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

Just as an aside to the Phorm debate this may come back to bite ISP's on both sides of the Atlantic. By testing and deploying Phorm ISP's are proving that given sufficient incentive they can indeed monitor and control the content of traffic on their networks. Something they had previously said couldn't be done. They can't possibly claim that they are "mere conduits" on the one hand then routinely intercept, profile and classify users on the other.

I imagine those who seek to remove "objectionable" content from the networks will not have missed the implications of universal profiling.

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

Nice one Alex, I look forward to the read!

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

Phorm PR arent showing as viewing the thread anymore. Did we frighten them off? :D

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

Hi all. I just joined. I'm a BT customer. My first post on this forum is a technical question:

Over on the BT forums they've issued a new FAQ.
http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/ann.jspa?annID=64
No 57 reads:
"Does Webwise runs its own Javascript software on the users' machines? (relates to a Phorm patent where it claims it can do this)
No, Webwise operates at the network level and will not download, install or run any software on users' machine."

However, at http://www.experts-exchange.com/Prog..._22012205.html
we see
"On a website I look after (http://www.bluesnights.co.uk/) I've noticed a strange piece of javascript that has embedded itself on the site after the closing html tags.
Eg: </html>
<script type="text/javascript">var PSpc="I.287303.1",PSsize="none";</script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://ntp.sysip.net/tag/2.js"></script>
How it got there, I've no idea. Can only think I've been "infected" via my Firefox browser when visiting Google and the like (who all seem to have the same script on their web pages when I viewed page "Source"!) and then inadvertently uploaded via my FTP when making site changes.
This doesn't show up on my computer as a virus/malware, etc.
Google reference to "sysip" is very sparse (seems to be a proxy) and I can only assume that the script is some sort of "spyware" or harvester?
Does anybody know what this is? And what does it do?
And how do I get rid of it - permanently!
Is their a counter script I can add to my web pages to stop these scripts "attaching" themselves incognito?
Can anybody help? Many thanks,
Richard"

If it was not on the user's machine, then where was it?
What do you think BT means by "at the network level"?

Another horror story with more examples of the Phorm/Webwise software injection HTML or javascript is at:
http://www.spikelab.org/blog/btProxyHorror.html

gnilddif

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

thankyou for all those people that have posted alot of information on this site its been an interesting read

i have also been in touch with a few forums about this phorm business myself and brought it to light with them about secureing there website against phorm

and past it around the joe public around the parents and schools but i can tell you now the schools system was shocked about this system and was doing enquires within there system and was thanked for the mention

has anybody found that channel 4 update yet where phorm was grilled alot more at the night news as i missed that myself

its looking more like phorm pr are unwilling to answer our ? anymore as they are seen viewing the site but are unwilling to answer the ? that have been put to them only giveing the usual drivel that is copy and pasted form site to site

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

No, we learn and adapt. We have inserted our malware beyond the reach of your virus checker in this incarnation.

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

Shocking...I've been searching up that code that appears while browsing and it was also causing my internet to run slow and increasing the cpu. I'm disgusted, I absolutely loathe BT with a passion and as soon as someone files a lawsuit I will be getting effin' BLOTTO.

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

Apologies if this is a repost, but when I asked VM exactly where in their small print I had authorised them to use my usage data as part of their revenue stream, they pointed me to:

Section 'G: Your details and how we look after them' of your terms and conditions which states:

"By having the services we provide installed in your home and/or by using them you are giving us your consent to use your personal information together with other information for the purposes of providing you with our services, service information and updates, administration, credit scoring, customer services, training, tracking use of our services (including processing call, usage, billing, viewing and interactive data), profiling your usage and purchasing preferences for so long as you are a customer and for as long as is necessary for these specified purposes after you terminate your services. We may occasionally use third parties to process your personal information in
the ways outlined above. These third parties are permitted to use the data only in accordance with our instructions."

Doesn't it seem from this that they've covered themselves and that we've all signed up to be Phormed?

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

Spot on. Phorm/121Media discovered that the marks were actually able to remove the last piece of scumware they tried to foist on them, and decided to use some people who could make it nigh impossible for victims to entirely get rid of it.

