Home Office or ICO as he will not be able to answer them (at least not without consulting both authorities first and as we already know the HO don't even answer his questions in a reasonable time frame). More useful questions would be ones seaking his opinion on issues. For example, I received a very good question from Peter N as follows:

This is the sort of question the Earl will be able to answer because it is asking for an opinion.

Please remember I only have a couple of hours at most with the Earl so I have to select the strongest questions, please don't be offended if you submit a question and it doesn't get asked.

Thanks

Alexander Hanff

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I think one of the key questions will of course be 'what do you think of BT's opinion that copyright laws don't apply to them' or something along those lines... but I'd be very surprised if you didn't already have that one on the list :P

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Try asking him ;
"Do you think that if BT etc were to offer better broadband speeds or cheaper monthly fees then that would be a reasonable way for informed customers to opt-in to have Phorm ?"

Bet you won't !

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Your question makes no sense so no I won't be asking him it. If customers want to Opt-In to Phorm that is entirely up to them for whatever reasons they wish, and I expect I am not the only person here who believes the same.

The issue is Phorm is NOT opt-in it is opt-out, which is illegal.

Alexander Hanff

Sorry the above was addressing HW not icsys.

Can people please send the questions in PM, not post them to the thread. Thanks.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

If the Phorm system was truly opt-in where no data is passed anywhere near a Phorm server if not opted-in then there is no reason that the above could not be implemented.

But we know that even if you do not opt-in, your data still passes through Phorm kit.
I for one would rather pay than be profiled.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

software developers have spent years to keep us spam, phish and ad free, why should a ad company come along and undo all that and sit in the isp where we cannot avoid the very things we we never see, and on top of that snoop on our carefree surfing to profile us and sell our data to the highest bidder, never mind us how about our children, their data is not for anyone to intercept and profile and sell and serve up unwanted ad`s.
why should we pay for a service and get no reduction for been bombarded with ad`s, even opt`ed out can we be sure we not going through the dpi kit, NO. It`s ABUSE of our rights to spied on for no reason other than for commercial gain at our cost.
could go on but i am sure others want to chip in pipe up.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I second that. Especially when the price difference will be less than the cost of a loaf of bread a month.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Indeed. That's the line I was going to go down. I have a direct line to someone from BERR (who rang at an inopportune moment) and I plan to put the copyright question to them.

To that end does anyone have any links to BT or Phorm material where it states that a copy of the web page is made / kept?

Also is there any mileage in the fact that HTTP is a request / response protocol. My readers request the page and I send it to them. It is not generally available as I decide to which requests I wish to respond. I may do that based on a cookie I have placed there as a result of them logging in. etc.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I don't expect he would make himself look like a fool in front of his lordship by posing such a badly-phrased question as that, no.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

... and that opt in means provider of SERVER and CLIENT opt in.

Speaking as the operator of several servers, I'd like the chance to decline to opt in too, so I can assume the privacy of my communication is also respected.

Pete

---------- Post added at 15:20 ---------- Previous post was at 15:18 ----------

Here, in a Webwise webchat. Marc Burgess is Phorm's CTO (Chief Technology Officer).

narcosis
What sort of impact will the scanning & tagging of http traffic have on response times during peak surfing times ?

MBurgess
Pages are not tagged (or modified), and the keyword analysis process is offline so it can't affect response times. The ISPs are very concerned not to interfere with users' browsing experience.

narcosis
If the keyword analysis process is offline then in order to scan for keywords would you not have to have a copy of webpage in order to analyze it offline ?

MBurgess
Yes, a mirrored copy is analyzed.


Also confirmed by Richard Clayton's analysis

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Try answering a question first, for three days now i have asked you to answer these question:

1. How does phorm enhance my privacy?
2. How does phorm dispose of my data and what method is used?

Admin edit (Chris T): We will not tolerate foul language. Do not attempt to bypass our swear filter by mis-spelling words.

Is your ISP BT,VM or TalkTalk?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Thank you very much.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Looking at HW's earlier link (http://www.netimperative.com/news/20...t-all-bad-news)

There seems to a practical point being missed by "the world of online advertising" in their support for behavioural targeting. Had Phorm signed up 70% of UK broadband customers - where would this leave the rest of the UK online advertising industry?

There can only be one installation at the ISP(s) and if that is Phorm then unless you work for Phorm you will see nothing of the bright new future. Chances are, if Kent is right about the reduction in irrelevant (non-Phorm) advertising, you are more likely to be unemployed shortly.

