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

I provided the police with a very comprehensive case file yesterday which is being investigated.

A member of the press was there when I handed them the file and heard the officer state it would be handed to their specialist crime investigation unit, so whereas I have no reason to believe the police are not taking this serious, it would be a mistake for them to try and talk their way out of it.

Alexander Hanff

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

JUst pick this up via Badphorm Website
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7511671.stm

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

Yes in the same way all data on all ports goes through their L7 Switches, they just chose to pick out and analyse the http stream on port 80.

As it's competitor has publicly stated...

NebuAd can, but does not, monitor e-mail, instant messages or Internet phone calls, a spokeswoman said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...v=rss_business

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

Out of the Twilight.

A couple of questions related to the Phorm campaign if I may ...

I have scoured the press and media sources, but it appears that
they have shown little or no interest in the BT AGM meeting or
the protest. I'm therefore unable to gauge the level of protest.

Can someone please give me a reasonable estimate as to how many
protesters actually turned up ?

Secondly, to Alexander Hanff ...

Throughout your involvement in the anti-Phorm campaign, you have
repeatedly mentioned on various forums and your own website, that
you have no personal income yourself, and therefore would like
voluntary donations via Paypal to enable you to continue and
maintain your efforts.

As it has been the anti-Phorm campaigners who have been making
said donations, and, as you state, those donations have been/are
being used to finance your contribution to the campaign, I'm sure
you agree that you should be accountable to the contributers as to
how their donations have been used ?

I therefore do not consider it unreasonable to ask if you can ...

(a) state how much you have received in the way of donations toward
the campaign, and ..

(b) state how much of those donations you have actually used to finance
the campaign.

As you are obviously someone who is a great believer in accuracy, and
no doubt someone who pays due diligence with regard to donations and
expenditure, I'm sure these figures must be readily at hand to you.

I apologise if you have already published these figure elsewhere,
but unfortunately I have been unable to find them.

Regards,
D_A

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

The figures were posted on the NoDPI web site with regards to how much we needed to raise and what it would be spent on as part of the fund raising post.

There has also been some additional expenditure on domain names this week, other expenses related to the event include parking of £20 and petrol £80, extra insurance for the driver of £15 and a whole bunch of other things.

I don't really think this is the appropriate place to discuss this though, I can assure you that to date I am out of pocket from the campaign work I have engaged in over the past 5 months and that those expenses have been well in excess of £1000.

Alexander Hanff

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

And your reasons for wanting Mr Hanff to publicly post that information is?
sorry mate this is a debate about personal privacy.

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

Do we take it you were a contributer then? If not, what business is it of yours?

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

I think it is fair to say if I was in this to try and rip people off, I could just put ads on the nodpi website, it generates enough traffic to make that profitable. I do find the tone of your post a little offensive D_Advocate.

Alexander Hanff

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

Trying to sow the seeds of doubt, must be getting worried!

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

None of which answers my questions (a) or (b)

D_A

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

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

My reason is that Mr. Hanff is recieving and using public
funds (contributions).

Indeed it is about personal privacy, but doesn't that encompass accountability ? How many posts in this thread have been about BT's accountability ? .. or is it one rule for one and a different rule for others ?

D_A

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

[QUOTE=D_Advocate;34602336]My reason is that Mr. Hanff is recieving and using public
funds (contributions).

How many posts in this thread have been about BT's accountability ?

For that information, if you care to read through the entire thread, you will find out!

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

As I said, this is not the place to discuss it. Furthermore, I did answer your question as to how much of the donations has been spent on the campaign. Given that the level of donations has not covered the costs, it would be logical to conclude that all campaign donations have been used for the campaign.

I will not discuss this here further, if you would like to contribute the significant amounts of money it takes to register as a charity, I would then be officially accountable to you and be happy to provide all financial details.

Alexander Hanff

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

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

The Register is reporting that NebuAd 'American Phorm' is having a torrid time at Congress - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07...ebuad_hearing/ :)

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

Need a space before the smiley, as above

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

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

With due respect .Did any of those attending the BT AGM yesterday have any sort of discussion on see any evidence of the Pro Phorm support group ,indeed were they there.

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

No Phorm advocates were there.

Alexander Hanff

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

i have just finished two days of intensive training on a content filtering system that uses layer seven deep packet inspection technology to do content filtering, traffic shaping and firewalling.

it is scary just what we could see on the network, even down to the applications that where listening on what ports (but it did need a lightwieght agent on the pc to do that bit)

if phorm can do half of what this kit could do god help us

peter

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

A thought has occured to me (if this has been brought up before I must of missed it). If I recall correctly, BT said that THEY were developing a cookieless system (be it opt in or out). If that were the case, two points spring to mind.

1. If BT are redeveloping part of the Phorm technology, does that have any implications? It would no longer be solely Phorms technology.