Shame people don't just want to accept the phinger of Phorm shoved phirmly up their phudge tunnel, isn't it PR Team? Wouldn't it be so much nicer if we all just didn't worry our pretty little heads about it and played the good little consumer and just coughed up money to the nice man who wasn't involved in nasty malware at all, no, it was for showing pictures of fluffy bunnies and kittens and nice things that you might like to buy and everyone who was infected with it was so pleased that they couldn't remove it even if they tried?

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

No because they are not permitted to violate criminal law in order to do any of that stuff, irrespective of whether they put them in the terms or not.

If your ISP included terms that they could come into your house and smash the place up (criminal damage) it does not mean they can do it, as it effects your statutory rights in an adverse way. And as we keep saying consent is required from -all parties- not just you.

Alexander Hanff

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

It doesn't say anything about being allowed to contravene the data protection act though.

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

On the face of it, possibly, although I'm not so sure.

It says they can use your personal information "for the purpose of... profiling your usage and purchasing prefences".

Where's the "in order to subsequently provide advertising"? I don't see it there. There's no mention of what purposes the "usage and purchasing preferences" are to be put to. From the wording, the profiling is an end in and of itself. If they want to then utilise this profiling for something i.e. giving us adverts, then I'd say that would require a further change.

If they try to cover it under "to provide our services", then I'd argue that I never signed up for Phorm as a "service". I signed up for internet access, cable TV and phone services. Had Phorm been part of the package when I signed my contract, I would not have signed the contract.

I don't see how they can claim it's a "service update" either, it's the addition of a completely new layer of malware alongside the services we all signed up for.

However, the above would need to be argued about by lawyers, and my interpretation even to me is a bit nitpicky. Remember though, that you can refuse the right to all kinds of processing and collection under DPA, and that this refusal _overrides_ their Terms and Conditions. At worst, it means everyone has to actually issue a DPA notice nullifying their right to use this information in this way: I think Captain Jamie (?) had a pretty good letter on that one, although I haven't gone back to look at it.

I'd also be interested to know how long this exact wording was inserted in the Ts&Cs.

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

I agree with previous posters that routine inspection of communications is the thin end of a wedge that makes even more malign forms of surveillance easier - both technically, because the systems are sitting there in the ISPs, and because there is a risk that people become desensitised to the violation of their privacy. It seems to me that here are no "safeguards" against this, other than to uphold our right to privacy as a matter of principle.

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

Now this is more like it! http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...4786614&EDATE=

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

I think they're doing daily recon of all the fora, tech and news sites that are actively following/discussing their master's plans, probably to compile a daily "sitrep" for Kent Ertugrul and his cronies. I wouldn't be surprised if their strategy planning sessions were beginning to revolve more and more around what's being said about them on the web and in the media.

---------- Post added at 14:01 ---------- Previous post was at 13:55 ----------

Looks like an online version of the Nectar Card scheme. Whilst I am opposed to customer profiling on principle and refuse to participate in it personally, if other individuals want to submit to it I respect their right to choose. The most important point of the above scheme is that it is opt-in only, and I assume that as such, the data of people who don't opt-in doesn't have any contact with the profiling process whatsoever.

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

I thought my ears were burning :) Slightly tweaked versions of the letter have gone off to the following:

Non Labour members of the Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport:

John Whittingdale MP: jwhittingdale.mp@tory.org.uk
Profile at http://biographies.parliament.uk/par...t.asp?id=25239

Nigel Evans MP: ribblevalley@tory.org (nigel@nigelmp.com bounced)
Profile at http://biographies.parliament.uk/par...t.asp?id=25719

Mr Evans is a member of a number of Parliamentary committees which may be very interested in this issue. Definitely worth contacting.