Given Phorms unique position, the door is open for gathering a good deal of useful commercial (non-subscriber, competitor?) information while the wire-tap is up. How much more impressive will Phorm's presentation be when poaching XYZ's cleints if it is based on actual habits of 10 million subscribers. I know that if I had access to that information I would use it.

I think that if I were involved in online advertising right now I would be getting quite worried about my future.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

i think ,questions about large business (not just BT, Vm, CPW) applying one rule for the paying end users as regards suspected copyright (non commercial and non profit infringment),and kicking the user, and the same copyright rules being clearly ignored by them, to make a commercial profit, based on wholesale piracy, is a good one.

when put into perspective, and worded in such as way to help the Earl? of Northesk (shouldnt that be Lord Northesk, not Earl of Northesk alexander?) make a point of it, given the MANY new interested readers/listeners that will be informed by the interview from a UK lord...

dont ever forget, the lord , the Earl, and the Baroness speaking and hence being quoted afterwards, will give the campaign much credence in the higher circles of influence in this country, so we dont want to many mundane questions...

(you know the drill, it needs druming home though and in an official quote if possible)
is the lord conserned that any paying end users , even the countrys judges, lawyers, news editors, reporters ,home workers and their children that happen to have BT (with this DPI kit installed on the other end of the wire)connecting their BB web connection at work, or at home, will potentialy have this unlawful wiretap intercepting each and every webpage and Email they use (even if they dont see the ads if they are opted-out of that ad delivery part)etc.

isnt that more than enough reason to stop it NOW, for example the very real potential to have some ISP/Phorm employee or 3rd party be payed by unknown persons to divert any and all confidential http pages to a secret storage for other unlawful purposes aginst these high ranking and respected people being (in many cases unknowingly/unwitingly) intercepted.

or something like that ;) hard hitting ,and by all accounts, factually currect and easy to do if you have access to the right people and pay them enough....

see 3rd party cookies, MITM, and all the other points the web techs etc have already proven can to used with this core webwise/phorm/ISP collective business model.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I agree, but people need to send me a defined question in PM, this thread moves too quickly so I might miss something bearing in mind I am doing about 30 things at once.


Depends on the context. When I send him emails I greet him with Lord Northesk, but when I am talking about him, I use Earl of Northesk as that is his title. I did check before I sent my first email to him though several months ago as to what the most suitable salutation would be, and either Lord Northesk or Earl of Northesk are acceptable.

Indeed, this is a rare opportunity to engage the body politic at the highest levels and I am very respectful of that. It is important to make sure I don't waste his time.

Alexander Hanff

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

ZERO TOLERANCE WARNING

Some forum members continue to believe that they can bully, harass and insult other members with impunity. I would like to remind everyone, especially those who are closely following this thread, that the Cable Forum Team takes a dim view of such activity, especially in this discussion about Phorm which is of great importance to a large number of internet users in the UK.

We are taking a zero-tolerance approach when moderating this thread because we are satisified that we have posted more than enough warnings already. We have issued infraction points to FIVE different members today alone, resulting from comments they posted in this thread. We will hand out as many more as it takes to get people to calm down and discuss the issue rationally, without insulting each other, swearing at each other, or inciting other members to participate in bullying or harassing behaviour.

Everyone who is tempted to continue misbehaving - please consider this to be one more warning than you deserve. The next infraction we give out could be yours.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Guess I better answer as you're sounding a bit upset. Perhaps if you phrased your questions a bit more politely then you'd catch my attention quicker ? I'm attracting a lot of responses on this thread so please forgive me if I take time to answer something.

The answers to points 1 and 2 are available at http://www.phorm.com/about/faq.php

My ISP is BT, and as I have often said, I'll happily have Phorm.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I don't see answers to either of those two questions. The closest is "How does Phorm protect customer privacy?". That's not the same as "How does phorm enhance my privacy?"

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Its only taken you three day to post a link that says nothing, see below


Where is the detail, that is nothing more than PR talk.

Its only taken you three days to respond, i knew it would get you to respond, which is why i worded that way first. Says a lot about you.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I'm not aware that Phorm are claiming to enhance your privacy so can't really think what to add ?
They are of course offering the free anti-phising service Webwise, but this is not what you're getting at I suspect.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Question to ask Lord Northesk...(already PM'ed to Alex)

"Given that when an account holder has to answer a number of security questions to access his/her account be it Virgin Media, BT or their banking services, how can BT be justified in allowing the current opt-out model using single cookies during a browsing session, which could easily be ignored/accepted by the non-account holder, without informed consent, or indeed, any knowledge at all (especially if the current user is a child)?"