2. Given the nature of the system using cookies/redirects, to move to a cookieless system would change the way it works quite considerably from what Dr Clayton documented (apart from the actual profiling process I would imagine). Who would be responsible for auditing that new system? Given that Phorm/BT got burnt quite badly by opening the system up publicly before, would they do it again?

Regards...

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

Does anybody have a date/time as to when the next BT trials
of Phorm are taking place (if indeed they are), and which geographical
area they will be targeting ?

D_A

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

In the HoL debate, Lord West of Spithead said:
This is what an official in the Home Office told me... I haven't circulated or uploaded this email yet... I was waiting for the final set of documents. Given they've punted that into the long grass here it is:

I think that speaks for itself really, in a confused sort of way. I can't make sense of "we did we". Did we or didn't we.

Perhaps they asked BT not to tell them, as if that would make it alright.

It seems strange that the Home Office would not expect to be informed that someone was conducting secret mass surveillance at the core of BT's network, twice, using Russian supplied systems, during a period of critical/severe security alert, as a courtesy perhaps if nothing else...

The Home Office still won't tell me when they first received enquiries, who the enquiries came from, or what the substance of those enquiries was.

See here for current thoughts and HO FoI releases.

Pete.

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

Going on the previous two trials why would the tell us!

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

Well done Rob, didnt see most of what transpired there distracted reading the above link.... but I can imagine. @ Moderators, zen time, say to the world in general 'speak to the hand, the delete buttons not listening' :)

Anyhooo, back on topic, why are these companies (Phorm/NebuAd) so keen to preserve no Opt-in, I believe its because through there own background/research/experience they know the buisiness model would not hold water if they had to rely on the customer trusting them, in which case they are just shooting themselves in the foot because the public wont accept being essentially forced into an option. Or are there other reasons the more internet savvy amongst us can highlight?
EDIT: And I know the underlying technology still ideally needs removed and preventing, but I am just curious about this bit

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

No this information has not been published anywhere.

Alexander Hanff

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

I believe they have promised 24 hours notice. Other than that, they are saying nowt.

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

It is blatantly obvious that an opt-in model would cripple their revenues. People just do not want this technology as the latest poll shows, so there is no reason to think they would opt-in to it. Opt-Out guarantees Phorm almost 90% of the entire broadband market here in the UK, Opt-In guarantees Phorm's failure.

Alexander Hanff

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

Apathy in all walks of life counts for a lot.

Opt Out, many just won't bother, or at least that will be the assumption, as it's something else to do.

Opt In, same argument applies.

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

usual thing of most people do not change from default settings, take wireless routers and the number of insecure ones around

thats the reason phorm want it opt out

peter

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

So there is no certainty that the trials will actually take place, and
statements pertaining to such are purely speculative ?

There may be some grounds for that speculation, considering that
BT have announced an intention to carry out the trials, but that
is by no means definitive considering the current climate.

D_A

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

Gavin Patterson said 'in a couple of weeks time' at the AGM, after I'd suggested it might launch in 24hrs (quoting recent hype from gullible newspapers).

Given they've been saying that since February, make of it what you will.

From the ICO documents released to me, it seems they are planning to target 10,000 users on the Kingston RAS, which apparently serves most of the south of England, and parts of Scotland (R Jones and his friends from BT forums might be able to confirm) before rolling out across the network.

Unless of course they are prudent enough to listen to advice from the Earl of Northesk.

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

Let us not forget there have been 4 polls now regarding this technology and all of them have been overwhelmingly anti-Webwise.

The poll here resulted in 95.5% rejection rate
The ISP Review Poll resulted in 56% of participants stating they would leave their ISP
The NoDPI Poll shows 89% of participants feel BT should be prosecuted for the covert trials.

Finally the poll which appeared yesterday (I forget the URL) showed 65% of people would leave their ISP.

BT -claim- their own poll goes against these figures, but since they refuse to make it available, we only have their word on that.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 21:10 ---------- Previous post was at 21:07 ----------

Actually no it is not speculation at all. BT have made dozens of press releases and stated in the AGM yesterday that they will be trialing this technology in the near future (normally the press releases say next couple of weeks). So we are not speculating, we are going on information directly from BT.

Alexander Hanff

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

Polls without published numbers of those polled are hardly relevant.
95.5% of 20 people (for example) can hardly be considered 'overwhelming'.

So, we can trust BT on this ? They always do what they say ? They always say what they are doing ?

D_A

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

If you actually bother to look at the polls you can see the numbers. The CableForum poll is at the top of every single page in this thread. The ISPr poll I posted is linked to directly from that post. The NoDPI poll is on every page of the NoDPI web site and I have now found the link to the other poll I referred to:

http://www.nma.co.uk/Articles/38754/...aten+ISPs.html

This poll was independent and was nothing to do with the Anti Phorm campaign.

The BT Poll consisted of 1400 people if memory serves, I am sure others have a link to that information they would be happy to share, I don't have it to hand.