Phil Willis MP: willisp@parliament.uk
Profile at http://biographies.parliament.uk/par...t.asp?id=25250

Adam Price MP: pricea@parliament.uk
Profile at http://biographies.parliament.uk/par...t.asp?id=25332

Philip Davies: daviesp@parliament.uk
Profile at http://biographies.parliament.uk/par...t.asp?id=35440

The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee appears to have a lot of experience and potential interest in this issue.

hlscience@parliament.uk

The Earl of Northesk: northeskdjm@parliament.uk
Profile at: http://biographies.parliament.uk/par...t.asp?id=26583

Useful hints and tips for addressing peers of the realm (I love using old fashioned language. No, not *that* kind!!)
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/m...ct/address.cfm

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

Think someone mention "ironkey " here. Any way while I could get one at my local shop I am not really looking for a USB device. So the question I am asking is, can I get the software & put it on my PC?

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

OK I have finished my analysis of RIPA you can read the updated PDF at http://www.paladine.org.uk/phorm_paper.pdf

It is gonna be a long article by time it is finished, currently over 4000 words and I still haven't completed even 20% of the final article.

I would appreciate some feedback on the article so far if possible please.

Alexander Hanff

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

Good work. I myself used the writetothem website to contact the Earl of Northesk myself a few days ago to enquire whether he had yet had a response from the question he asked HMG regarding Phorm in the House of Lords on the 17th March. I have yet to hear back but I do recall from reading his question that he was due to receive an answer by the 31st March so I hope to hear something in due course. If I get a response I will of course let you all know.

Sadly, as of yet, I have yet to receive any response from either my MP, 5 out of the 7 MEPs I wrote to or even from Liberty.

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

Dam right the DPA is in place to protect our civil rights, something that phorm the BMI and government seem to happy to trample on. Protecting copyright and enforcing fair use, has to be achieved reasonably, otherwise the internet and everthing it stands for is lost to us forever.

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

Alexander, unfortunately the link does not seem to work.

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

Works for me...

Have you got noscript or some other blocking software running?

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

Damn you must have been quick, the link was incorrect for about 25 seconds before I noticed and edited the post to correct it lol.

Alexander Hanff

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

Got it ok here. *makes cup of tea and settles down to read*

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

Apologies if it has already been posted, but it is worth bearing in mind Art 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights:

"Article 8: Right to Respect for Private and Family Life

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

Liberty comments, on its website: Article 8 guarantees respect for four things: a person’s private life, family life, home and correspondence.

Although the Convention does not in itself give rise to legal rights, as I understand it the courts have to interpret legislation (such as RIPA) so as to be consistent with the Human Rights Act (which gives effect to the Convention). So the courts should not interpret RIPA in such a way as to permit surveillance of people's electronic correspondence (including web traffic - posting to this forum is surely correspondence).

But I'm going to look at Alexander's article now, before I display my ignorance of (this part of) the law further,

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

Hehehe you basically just covered the first section of the article lol.

Alexander Hanff

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

Nooo - not quick, just hadn't refreshed the page!;)

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

Just a quickie as I go - I'd amend "deliberately deceived" on page 4. It's perfectly possible that it's a case of left hand not knowing what the right is doing rather than a deliberate attempt to lie. From what I remember haven't they already stated that customer services didn't know about it? Personally I'd give them the benefit of the doubt over this one: having worked in tandem with a lot of large corporations, I'm firmly of the cock-up rather than conspiracy school.

Back to the paper...

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

Just a couple of small points Alexander, embedded links 11 and 17 (the FIPR ones) don't work, and you appear to have your spell check language set to US English.

As for the content, I'll leave it for more intelligent people than myself to comment!

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

I umm'd and arrr'd over that one myself. I decided to leave it as is simply because if it is a case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing, they have still indirectly deceived their customers because they have deliberately not told customer services. Customer services should have been informed and someone must have made a decision not to inform them.

I will change it though if people think it is the better option.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 14:55 ---------- Previous post was at 14:53 ----------

I don't have embedded links in my pdf reader so I am unable to test/fix that. Cut and Paste should work though.

Alexander Hanff

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

Hehehe you basically just covered the first section of the article lol.

So I did! I agree with the rest of the article, too!

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

How about "I contend that BT deliberately deceived"?

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

I think that "deceived" is fair enough, but I'd remove "deliberately", or replace it with "deliberately or inadvertently". Maybe something like "decieved, whether deliberately or inadvertently". I really think it's best not to put in anything that can't be really solidly backed up.