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Sorry Madslug, but I think you may be at cross-purposes here. I wasn't referring to the voice stuff per se, I just included that reference as what followed was directly related to the previous sentence.

I was attempting to draw attention to the article where HW said it supported Phorm, but when you read it, it doesn't. The only thing the article put forward was that people might be offered free broadband services in return for having their connection monitored. If this is an optional service and people really want to do it then I see no reason why they shouldn't. (Again this is deliberately ignoring the website aspect).

On a slightly different note, in reference to the US companies dropping the DPI products, this is really what I thought BT would do when news of what they were attempting was brought under public scrutiny. Internal policies are geared to prevent making a fuss from within hence the leak to El Reg.

I obviously gave BT upper management more credit than they deserved, because I was basing my opinion on the middle-management of which I had more day-day knowledge. If some of those managers had a say in the matter then I daresay we wouldn't be in this position today and BT would have wisely dropped this insidious product from their portfolio.

This simply serves to highlight that BT cannot respond to the market quickly enough to compete with US companies in the same space. The only reason they are where they are is because of their previous role as incumbent Telco. Any other business making such blunders would be out on their ear much more quickly but their massive resources and stranglehold buffer them from so much of their real world mistakes that they cannot appreciate just how much people were going to get up in arms about this.

Their recent email correspondence with the ICO made it very clear they were shocked that this storm was still going on. Arrogant management in Ivory towers. I feel sorry for the tens of thousands of BT employees who are horrified about *their* companys' actions in this matter. (I say 'their' because pretty much all full time BT staff are also shareholders).

If anyone other than the ex-BT Retail CEO had just taken over the company then there would have been heads rolling within BT (eventually) as this is perfect political assassination stuff.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

From:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...ial/page2.html

We think it is unethical of the Register to seek to undermine a technology that enhances online privacy - Phorm's system ensures that ads are served with no data storage - something that will benefit readers of the Register and other websites.

In the interests of balance, we would like the Register to reflect the improved privacy environment Phorm provides over the other major online ad targeting companies detailed in the attached table.

(My emphasis)

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

As a matter of interest, where have you got this information from ?

---------- Post added at 16:01 ---------- Previous post was at 15:59 ----------

Well online privacy with Phorm who do not keep any data, is surely better than anyone else who do keep data for long periods of time, such as Google. As shown in the diagram that Phorm used http://regmedia.co.uk/2008/03/31/phorm_comparison.jpg

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

The comparison with Google doesn't work as has been discussed before. Even if it did, the point would only be valild if phorm replaced google et al.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I hope you can appreciate that having already lost a great deal personally around disclosing private information that I'm not just going to divulge this on an open forum.

Suffice to say that I believe that the vast majority of BT employees (of whom there are tens of thousands) are not in full support of BT rolling out this product or having conducted secret trials which they then lied about, repeatedly.

Would you wish to be associated with such a company? (This is rhetorical btw in case you hadn't worked that out as I think you would be happy for the Devil to be your life-coach as long as you had shares in his company).

Edit: It's just occurred to me (I can be very naive at times as self-evidenced) that out of that whole critique I layed at BT's doorstep you only chose to pick on that one element. It doesn't take a ad-executive to work why.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7488009.stm that looks bad for all who visit youtube.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Yeah I just read about it elsewhere. It isn't going to happen, Google will find a way to appeal the order. Furthermore, I doubt they keep videos which get removed (although I could be wrong) so it would be a very difficult order to comply with. I expect and private videos will probably be contested on the grounds of privacy. Privacy laws can change state to state in the US so some states will not be happy that a judge in a different state is violating their citizen's privacy rights.

Alexander Hanff

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Something I forgot to mention, is that access to a Microsoft Home Server using their new software is HTTPS. If you try and enter HTTP in IE 7, it automatically changes it to HTTPS and they supply a free SSL Certificate with the software. So should that be OK. In Firefox 3.0 that I am using now it displays this:

The page must be viewed over a secure channel
The page you are trying to access is secured with Secure Sockets Layer (SSL).

Please try the following:

* Type https:// at the beginning of the address you are attempting to reach and press ENTER.