As for the speculation comments. Speculation would be if we were to say BT are going to trial Phorm without any evidence to support it; this is clearly not the case, BT have insisted time and again to the press, the public, their shareholders, ICO and the Home Office that they are going to start a third trial in the near future. So it is not speculation, I fail to see which part of that you find difficult to understand.

Alexander Hanff

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

Try looking at the top of this page. I'm not aware, personally, that any of the polls quoted (except, of course, BT's) did not publish numbers polled.

It's also worth noting that the Downing Street petition is No 4 in terms of numbers. (15,000+, which is not in itself a big percentage of internet users, but it IS significant that it is the fourth most subscribed to petition.

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

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


I guess we have our answer then.

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

Yes I thought that was a very strange response, I am not sure if he thought it would help his case, if he did then I would suggest he needs better advisors.

Alexander Hanff

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

D_Advocate look at the poll at the top of this page, over a 1000 votes cast, independantly verified by CF and each user could only vote once, it was only closed when phorm PR where caught trying to abuse it and alter the result, and that fact can be confirmed by the moderators here

if you go to the locations of the other polls you will no doubt be able to verify the figures you require

peter

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

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

Reminds me of those organised crime hearings way back when. The answers to most of the questions involved the fifth amendment.

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

Not only do people do not want this technology, people appear to also not trust this technology. When people also find out that this technology is in the hands of ex spyware companies like Phorm (121Media) who have shown, cunning, deception and lots of smoke and mirrors historically in the past, some people seem to have a genuine mistrust.

Personally, when I read quoted statements that Phorm uses from other sources far more respected than I, sometimes I feel that Phorm's text could mislead the reader. Yes, the sources they quote and the words that are said are often factual, but not always the true context of what was said by the original writer comes across in the manner in which it is reported. I have read a damming report on Phorm and when I looked at the quotes picked out by Phorm from that same report, if I had not read the original report, I could have believed Phorm/Webwise was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

This to me is not a sign that a leopard has changed its spots. It makes me mistrust Phorm even more. Is this transparency?

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

Thanks for the information Dephormation.

I didn't realise it was also being trialled in Scotland. I look forward to receiving their invitation :)

I would ask Robert, but I don't think he's speaking to me at the moment (or at least not listening to me :rolleyes:)

D_A

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

Transparency, Honesty, Accountability and Trust is what IMO this campaign has been about.

As to 'one rule', it seems that in this country, there is a different rule for large corporations and their executives, they can carry out 'technical breaches' of the law with impunity.

If Phorm/ Webwise ever goes live on VM's network, my 'public funds' will be withdrawn from their income.

(second attempt)

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

OK - am working on the Entity-Relationship diagram for Phorm:

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/7690/phormumlnz2.jpg

I've only just begun, obviously. Please mention all and any relationships you can think of and I will include them. Thanks.

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

BT corporate values;

"Trustworthy - we do what we say we will"

So you can, errr, trust them to do it.

Though they didn't say what they were doing in 2006/7. So yes, in a "can't trust them as far as you can throw em" kind of way.

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

I still dont get how the charles stanley securites document says that all 3 isp's have undertaken extensive trials of phorm and financial times today also re-iterates this that all 3 isp's did extensive trials yet the ico dont know anything about ANY trials on any isp, got to be really laughable at best.

If people were to go and do a bit investigation somewhere i.e forums or isp reviews and look at user feedback and discussions about boosts in degredation on internet on said isp's during such times as contract changes in 2007 not really hard to see that something was indeed going down with all isp's in 2007, and as in the leaked bt 2006 document the 2007 trials were going to be all about invisibility (even with all the redirects) and nothing to do with serving ads ;).

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

Ian Livingston was appointed chief executive of BT Group on June 1st, 2008.

Previously, he was chief executive of BT Retail, a position he held from February 2005. (during both the 2006/7 trials)

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

@D_A
No-one seems to have welcomed you to the debate yet, an oversight I'm sure..

:welcome:

Just out of curiosity, based on the fairly agressive stance of your initial questioning, would you mind giving us your frank opinion on this subject?

If you read back a few pages you will find a post of mine that gives you some of the information you haven't had an answer to relating to how the protest went btw.

And again :welcome: :D

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

:welcome: to the Forum. I have to agree with you. Virgin Media will only have my continued funding (and I know of quite a few others who say similar) while they remain Phorm Free.

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

BT
Ben Verwaayen
Michael Rake
Ian Livingston
Gavin Patterson
Emma Sanderson
Patricia Hewitt

80/20 Thinking
Simon Davis
Gus Hosein
Earl of Northesk

Home Office
Simon Watkin
Andrew Knight

There are also some interesting relationships to consider on the VM side (lest we forget this is cable forum)...

Virgin
Steve Birch (joined NTL in January 2006, left his job and the UK unexpectedly August 2007)
Neil Berkett
Alex Brown (Internet Product Architect)

Government
Patricia Hewitt (BT Director, former Cabinet Minister)
Tony McNulty
John Hutton

Parliament
Don Foster
Daniel Kawczynski

Lords
Baroness Shriti Vedera
Earl of Northesk

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

The Charles Stanley document shouldn't be taken as a reliable source in any way. A nice combination of wild optimism and bad research. A very good example of why the stock market goes haywire periodically - can anyone spell sub-prime mortgage?