Sorry, back to reading.

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

Totally different. Going back to the post office analagy, the post office might write to you or discuss that you would need to become a commercial customer if you constantly recieve huge volumes of post to your address. They can do that by monitoring the number of letters (packets) and size and shape (contents of these packets). They still don't need to read them to come to that conclusion.

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

There is a lot more to come yet. The next section on Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations will be quite tricky because so far I haven't seen anyone but myself raise any issues under the regulations, so my analysis will be entirely my own. I covered the main points on this in one of my posts here yesterday so that should give some indication as to the sort of information that will appear in the article.

I am taking a break for now as I need a nap (been up all night again) but I will start on the next section when I get up this evening.

Please keep the comments coming, I know there were one or two minor typos which I have fixed in the local version but not uploaded yet, so don't worry about those.

My spell checker is being weird, I actually have it set to English (UK) but for some reason the dictionary is throwing Z instead of S in several words (errors in the dictionary it would seem, I will look into it later.) I will change them back to their correct English spelling before the article is complete.

Alexander Hanff

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

My opinion is that it should be left as it is Alexander for the reasons you stated. The decision was taken not to inform customer services about the trial and the end result in at least one case we know about was that one customer actually bought a new pc after customer services told him he had a dns hijacker. A clear case of deception by ommission, in my opinion.

See what others think also though.

EDIT I just wanted to say thanks for all the hard work you are putting into all this Alexander and I really like the paper so far.

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

OK changed to:

"This means that not only did BT PLC engage in secret trials without the consent of their customers but they also deceived their customers when concerns were raised by them (either deliberately or inadvertently)."

I have updated the version on the server too to reflect the changes.

Alexander Hanff

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

Thanks Alexander, I really think it's worth giving the PR teams as little foothold for dismissing what you're saying as possible. So stick as closely to known facts or published opinions as you possibly can, and don't let justifiable anger get in the way. Wow, now I feel like Yoda or Mr Miyagi or someone.

Small stylistic point, personally I'd not use words like "basically" (as in the bit about DPI on page 5). It doesn't add anything to the sentence and it's a bit conversational/informal. Also, readers can find it a little condescending.

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

Ahh I missed that one ;) fixed now. I went through it earlier and removed a bunch of "Clearly..." type comments for the same reason.

Alexander Hanff

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

Nice one - now go get some sleep!

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

PhormUKPRteam are back *waves*

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

Yeah I am going in about 10 minutes.

If anyone finds it is difficult to understand anywhere, please let me know. I am trying to write it as a formal article (as I would my academic coursework) but at the same time I want the general public to read it so I am trying very hard to explain technologies and issues in sufficient detail for a broad audience to understand. It is a difficult balance when you come from a technical background so I fully appreciate that I might get it wrong at times either by over explaining or not elaborating enough.

Alexander Hanff

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

Awwwww how sweet. They must have missed us. :LOL:

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

Think we've scared them oph again. Unless they've gone phor a phag break, phor reprogramming or phor a phar reaching reindoctrination programming phase :D

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

PhormUKPRteam, just to help, you could copy and paste this into your daily report to Kent.

The opposition continues to :-

a) Explore all legal avenues, and lobby public bodies and legislators, to apply the law.
b) Explore all ways to bring the issue to a wider public audience.
c) Continue to point out the damage being done to the BT and Virgin brands in particular, due to their continued association with Phorm.

They seem to be having success in all these areas.

You could then point out you need a bigger team and lots more money in order to stop the rot.

Glad to help. :angel:

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

I'm a bit reminded of the outcry against Microsoft's WGA. Everyone was very much 'up in arms' over this but in practice, it hasn't proved to affect people's lives. Can a parallel be drawn?

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

Spotted this in a comment from theregister website. Phorm look to be recruiting (or maybe one of the ISPs involved?) :

http://www.jobserve.com/E4ECDD80ACF7BD0A7.job

---------- Post added at 16:39 ---------- Previous post was at 16:19 ----------

Good question. For me the answer depends on whether we value our data protection and privacy rights. It depends whether we believe big business should be allowed to break criminal law without sanction or punishment and whether or not we are happy to sit back and do nothing in the face of such a threat to our values and rights.