HTTP Error 403.4 - Forbidden: SSL is required to view this resource.
Internet Information Services (IIS)

Technical Information (for support personnel)

* Go to Microsoft Product Support Services and perform a title search for the words HTTP and 403.
* Open IIS Help, which is accessible in IIS Manager (inetmgr), and search for topics titled About Security, Secure Sockets Layer (SSL), and About Custom Error Messages.

Colin

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Indeed. In Germany the response to illegal surveillance has been much more robust...

Wiping Deutsch Telecoms Board Clean

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Wouldn't it be a great tactic for the pro Phorm PR to post on this Forum with the desired intention of inflaming the anti-phorm members and then force the CFT to pick them off one by one.

This would be a good way for Phorm PR to quieten the anti-Phorm brigade. If certain members could realise that certain posters are maybe out to do this, why not hold back on that keyboard and not respond when inflamed. It takes two to make a daft debate.

If someone wants to put forward views for proper debate fine, but I have seen many comments on this forum of late that appear to be there possibly only to inflame others. Please let common sense prevail and not react when tested! I see fine comments by members subsequently lost pages back in time, only ten minutes after they are posted because of this.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I would disagree - this wouldn't quiet us, this would make our resolve stronger. badphorm policies are clear, and they will warn if anything goes over the top - naturally, but to date they have only banned one member for attempting to provoke the campaigners.

I would suggest two things:

1/. Don't rise to the bait - however the posters in question have the right to be heard so your choice is to ignore or respond in a calm manner.

2/. If anyone has been excluded from the debate, they are welcome on badphorm, and all the other Forums following the Phorm debacle. (though it should be noted that the mods are doing a great job and don't want to go down this road)

:angel:

EDIT: Oh and hey - past 11K posts :)

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

" Originally Posted by warescouse
This would be a good way for Phorm PR to quieten the anti-Phorm brigade."

I meant specifically on this board. I agree this would make the anti-phorm resolve even stronger.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Agree wholeheartedly.

If members feel they are being baited - report it - don't rise to it or take on the poster as this will only lead yourselves into trouble. The team doesn't see everything that is said but if they happen to be seeing two people taking on each other, both those people will get infraction warnings.

The Forum has an ignore feature. Members should utilise it if they feel a poster is being annoying.

The bottom line is that if we can see that only person is causing a ruckus, that person will be dealt with accordingly.

I have to personally say though to that one poster, they know who they are, if your intention is to get this thread closed, you will fail. So if you are not here to have a sensible debate, I suggest you clear off before that decision is made for you.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

totaly agree It's better to bring Debate up to your level rather than sink to the level of others !

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Yes, that’s one mightily strange ruling. Although, one often reads of US District Courts coming out with similar strangeness. It’s like asking to see everyone’s shopping habits, so you can compare the attractiveness of bought products against what gets shoplifted.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I assume that post is directed at me.
I also assume that since that is not in BOLD, it is a personal view rather than that of a moderator.

I have no intention of trying to get the thread closed and intend to post in an eminently sensible way, so stop provoking me !!! [JOKE]

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I think you make far too many assumptions.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Remember it isn't all bad news. The other side of the coin on this item is a copyright issue which actually can be worked to our advantage. I wonder what BT's view is on whether there is copyright abuse when material gets copied from one part of the internet (like BBC iPlayer) and used elsewhere? After all some ISP's have been pretty big on copyright, although they appear to swing from side to side according to more sinister agendas.

It's a bit like the ISPA/DPI tomfoolery. If the authorities want the ISP's to be legally responsible for filesharing on their networks then the ISPA says - "DPI? can't be done - it's like the Royal Mail opening all the envelolpes - we could never manage it, and anyway it's illegal and we couldn't possibly do anything illegal"

If the ISP's then discover that they can make a shedload of money out of DPI, then suddenly DPI CAN be done, and Emma Sanderson is arguing that it isn't at ALL like opening the envelopes and of course it's legal because she says so and she's sought, er, obtained legal advice. And what do the ISPA do? Zilch. Suddenly gone three brass monkeys.

Likewise copyright. With respect to YouTube I am sure BT would say - you musn't copy videos to YouTube, (or your ISP webspace) it's a breach of copyright and we will have to close your account if you do it.
But when it comes to Webwise, then suddenly anything on the internet that is publicly available is ripe for commercial exploitation, and - you guessed it - it's legal, because Emma says so, and she's sought, er, obtained, legal advice.