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

Very good question. If you can find out do tell us.

The trial date is one of the standing jokes over in BT Beta forums.

first of all it was announced - with specific dates, in March and April There were two or three stabs at this, including at least one official announcement that the trials had started - soon withdrawn and denied.

Then as April progressed the announcements/predictions got a lot more vague, we were hearing words like soon, in a few weeks, and even - very soon.

Then we started to hear about "before the end of..." or within three weeks from..." - and that kept us on tenterhooks till June or so.

Then they just gave up and said the trials were in hand, and would be in a few weeks. That's their current position. The only thing they have been specific about is that there will be 24 hours notice. They haven't said where the notice would be posted.

There are still BT phone support staff even now, saying the trials have already happened, others who have never heard of Webwise and know nothing about trials, and others who have the official hymn sheet and who say they will be "in a few weeks".

My prediction? (Remember you heard it from me) - that there will be an official BT press release, that customers and staff will NOT be told directly and that it will happen without most of us knowing till the net catches up with the press release. And actually I still have my doubts that they WILL do the trials - I can't believe they are that stupid - not with a police investigation under way. But maybe they are.

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

Thanks. Not sure whether to have two seperate entities for BT Group and BT Retail...

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

Thanks, I don't often post to forums, but am an avid lurker, first posts I made regarding Phorm are here - http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200...24203278.shtml

Still waiting for an answer to the points I raised, you'd think they could explain their system in under 6 months. :shocked: ;)

[Mod edit] Link corrected

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

First point - I'm not a techie so consider me ignorant on the details.

But I am a BT pedant (Emma Sanderson accuses me of having a voracious appetite for detail - an accusation I am secretly proud of, and reminded her of each time I sent her an email).

BT have said they are "working on" a cookie free solution and have not chosen to enlighten us any further.
I don't understand the technical issues but it seems like a major retrofit to the system, and rather makes a cookie based trial fairly pointless.

There has also been comment that this can only be done in certain ways, ONE of which MIGHT involve separating out customers (by IP address) into opted-IN and NOT opted-IN groups (I refuse to use terms like opted out) and routing them differently around or through the corrosive Phorm spykit depending on which group they were in.

In which case (and again I am in deep technical water over my pedantic head) - they would need
a) to get domestic customers on static IP addresses - at the moment only BT Business customers are on static IP addresses - and they aren't part of Webwise (so BT say - although Stephen Mainwaring might take issue with that!!).
b) if they want to play IP address hockey they (BT Retail) need access to bits of the infrastructure (some grey boxes I don't understand) that are legally and commercially under the control of BT Wholesale for competition regulatory reasons. This is not allowed.
c) IP addresses become part of the significant PII being processed?

Again - ignore me as unqualified on any of the technical assumptions, but believe me on what BT have "said". I'm clear on that.

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

The poll of visitors to ISPR got approx 1,100 votes, over 56% would leave their ISP if they adopted Phorm, 25% didn't know what Phorm is.

Still, it should hardly come as any surprise that this sort of thing is not popular with end users... Why else would their advertising engine (when they were 121media) appear in a root kit ( http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00001420.html ), other than as an attempt to prevent users detecting and removing the thing, and why else would they progress to installing their hardware inside ISP's networks where end-users and anti-malware programs can't remove the thing.

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

If the HO need some in-house remedial English classes my wife is available for £50/hour plus expenses, and a John Lewis shopping list for a London flat.

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

Bit tricky because you have different laws in Scotlandland needs whole new spin story and it has to be the same as told in Englandland

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

The business model and projected revenues are based on opt-out. Of course the best business model is 100% covert - but they got caught doing that several times already ;)

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

To quote Lord West of Spithead "Providers are finding it difficult to make the profit margins they want and wish to charge advertisers more."

Who is he talking about? ISPs are not content providers. Most websites are the advert for their own business and have no interest in advertising any other business on their site. Who are these content providers that exist to provide adverts? - I thought they were called search engines and directories.

Last time I looked, search engines and directories were already charging more than advertisers want to pay. Just because a few other sites want to get into the same market and are finding the competition a bit tough, suddenly the ISPs must come to their rescue by sharing data with ad networks?

What about the real world? The other 99%. What are the ISPs doing to ensure that they can earn some extra money out of all this wonderful new system of making everything open to everyone?

Where is the revenue increase for the 99% of the sites that don't live off advertising? Down the p(h)an, that's where.

It really reads as though Lord West of Spithead does not even know about the impact this will have on the no advertising commercial sites who are having their customer data provided to the competition without any thought of compensation.

Wake up !!

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

Two questions here - quite separate.