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

An extract from the job advert;

"...ISP's are currently committing to an opportunity to derive online advertising revenues from customers visiting 3rd party Websites utilising anonymous information from their customers wider browsing behaviour. Advertising revenue is only derived from ads placed on our own portal and we do not monetise customers wider browsing activities.

The Project's primary objective is to deliver fully operationally supported online behaviour targeting technologies (Phorm) within the existing Network Architecture. This will enable us to derive incremental online advertising revenues. As a result of customers off portal browsing activities, serving them targeted ad's on third party Websites, based upon the ability to monitor online behaviours. Maximising performance of low value inventory on our portal.

Working with a company called Phorm an opportunity exists for us to derive significant incremental online advertising revenues as well as delivering the customer an anti phishing service.

Revenues are derived by:
The deployment of Servers into the network providing the ability to monitor customers online browsing behaviours on the wider Web and as a result of the technology and 'market place' Phorm provide serve them targeted ad's on third party Websites.
Maximising performance of low value inventory on the our portal, driving wholly incremental revenues..."

(Please note: this is NOT the entire article; there should be no copyright problem with quoting part of the page...)

Any talented people here? Fancy bringing down the system from within?:D

Since they're not prepared to tell us anything about the technical workings of this system, we'll have to find out for ourselves...

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

Damn, beaten to it again! I take my tea very seriously though, it has to be *just* right. The job description makes interesting reading. Here's an alternative translation.

Usual Project Manager sort of spec with:

"Strong personality that can take control and manage a very high profile project with high risk factors"

It's high profile because of the backlash and negative publicity we're getting you :) The risk factors are high because of potential legal action and regulatory investigations.

"Excellent communication skills"
"Focus and commitment to deliver a unique and controversial project"

aka thick skinned enough to take all the flak, capable of spinning to confuse the weak minded and being about as popular as Max Mosley is with the F1 constructors

"Track record of managing projects where benefits are likely to be in the range of £5-50m"

Are these actual proven claims? After all The Guardian rejected Phorm. With everything else going on making claims about benefits is rather brave.

"Proven record of managing high risk projects with complex delivery"

aka someone we can nail thus protecting our own management and reputation if this all goes titsup

Now there is a competitor which headlines that "No Need for Bad-Phorm Approach to Online Advertising."

*waves at PhormUKPRteam*

I've just got a read recipt from David Davis :)

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

If you do apply, they won't want a CV, just your 'hacker' nickname, darkstalker or cyberspy, for example.

They will know of you then by reputation. ;)

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

I don't know what to think about Phorm. I didn't object to WGA and haven't suffered any ill-effects so far from allowing it onto the system. I think that's my own practical yardstick. I'm not particularly worried by Internet privacy providing nothing affects everyday life, which it hasn't so far. This has been the attitude for around eight years now, so perhaps that's a reasonable trial.

Did anyone read the interview in The Register linked to in an earlier post? A reasonable case is put for not worrying about Phorm. It even seems to present some reasons why it might be good to accept it. I'm undecided.

Edit: Sorry, see link in post 2184.

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

The "it doesn't affect me" argument has an easy response:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . .
And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

Or for those who like Bill Hicks (who I'm sure would have some lovely words about this sort of scheme, after all he did tell anyone who worked in marketing or advertising that they were Satan's little helpers, the ruiner of all things good and should kill themselves)

"Go back to bed America, your goverment is in control. Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up, go back to bed America, here is American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their [ahem] skulls together and congratulate you on the living in the land of freedom. Here you go America - you are free to do what well tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!"

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

No disrespect intended Mart44, but this is exactly what they want you to think.

- from amateria's post (#2213);

"I agree with previous posters that routine inspection of communications is the thin end of a wedge that makes even more malign forms of surveillance easier - both technically, because the systems are sitting there in the ISPs, and because there is a risk that people become desensitised to the violation of their privacy. It seems to me that here are no "safeguards" against this, other than to uphold our right to privacy as a matter of principle."