According to Emma Sanderson there can't BE any copyright infringement going on.

The whole ISP position is farcical and changes every time the (commercial) wind blows.

And who cares which way the legal weathervane is pointing? They are above the law, they are an international blue chip company.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Well I didn't mention any names but clearly the description must have been accurate to get your response.

Personal view or not, in bold or not in bold - if you continue your crusade of ridiculous baiting against others, further action will be taken.

Now the centre of attention is on Phorm in this thread, not you. Back on topic.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

:clap:

Thank you.

Saves me getting a telling off for saying it :LOL:

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

@ R Jones hey big chip company`s like money and if that money found somewhere better to get used who does it really hurt us or them if the numbers are big.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

:clap::clap:

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I wondered if there are any BT shareholders going to the Anti-phorm protest at the BT AGM? I ask this because I was wondering what peoples views are regarding the BT shareholders themselves.

I personally take the view that the majority of BT shareholders, not to be confused with shareholding, are most probably unaware of Phorm/Webwise and the risks involved for the share price if BT are allowed to go down this illegal road.

That being the case I was wondering if a few "BT protect our share price" or similar banners would not go amiss in the same anti-phorm crowd. It could certainly grab the attention of a portion of the BT visitors to the centre and may provoke extra interest as to why this would be the case.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I think they be a few inside the meeting a fair few not only the ones who said they be, but how many lurkers is another number one cannot guess at.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I asked Emma if the shareholders had been inphormed on the technology phorm uses and what phorm does, the reply I got was not what i expected since the shareholders stand a chance to lose money from any fool hardy ideas BT management have. She said that BT carries out too many trials to tell shareholders of each one. I felt this one was so more the type ecery shareholder should have been given the chance to request more information.

As a shareholder myself I feel you cannot hold them to blame since thye have been told nothing about it until it hits the news, any that are not technical might stil not know anything about it.

Personally BT have failed the shareholders the retail CEO has brought the company into an area of disrepute MPO if there is a vote of no confidance in the people who alowed this I would have to vote I have none in them.

They have brought distrust from customers placing the company in a very awkward position share prices have been droping and BT are buying in as fast as they can wouls seem like a companny trying to stop the free fall something that dumping the excess bagage ( phorm) would stop. Looking at the graph for Phorm and BT they go up and down almost together.

Ok rant over as a BT shareholder who has seen both sides of CEO at BT Ben and Ian.w Ben is worth 40 Ian's as he was much more approachable than Ian. He was a man respected who never deleted emails without reading and always replied sad to say Ian seems to have a lot to learn on how to earn respect.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

anyone seen this http://www.kablenet.com/kd.nsf/Front...2?OpenDocument

Scotland's business minister has raised the prospect of extending the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act beyond public sector bodies

interesting,

peter

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Coverage of this issue has been rather sparse in the general media - in my opinion that's because the publishers have a vested interest in the advertising revenue - but BT shareholders are exactly as likely to have seen the reports as anyone else in the UK including all of us on these forums.

As a cross section of the community it goes without saying that there are going to be BT shareholders with insight into the issues and opinions to match. It's equally likely that there are BT staff at all levels who have opinions that are not dictated by their employment.

Considering that only a few dozen people are active on these forums you would expect that to equate to maybe less than one whole person taking the number of BT shareholders relative to the general population so don't be too surprised or disappointed if there is no obvious show of support from amongst the shareholders.

It's important to keep in mind that there are three separate strands to this situation.

BT - imminet trials and roll-out expect this year.
VM & CW - positive interest shown but hanging back to see if BT get screwed
All of the other ISPs - certain to want a slice of the pie once they know that they won't get shot down in flames.

Phorm may be in our sights but it is the ISPs that are the problem. We could see Phorm and Webwise go under only to see NebuAd or some other company move in with an identical product and a better line in spin.

We need get to the core issues and force this governement to impliment legislation that sets the limits on what ISPs can do in the short to medium term regardless of whether or not that invoves Phorm.

Without legislation directly created to address the issue of internet privacy and content copyright we will be stuck in limbo and all we will have is the ISPs "le le legal" statements and the extremely expensive and risky opportunity to bring a civil case against some huge multi-national like BT.

I would suggest that it doesn't matter one jot what the BT shareholders themselves think. At the absolute extreme of the scale, the most that they could do is get rid of the current Board of Directors at BT. That will not be enough to prevent BT and the other ISPs from chasing the money monster now or in the near future.