1 - have BT repeatedly stated their intention to do these trials? Yes. Repeatedly inaccurately, obstinately, pigheadedly - Yes. And now some very SENIOR people have said it at the AGM instead of just wheeling out Adam Liversage (Press Officer) or Emma Sanderson (Director, Value Added Services and TV star). So failure to do the trials is hugely embarrassing for them. In fact it is ALREADY hugely embarrassing because the trials are already nearly five months overdue.

2 - will the trials actually happen? Who can say? BT don't have a good record for public accountability, keeping their promises or telling the transparent honest accurate truth.

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

Is it possible that a trial in the legal court involving BT be the sooner of the two?

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

Emma Sanderson has said in emails to me - no we won't publish the research (but that doesn't mean we couldn't decide to do so in the future)

Gavin Patterson (I think it was him) said at the AGM yesterday, they have so far not published the research - but we might consider doing so.

Please DO publish it BT. We'd love to see it - questions, answers, and the numbers and methodology. No selective quoting. It's called "Premium Browsing: Research Findings" in case you've lost the file or the computers are down again.
(I think Premium Browsing is browsing with Phorm spying on you and exploiting the web sites you visit and making shedloads of money out of your private data exchanges - sounds like rubbish browsing to me, but I'm not in advertising)

---------- Post added at 23:12 ---------- Previous post was at 23:09 ----------

If you just scroll up about three or four inches, depending on monitor resolution, then you can see the absolute figures for that poll - it's the one Cableforum did themselves - 958 to 45, poll now closed.

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

The title seems apposite, we browse, BT get the Premium, another example of phormspeak.

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

Oh yes they DID say what they were doing ;) They clearly said they weren't trialling anything to do with dns.sysip.net and they weren't linked to 121Media/Phorm. Unfortunately they were not telling the truth at that time nd later on they said - oh yes - we WERE actually responsible for that dns.sysip.net thing, and yes - we are in a commercial relationship with Phorm/121Media.

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

opted in users will still need a cookie or they will not be able to identify the user on a pc to target the adverts efficiently,

there is a problem with this as BT do not own or run the kit dishing out IP addresses, BT Wholesale do and they are not allowed to co-operate with each other

nope, they cant give BTR customers static addresses as if the opt-in and then later choose NOT to opt-in they would need to change IP to bypass the profiler / DPI kit, so BT would need to operate 2 seperate DHCP pools, but there is another issue, all ISP's are running out of addresses so there will not be enough IP addresses to allow for two pools each capable of holding all customers in case all users either opt in or not

see above

any method of an identifier uniquely assigned to a person is defined under EU regs as PII, be it number, IP or name.
phorm say they do not collect IP's. this is partly to try and avoid the issue of PII and also they are of no use as BT use dynamic (changing) IP's , if they were to deploy this on BT business link that would be different as they all have static IP's

yep

peter

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

FT have corrected the statement about all 3 ISP's having done trials in their online version.

"Carphone Warehouse's Talk Talk and Virgin Media have also run trials."
now reads online
"Carphone Warehouse's Talk Talk and Virgin Media have also agreed to evaluate the service but are yet to run trials."

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

Lord West of Spithead:
The Home Office, BERR and the Information Commissioner were not aware of the two tests conducted by BT, which was not good.

Lord West of Spithead:
Internet service providers have access to such details, but they have to put safety measures in place; and that is what the ICO is meant to ensure happens

Two remarks taken from the HOL today ,loaded and aimed just one more step....:D

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

I would keep BT Group and BT Retail separate. BT Retail run the ISP and they are separate - because of competition rules and the "break up" of BT by the regulator.

It becomes significant when you start working out who controls which grey boxes and which wires - BT wholesale run the network infrastructure and BT Retail aren't supposed to have access to that any more than any other ISP.

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

Does anyone know of a Skype addon which can send and receive faxes from/to one of your Skype numbers?

I have found PLUSFax but they charge which seems a bit odd, one would assume that fax calls (so long as they are a standard number as in not mobile or premium rate) would fall under normal Skype coverage. For example, if I wished to send a fax to 020 8123 4567 that would be a number within the Skype free call range (I get unlimited national and international calls to landlines with Skype - 33 different countries apparantly), so I am not sure about the charge they are applying.

I have 3 Skype numbers as part of the International package I have subscribed to with Skype, it would be very useful to use one of them for sending and receiving faxes.

If a free tool does not exist, perhaps one of our talented programmers here would be prepared to develop one?

Alexander Hanff

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

Time for my bed, but a final reminder - anyone lurking here for the first time welcome and there's more to read here,
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34...post11849.html
which may point you in the right direction if you are looking for some more information to protect your privacy.

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

I had a discussion with someone very pro-phorm. He denied working for BT or Phorm so I guess a shareholder or maybe even PR. He reads this thread regularly so hello :waving:

If you aren't already, get involved in the debate, start posting.

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

No they havent R jones look

The group is one of three UK internet service providers which have conducted trials of technology developed by Phorm, an Aim-listed company, which tracks the web-surfing habits of its internet users to enable it to target advertising more tightly.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/34c59420-5...077b07658.html

stock exchange knows more about developments than this government, says a whole lot ;s.