(my bold emphasis added)

The abolition of individual privacy will only succeed if it's done incrementally, and that is precisely what's happening here.

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

Um - because WGA (an utterly different thing altogether) was OK, then a system that intercepts all your internet browsing with incredible potential for abuse should be fine? That's a bit like saying, I've been eating apples for some time now so I think smoking will do me no harm.

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

I think that's a little emotive. I thought the issue was targeted advertising rather than World domination in a physical sense. I'm not sure a parallel can be drawn with that.

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

Hi everyone
Hope you are all looking forward to the weekend - looks like a bit of rain.

Re: MI Info, we have to say we are a little confused here when it comes to your endorsement. If you take a look at the site and their terms and privacy policy you will see that Mi-Info collects and stores your personal data.

Not to mention the fact the release is misleading, suggesting (wrongly) that Phorm sells or passes on customer data.

Our ISP partners have not sold and will never sell your data. No data leaves the ISP network and no PII data is stored by Phorm's technology. We do not tie into the ISP's authentication server or any other information the ISP holds on their subscribers.

For the record, once again, we do not store personal data or any information on which sites a user has visited. Nor do we store any personally identifiable information such as IP addresses etc (unlike Mi-Info) and we do not pass on any information (unlike Mi-Info).

Unlike Mi-Info, Webwise users are anonymous to the system – the technology observes anonymous behaviours and draws a conclusion about the advertising category that's most relevant. All the data leading to that conclusion is then deleted by the time each page is loaded.

Webwise is far more secure simply because it does not store any data and therefore it cannot be lost. As always for more information, especially on the new levels of privacy and security that Webwise sets, go to http://www.webwise.com or http://www.phorm.com

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

Like Phorm, many thought it wasn't (or isn't).

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

As always, I can't, because I've blocked all connections to your domains (or the ones you're prepared to tell us about, at any rate.) Have a nice day. :dozey:

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

Indeed - that was exactly my point.

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

So by extension anything else people think may be bad will also not be bad?

Kind of a crying wolf logic.... there's probably a name for this logical fallacy, perhaps some philosophers on this board can name it. Interesting, though, to think that a lot of people out there might also draw this conclusion.

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

Kind of makes us sound like lab rats in a maze. But then I'm sure that's how Phorm sees us. Either that or cattle.

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

"I thought the issue was targeted advertising rather than World domination in a physical sense."

Matt44, the issue for me is of interception of private correspondence, which is in violation of human rights to privacy and in breach of statutory protections of privacy in electronic communications.

Targeted advertising and whether there is consent to it is not a trivial issue (it entails consequences such as the potential theft of finite, paid-for bandwidth and CPU cycles as well as the risk of the inclusion of inappropriate content), but it is a side-issue in comparison with these fundamental human rights.

---------- Post added at 17:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:27 ----------

Sorry, Mart44

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

Thanks, I won't have anything to do with that either. Is there anything else thats dodgy, out there, that you would like to warn us about? Your contacts could be very useful in this regard.

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

This issue isn't really targeted advertising per se. You can get that just by visiting a site with ads related to the site content. The crucial issue is opening the floodgates for ISPs (who should be neutral when it comes to carrying our data) to peruse all of our browsing habits and data for commercial purposes. Once we're happy to allow that, we may as well forget any rights to privacy, online and offline.

And before PhormPRBots say that no humans will look at the data, it's being intercepted and it's open to the potential of abuse, whatever they may say.

Besides, it's plain illegal, as well as rude, arrogant and intrusive.

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

Intercepting God's weather signals now as well?

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

Here, here! :clap:

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

It just depends on your point of view. I'm only saying that there could be a different one regarding Phorm. I try and look at all sides instead of taking a knee-jerk reaction. Nothing wrong with that is there?

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

Yeah, and injecting some rather nasty Javascript at the behest of the highest bidder, or so I hear :p:

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

Dear phorm pr team simple fact is look at the poll above 95% of users dont want your jank on the vm network simple fact and when vigin media starts to lose more customers than they take on i hope your whole dodgy enterprise folds and some pineapple loses loads of money well all be cheering in the street dont dress your spy/adaware up it jank always has been always will be.