Aim high - the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the High Court. Everything else is just pants.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

more bad news from stateside

from http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07...s_with_nebuad/

it look like WoW is now the only US carrier still sticking to using nebuad

don't share any current or ex BT execs does it?

also states not it seems US congress are saying this technology need to be "OPT-IN" over there as well, oh dear, phorm always thought they could go opt-out stateside :nono:

peter

***************
We've also learned that Bresnan Communications - an ISP serving Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and Montana - ran its own NebuAd tests last month. Spokesman Shawn Beqaj tells us that the company has no immediate plans to officially deploy the system - or similar systems - but it may do so in the future.

"We intended to do a trial and that's what we did," he said. "We're looking with great interest at discussions on this matter both in the regulatory sphere and in the public domain."

Meanwhile, a spokeswoman Embarq - another outfit that has tested NebuAd - tossed us this: "We do not have a contract with NebuAd, and we are not using online behavioral targeting tools."

Like Charter, Louisiana-based ISP CenturyTel froze its NebuAd plans in direct response to words from Congressman Ed Markey.

****************

---------- Post added at 22:25 ---------- Previous post was at 22:14 ----------

also look at http://www.mediapost.com/publication...&art_aid=85952

*********
Art Brodsky, Public Knowledge spokesman, says: "We have seen video of the NebuAd CEO saying, 'Google knows what they do on your site, but we know everywhere you go, the sites you stop at and ads you see.' The problem is there's no opt-in or opt-out to these types of services."

********

sound familiar????

peter

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

aiming high is good,but dont underestimate the effect of 1000's of small claims as weapon too.

more comment on 3 strikes on the one hand ,and phorm on the other.
http://spicycauldron.com/2008/07/03/...-file-sharing/

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I think the gist of what I am trying to convey is, as I see it, the anti-phorm rally is an opportunity to raise public awareness. The public also includes shareholders so I thought if you could get a few chosen shareholder comments it could be an opportunity seized on the day.

As regarding aiming high, there is no argument against that but it is well known that politicians and the like, do respond sometimes at sudden speed at the realisation there is a large groundswell of public opinion and strong media criticism. Bearing that in mind there is nothing wrong IMHO in fighting the battle on one, two, three or many fronts simultaneously.

Regarding the legal issues, although the laws of the land could be perhaps tightened, from what I have read, there maybe are sufficient laws in place right now. If these laws were correctly applied by the people who are paid to do so we could be be doing something else right now at this moment in time instead of discussing Phorm. (Perhaps some other anti privacy issue. There are plenty of them :( )

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

The small claims will only be necessary if the system is used.

If we can't stop it being introduced and used then we would obviously move towards concentrating on claims and court appearences but until then I would think that it would be better to fight the immediate battle.

At this stage there's no real point in worrying about what may happen if Webwise is introduced because until and unless it is there have been no copyright breaches, no targetted children etc.

At present there's no offence being committed so all we have is the gun and bullets without a target. What we do have is a huge question mark over the legality of DPI and the princples of privacy in the 21st century. It is this that will resonate with ordinary people and authority figures alike.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Reference more bad news from stateside, seems like the whole world is trying to make an early stake on this technology throwing caution to the wind legally.
If this does get a foothold anywhere I think I will be buying envelopes and stamps again.
Shiny prospects for the Post office.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

only 800, it be a lot more and when its a few thousands they may say hrm somat not right here what we done wrong.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

warescouse.

I agree that existing laws should cover many aspects of the problem but they are open to interpretation and that requires case-law decisions which can only happen after the system is in use.

If you look at the laws regarding interferring with the mail, for example, you'll see that those laws apply to the mail carriers as much as they do to anyone else but there are also separate conditions in the acts that specifically apply to the postal service and their employees.