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

Until the comments made by board directors came out of the AGM, I would have said to keep them separate, now I am not so sure. BT Group will be responsible for appointing the directors of BT Retail and will also be dictating the culture under which BTR operate.

It is much easier to keep them separate, and will not do any harm. Showing them as one may make for a more complicated diagram.

Don't forget, BT also have international ISP interests and those will not be under the control of BTR.

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

I've created two entities: One for BT Retail and one for BT Group plc.

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

sorry re read it it says "The group is one of three" ref to BT at the start BT been the one.

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

Something else for newcomers, and for regulars who haven't already noticed, head over to twit....

http://twit.tv/sn153

The interview with Alex is up.

Newcomers may also wish to listen to edition 151 (the last half explaining more about phorm technology will be more of interest)

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

Re-read it wildie the one (change the group for BT) is in the past tense it still says 3 conducted tech trials (So Does the charles stanley securities document back the claim up earlier) :p.

We all know the tech trials were on the networks but didnt serve ads in 2007 - also remember these tech trials would have been used for development of phorm kit mk3 2008 that dr clayton got to eyball, he even mentioned somewhere that he saw an older more horrific version of the phorm kit but didnt see it in action someone might remember where.

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

I think what has happened is that the article was originally wrong on both counts earlier -
a)the para about "three UK internet service providers which have conducted trials" and
B)when it named VM and CPW as having done trials.

Then I think the lawyers of VM and CPW got in touch so they had to alter the second para. But they left the first para because no one could action them on it as it wasn't naming anyone.

Someone on BT Beta forums also pointed out that the sentence "Critics have alleged that BT conducted trials without customers' consent in 2006-07." is also a bit economical with the truth, as it isn't an allegation but a FACT admitted eventually and reluctantly and publicly and on the record by an embarrassed BT.

Maybe people could use the "contact us" at the FT to ask who the "three" are who have supposedly conducted trials, if they aren't CPW and VM. Only leaves a very small sector of the market - because BT, VM and CPW are supposed to hoover up 70% of the broadband market between them.

I tried doing it myself this morning but the wretched contact form page reset and timed out after I had typed most of my letter so will try again later. Maybe that's part of the design of the page to discourage complaints... Did it a second time too. What a waste of time. It loses everythng you write!

As to the "motives" for that - I couldn't possibly comment. But well spotted.

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

Do a search for my name on here cable forum someone have a look at some of my comments and others from last year especialy note comments of since the name change was a great deal of similar to me posts in the time i came to cable forum to look for answers of how this happened overnight to most people.
yes the name change to virgin media the very same name change that changed the T&C's of vm to include the word PROFILING and that they could profile you (Only kit i know that profiles is phorms).
http://www.broadbandgenie.co.uk/blog...eviews-please/
check out some the users comments there about march and after and ignore the non broadband ones.

All of this stuff didnt click into place for me untill i seen the channel 4 steven mainwairing interview this year and that guy was having more or less exact same problems as me added with reading dr claytons report and how phorms kit would affect a user it was all too very similar was like reading wow thats what happened to me last year.

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

@ r jones, type into notepad then cut n paste into feedback form when you are ready.

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

Yes thanks. I'll be doing that next time I try!!!

Update - made it!

"Re the article "BT to begin further trials of ad technology" - By Philip Stafford.
Published: July 17 2008 03:37 | Last updated: July 17 2008 03:37

I see that you have already corrected in the online article, a factual error regarding the claim that Virgin Media and CarphoneWarehouse/TalkTalk have trialled Phorm. Unfortunately there remain two other paragraphs with what appear to be factual inaccuracies.

Firstly, you state that, "The group is one of three UK internet service providers which have conducted trials of technology developed by Phorm, an Aim-listed company". I am well informed on this subject, and I am not aware of any other UK ISP outside of BT Retail, who have trialled this technology. Are you sure you can substantiate this statement? You have already admitted that neither VM nor CPW were responsible for these trials, so who did you have in mind?

Secondly, you state tht "Critics have alleged that BT conducted trials without customers’ consent in 2006-07." Actually the conduct of trials without consent is not just an allegation by critics. BT have fully admitted that they did indeed conduct covert trials in 2006 and 2007 and have also admitted, on the record, in documents from the UK ICO, that are published on the web as a result of an FOI process, that these trials were without the consent of their customers. This is not an allegation, it is a matter of fact.

Articles such as this have a direct effect on the share price of Phorm. The last time it rose substantially was the result of announcements about trials. Unsubstantiated rumours about trials in the press, can adversely affect the fortunes of investors. Given that FT is alleged to have links with Phorm through partnership in the Open Internet Exchange, it is incumbent on FT journalists to be very sure that the content of stories on this company are edited to the highest standards of accuracy or you may expose yourself to Regulator scrutiny.

Any reply to this correspondence will be published on the web unless you indicate to the contrary in which case your wishes will be respected.

Thank you and best wishes."

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

@R jones

Very well written. An article in the FT can definitely have an effect on the share price so it is important that this is corrected.

I would add one thing. Shouldn't the paper declare the potential conflict of interest? What do others think?

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

From the Lords questions session and Baroness Miller's questions in particular,
http://www.publications.parliament.u...ldtoday/02.htm

This was a Home Office Q&A session and involved Baroness Miller - fresh from her appearance at the demo and full of good info from the campaign to counter the Phorm PR.

Internet Privacy
11.15 am
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer asked Her Majesty’s Government:

What guidance they have issued to internet service providers on when and how they can intercept their customers’ website use; and what information they have made available to the public about the privacy issues involved.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord West of Spithead): My Lords, the Home Office provides guidance about lawful interception conducted under warrant for law-enforcement purposes. This is separate from advice provided by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform on the relevant business facing legislation. ISPs may, with the consent of the consumer, use information about consumers’ internet use for the provision of value-added services. The Information Commissioner provides information to the public on privacy issues.

So - another acronym to add to the glossary.
BERR- Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform

Anyone been in touch with them? Letters, references, statements from ministers etc.?

If it's their job to advise business about regulation compliance etc. maybe we need to do some FOI to that department to find out if they have been in touch with Phorm/BT and when.
Aim - to reduce wriggle room. If BT/Phorm talked neither to Home Office NOR BERR prior to trials then any claim to due diligence looks increasingly weak.

Also - if they have talked to BERR it would be good to know what advice they were given.

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

I wrote to Alistair Darling, my MP - and he contacted BERR, namely John Hutton MP.

I will note that the response from Mr Hutton is extremely empty, and appears to contain alot of Phorm PR. Additionally, he sent me the ICO Website Article (which I have viewed so many time already).

Quote - para 2 from the letter:

As you may be aware, some Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have announced plans to track Internet web activity using Phorm's Webwise and Open Internet Exchange (OIX) products. Many web pages, including for example search engine results pages, include advertising which may or may not be of interest to the customer. Phorm enables the ISP to replace these advertisements with others that are relevant to the customer's recent web browsing. This potentially means less irrelevant advertisements for the user and better targeting of their advertisements for the advertgisers, for which they would pay the ISP.

You should note in addition to Mr Hutton drafting this letter to Mr Darling using the Phorm PR as a reference; Mr Hutton also appears to have a few of the facts incorrect.

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

Well done to Radio 4 for including much of the sound track from this debate in their parliament report this morning. It was given the prime 8:55 slot.

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer is an amazing speaker. The written words did not give credit to the strength and depth of her presentation. If she had made her short speech to the BT AGM they would not have dared summarise the words as being some questions.

Lord Roberts of Llandudno was also given air time this morning as part of the short sound extract. His mention of "and the use of this technology, especially by Virgin Media, to write to 800 customers warning them about this downloading" - does anyone know what he is talking about? I suspect it is to do with the video and music file sharing. If so, it does show that there is a great deal of misunderstanding about the 2 different methods of detecting.

However, it does show how easy it is for a script which is sitting somewhere other than within the ISP to also capture a lot of data about what people are doing on the internet. If people feel that a script 'in the wild' is damaging to their privacy, once they understand what DPI is capable of doing .... coupled with misunderstanding .... the thought does not bare thinking about.

Just look at how excited people are getting at the tracking now being done by scripts hosted by search engines. Those in the know have been talking about these scripts and privacy invasion for 2 - 3 or more years and, until now, very few people have been listening. The free analytics have been seen as an essential tool for sites that have poor hosting that does not provide access to logs. Even commercial sites are happy to host this script and give away all their visitor data - they even host an https version on the login and shopping cart pages.

No wonder so many people feel that websites will not be an issue when it comes to DPI interception.

The problem seems to be that there is a whole generation of web developers that know no more than that there is a free analytics script available that they can host i t on a website and then charge their client a fortune for ever month when they print off a few pages of a report. I just feel so sorry for the clients that are paying to give away their commercial secrets.

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

Okay - that's helpful.

I have a bit of jargon of my own now - I think we can classify these key people as either

UNinphormed -average member of public who simply hasn't heard of Phorm
DEphormed - someone who has chatted to Kent or read the Phorm PR
or
REphormed - someone who has read the information we can give them

We have seen some really encouraging signs of key public figures being REphormed. I think Baroness Miller is a classic example - look at her performance in the Lords just after the demo. Her questions were spot on and so useful.

When a DEphormed figure makes a public statement (I would classify John Hutton's reply as DEphormed) then we need to be nice to them and REphorm them. They may then be very useful to us. Like all those shareholders that got REphormed on Wednesday. Well done again everyone.

further comment:
The question from Lord Northesk that Lord West of Spithead (HO) didn't answer at all in that session, was the one asking how/why the HO correspondence about Phorm got onto cryptome website. "My Lords, can the Minister explain how the Home Office advice to Phorm found its way onto the cryptome.org website?"
totally ignored!
Always interested in the questions that didn't get answered!