It is this level of legislation that is required - unambiguous and designed specifically to avoid the ISPs simply designing something that isn't quite DPI and getting around the law.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

the post was to show more isp's canning nebuad after trials and pressure from congress

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I take on-board your point completely but we need to shout loud "we are not happy" so that we can push it to the front of the legal systems agenda.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I know fella, :) I may not be able to contribute any legal/copyright expertise to these discussions, but I can make a Joe public comment which may make a risk taker with vested interests think twice if his potential customers are simply going to use other readily available methods to safeguard their privacy wasting the effort/money spent on implementing this horrible technology. I wish Alex all the best with his meeting, and that we do achieve a permanent wall to future attempts of this kind.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

HW's targeted posting has disrupted this thread for long enough. Let's not opt-in to Phorm-style interventions anymore eh? :D

Talking of disruption: have to watch the demo isn't infiltrated by those who might wish to denigrate and marginalise its purpose. Anyone acting belligerently, especially for the press, should be regarded as suspect imho.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

:confused: Heres another thought I have not seen posted in relation to the Opt-out versus Opt-in argument - Question for BT, Armed forces personnel on tour of duty, how exactly are they supposed to opt out for and monitor family users???. Shouldn't they be able to not opt in and go away for months on end fighting for their country knowing that their family are safe in all respects at home.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I am certain an armed force member fighting, in belief for their country away from home, would like to be assured that his or hers children (minors) web access is not being spied on via Phorm's/webwise system. Any opt-in or opt-out mechanism should be done as mandatory at account level so that if the account holder decides to remain opted-out, not one iota of their, their partner's or their offspring's web data is intercepted by Phorms in-line spying mechanism for the whole period the account holder wishes to remain opted out.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

When I sent a high-flyer systems (ex-BT) mate <bt-phorm-report-2007.pdf> his response was:

It's a very good tech document!!!!........however

Why the [Mod Edit (Matt D) - Removed. Please obey the rules & do not swear] are they trialing on live customers with out their
knowledge??
Gathering info and placing ad cookies on your own customer-base?
Naughty.
How many people know about this?

From this response I'd think that if awareness of what has already happened is that low inside the IT community, then that community is potentially onside, and should be targeted as well as the great unwashed. Just a thought.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

<In response to warescouse> Exactly and as it currently stands with BT he/she if on tour will not get that choice because they will all be opted in by default until that person comes home.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

There's been something rattling around at the back of my mind for a while. It's one of those things where you know that something is wrong but you don't what it is - well I do now.

Someone tell me if this has been discussed, debated and answered before because I'm sure I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere.

In all of the information given by BT and Phorm to customers, the ICO, 80/20 Thinking and anyone else involved it has always been asserted that Webwise does not collect any personally identifiable information.

Let's accept that this statement is accurate but look at what it really refers to.

BT and Phorm have only ever discussed PII in relation to the Webwise system but BT's Privacy Policy states that:-

We sometimes use other companies to provide services to you or to provide services to us. To enable them to do this, we may need to share your personal information with them.

This means that BT can honestly say that Phorm will not gain access to any PII via Webwise but no official document or statement that I am familiar with says that Phorm have not or will not be given PII under the existing terms of BT's Privacy Policy.

This means that Phorm could already have personal information records of ALL of BT's customers. If Webwise is used then Phorm could have an entire file of millions of peoples personal information and access to vast amounts of personality profiles to match them against. Worse still, you can opt-out of Webwise but you can't opt out of BT's Privacy Policy.

Is it possible that BT and Phorm have been playing a crafty game in only ever mentioning PII in relation to Webwise and OIX?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I think you are forgetting the macro picture. If this is new money on advertising, the cost of all goods is going to go up.

That affects US. It will only affect the big chip company if 'us' can no longer afford their services or goods.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

In response to Peter N

From the Webwise Chat
What about the other messages though?

Selective answers and half answers seem to be the norm for all things related to Phorm.

One of the things I have noticed people doing (and tried to avoid myself - unsuccessfully) is leaving questions open, or asking more than one thing in a question as it provides a nice way for them to answer the bit they want to answer whilst avoiding the banana skin.

Of course there are times when they just don't answer the question at all. Again from the chat
It looks like a BTs "Ask Emma" response - you mentioned advertisers, so I'll give you my answer regarding advertisers irrespective of the question.

I'm sure we could all find a thousand more examples of similar things in our communications or on web-sites, and I think we should be more careful when we are asking questions. It's so easy to run off at the mouth and try and get everything in .

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Are you forgetting the copyright breaches and targeting of the 2006 trial and copyright breaches of the 2007 trial (no ads displayed but they still used content which did not belong to them in the development of a commercial product)

Both trials involved adding additional code to the html code of the sites during delivery - generally that is called hacking.

---------- Post added at 01:20 ---------- Previous post was at 01:10 ----------

This has been mentioned many times - the burglary and arson analogy. Innocent of arson and if no one talks about the burglary, then they are deemed innocent and UK law does not allow anyone to be tried twice on the same charge.