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

I got virtually the same response from my MP Paul Clark .. although to be fair he did seem genuinely surprised in his first e-mail back to me ..

Enclosed was a letter from Shriti Vadera at BERR which is seems to be word-for-word as yours, and also includes the ICO website article!

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

Just looking at the traceroutes in the posts in the http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12...l#post34425758 thread.

Do you always get bounced around so many ntl nodes before your traffic gets out? How do those old traces compare with what you are seeing today? With my broadband supplier I go through 2 of their nodes (the one that picks me up and the one that does the DNS to route me to the destination) and then straight to the host of the site I am tracing to. My LAN and the destination host bounce me around more than my ISP.

---------- Post added at 12:09 ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 ----------

The first response I received from my MP included the BERR response that is dated 10 June 2008 - they (BERR) now have a database of who contacted their MP and sent an identical letter to everyone.

The gist of the letter is that the ICO has everything in hand and that there is no consideration for anything other than DPA and monitoring (not interception?) for advert delivery. The interception of all the other browsing done by the ISP customer is excluded from discussion.

To quote from a later paragraph from that quoted above:
"... Both the ICO and I [Shriti Vadera] have discussed with BT their plans to run a trial involving around 10,000 broadband users, and the company has confirmed their decision that customers' web browsing will only be monitored for subsequent delivery of advertisements if they decide to opt-in to the trial. BT have also told us that the system will not store personally identifiable information, URLs, or IP addresses nor retain browsing histories, and that search information will be deleted almost immediately and will not be retrievable later. The ICO will maintain close contact with Phorm and BT throughout the trial. Similarly any ISP putting Phorm into commercial use is going to need to deploy similar safeguards to satisfy the ICO."

Not the careful wording - browsing is only being monitored so there is no interception taking place, move along please.

I am waiting for a reply to the response I sent to my MP - mainly asking about RIPA and Copyright Designs and Patents Act. All of which had been in earlier correspondence but completely ignored by the responses received.

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

one thinks some people are confusing dpi with p2p monitoring, they really need to understand that one is done outside of the isp using the p2p networks with spies on it the other is dpi which spies on every one using the isp for nothing more than data pimping and stupid adverts that everyone blocks stops and ignores.

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

Well done! So the BERR are DEphormed but need REphorming. The flow-chart is:

UNinphormed - DEphormed - INphormed- REphormed.

They have taken the Phorm spin on board, and don't have the info they need to make it clear that Phorm are misleading them.

A cup of Clayton, a bottle of Bohm and a handful of Hanff should help the medicine go down. And maybe a magnum of Miller might help too.

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

I read that as if you dont opt in they they only monitor your browsing so those not opt`in are still going through the dpi kit, that`s how i read it.

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

Exactly - as always- the key is in recognising what they DONT say. And in your quote: -

They DONT say that they don't intercept the non-opted in customer.
They DONT say that they don't look at the data stream of the non-opted in customer.
They DONT say that they don't divert/redirect (at all) the data stream of the non opted-in customer.

If they could say that, they would. But they don't say it. Conclusion obvious. And the network diagrams published so far, with BT's name on them, back this up.

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

"Lord Roberts of Llandudno was also given air time this morning as part of the short sound extract. His mention of "and the use of this technology, especially by Virgin Media, to write to 800 customers warning them about this downloading" - does anyone know what he is talking about? I suspect it is to do with the video and music file sharing. If so, it does show that there is a great deal of misunderstanding about the 2 different methods of detecting."

Madslug, yes you are correct, these letters are ref. the downloading of "illegal" music. I mentioned in a post a long time ago about a case that is still ongoing about people that downloaded a game called "Pinball" or something like that. Some ISP's have given the names and addresses of these people and they are being threatened by a law firm called Davenport Lyons to cough up several hundred pounds or be taken to court.

Just seen this, ZDNet pictures and article of the Phorm protest at the Barbican.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1...9448963,00.htm

Dave.

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

Well i for one dont give a hoot about illegal file shares and their issues with the law they break, it has nothing to do with dpi.
so the trials are going to be opt in but those that do not opt in are still in cos we have not real choice as they still pass through the dpi kit which is still wrong wrong and err wrong.

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

How do you monitor something without intercepting it?

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

Hi, here is an interview with Phorm's Nick Barnett -

http://www.netimperative.com/news/20...arnett-phorm-1

Dave.

Not sure if this has been posted before -

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/news/EkEyklEyuZDnrsvyex.html

Linked from here -

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3...onnection.html

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

same thing just different wording and more indirect that direct I had thought

---------- Post added at 14:06 ---------- Previous post was at 14:02 ----------

like the way he says you can switch it off as well as on, that to me means on by default and opt`ed in in the first instance, once again they fail to see it must be off by default first. or am i not understanding that in its contexts?