Phorm only ever talk about Phorm/Webwise/OIX. Even BT uses answers that are identical to the Phorm answers.

Whenever any questions are asked specifically of the BT side of the firewall (as per the BT diagram) the answer always centres around the legal advice comforting BT into knowing that they are not breaking any laws.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Did you not know that as a partner of an isp involved with phorm they do indeed share all of your account details with them - name, address, postcode maybe even ip for some great usage analysis they will claim, shouldnt be too hard after that to make a very big profile on you in no time.
Rest of the work is just pimiping it to the biggest buyer ;(

Perhaps phorm pr or other known phorm belivers could correct me about this.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I was specifically referring to the introduction and full use of Webwise. The 2006/2007 trials are a separate matter and only relate to BT so any breaches there are down to that one specific ISP.

I don't mean to detract from the seriousness of those events but they are the one area of this issue that has gained a fair bit of air time and still not evoked any real response from the public or parliament. If anything it could work in Phorm's favour because there are a lot of people who won't see what the fuss is about because "nobody was hurt".

It's something that needs to be persued but even if BT are prosecuted for conducting those trials - it won't be Phorm because of their third-party relationship - that would not prevent Webwise or similar systems from being introduced now or in future.

To avoid preaching to the converted and get people to see the dangers you have to get them to worry about how it will affect them and with the Barbican meeting offering a brief but potential high-profile opportunity to get the message across we need to get them involved rather than simply informed.

Although the gathering is based around the BT shareholders' meeting you have to bear in mind that not all BT shareholders are BT broadband customer and the message has to be relevent to everyone who can possibly her it. If too much is made of BT's previous actions it practically invites people to feel that it doesn't concern them because they use a different provider. We need everyone regardless of their ISP to be aware of what's at risk in order to get the broadest possible support.

There's an old saying in sales - sell the benefits not the product. In this case that translates as telling people what will happen to them rather than what did happen to someone else otherwise we'll just be greeted with a wave of apathy.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

BT/Webwise/Phorm/121Media have said much about how their service enhances privacy because it doesn't store any recognisable data.

Whose privacy are they enhancing; it would seem that the only privacy they are protecting is their own. Whatever you think about Google etc they do have records that can provide an audit trail of what they have been up to. Just look at the judge calling for all the YouTube access records.

BT/Webwise/Phorm/121Media on the other hand delete everything they have done as they go along..... no evidence for courts to see what they have been up to. Isn't this like a financial institution shredding all their documents as they go along?

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

This is a valid point and BT have been quick to jump on this indemnity with regards to the trials, when discussing it with ICO and HO. Claiming they can't contact people or provide information on their identity to any authority because they have no data.

Alexander Hanff

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

Ever noticed how BT do not know which IP addresses were used in the trial? - completely anonymous to BT and all their staff.

Phorm counted them all in, and out again, in the report on the 2006 trial success. They even counted the domains and individual http requests. No PII here, just a cookie with an UID - move along please.

The PII was being processed by a script hosted on the user's own computer ... so nothing to block https .... No wonder they had to rewrite the scripts.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

I consider this quite an important point that should be remembered, I will certainly try to do this in future.

---------- Post added at 07:54 ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 ----------

Agreed, BT/Webwise/Phorm/121Media state they delete any evidence while at the same time they ask us to trust them with our data and what they do with it. There should be accountability. They are affectively saying 'trust us' but based on evidence we have obtained about all those parties involved up to now, it is a bit rich to imply that we should do so.

---------- Post added at 08:07 ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 ----------

That could have been Phorm's/121Media's dream goal when they were playing around with their ContextPlus and Apropos rootkit. Frightening, but a good point.

Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 

the much talked about anti-phishing in webwise is about to take another one on the chin, due to the delays getting the trial out the natural course of upgrades has seen the Beta 2 of IE8 coming out

see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07..._enhancements/

to quote

***********
Microsoft has detailed a raft of security improvements due to appear in Internet Explorer 8. The second beta of Redmond's web browser will be packed full of features designed to thwart phishing and drive-by download attacks, Redmond explained on Wednesday.

***************
so what use will webwise anti phishing be now with this and FF3 out????

come on phorm give up the pretense that the anti phishing will be of use, fess up it is just a smoke screen to hook gullible punters who do not know what their system are already capable of, who you have not given the full facts to, to opt-in to your spyware

peter