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

:D
Far less technical. Looked out the window. Have a good weekend.

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

Your window? Or did you persuade someone else's landlord to let you in so you could peer out of their window?

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

This issue isn't really targeted advertising per se. You can get that just by visiting a site with ads related to the site content. The crucial issue is opening the floodgates for ISPs (who should be neutral when it comes to carrying our data) to peruse all of our browsing habits and data for commercial purposes. Once we're happy to allow that, we may as well forget any rights to privacy, online and offline.

And before PhormPRBots say that no humans will look at the data, it's being intercepted and it's open to the potential of abuse, whatever they may say.

Besides, it's plain illegal, as well as rude, arrogant and intrusive.[/QUOTE]

I agree. It is as reasonable for Virgin to start intercepting my telephone calls as it is for them to intercept my electronic communications, and just as illegal.

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

If you'd read the sheer quantity of debate that has gone on here since mid-February, you'd realise this isn't a knee-jerk reaction, but people are genuinely angry that this is being done to them without any apparent regard for their wishes. The opt-out doesn't appear to prevent interception, and that is what has got many people so exasperated.

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

That's interesting. You're the first person I've ever seen mention offline privacy (as in not 'The Internet'?). We divulge a great deal of information about ourselves to the government, councils banks, hospitals, doctors etc. These are people who know our names and where we live. The information is probably all on computers that talk to each other somewhere. Probably quite a bit known about us all in all. Yet we don't seem to worry about this as much as privacy on the Internet.

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

I doubt whether this is Phorm's PR team - winding up potential users is not usually part of a PR's brief.

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

:tu: Almost fell out of my chair laughing at that one.

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

I quite agree, the erosion of privacy has been accelerating and I've been trying not to worry about it too much - especially as there seems little one can do in the face of a zillion organisations requiring to have one's details on file. However, even if these organisations have a lot of data about us, they don't actually pick through our email (or snail-mail) or look over our shoulders as we surf. The Phorm issue has been my wake-up call, and also at last something we can do something about. It's utterly blatant and it's ubiquitous - a significant part of our lives is now conducted online, and at one stroke ISPs would like to just plug into it all and do whatever the heck it likes with our data using black boxes that no-one can adequately audit.

What I meant in my comment was that if we don't take a stand on this issue - which is finally something we can do something about - then what right do we have to complain about intrusions in other parts of our lives?

The fact that the company helping the ISPs with this plunder has such a dody past is kind of a bonus in terms of highlighting the utter unacceptability of what's proposed.

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

Excuse me! Did I say that I endorse MI Info? No, I did not. I pointed out that there is a competitor which claims that the intrusive and IMHO illegal approaches advocated by Phorm aren't needed. I approved nothing about the company, its approach nor its product.

Endorse: to approve openly <endorse an idea>; especially : to express support or approval of publicly and definitely <endorse a mayoral candidate> b: to recommend (as a product or service) usually for financial compensation <shoes endorsed by a pro basketball player>.

If I'm going to endorse anything I will clearly and explicitly say so. I don't need you to twist what I write here. Please don't insult my intelligence and that of the other CF members.

If I were to point out the existence of an extremist organisation then following your logic I am endorsing them. What patent garbage!

For the record I do endorse the following actions with regard to informing people and campaigning for action to be taken against BT and Phorm:

Writing to your ISP

Writing to your MP and MEP

Writing to your House Of Lords representative

Writing to every Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee member

Writing to every Commons Science & Technology Committee member

Writing to every House Of Lords Science & Technology Committee member

Writing to the Shadow Home Secretary, the Right Honourable David Davis MP

Writing to the Office of the Information Commissioner demanding to know why they have not initiated investigations into the two secret BT trials which are now public knowledge

Writing letters to local and national newspapers

Writing about this issue in your weblogs

Telling friends, neighbours, work colleagues

Telling your superiors at work

Telling people with influence. We all know people with influence. Your local priest, vicar, rabbi or other religious leader, community leaders, councillors, local businessmen.

Here is the e-mail I sent to the Earl Of Northesk. You will see that it has been tweaked slightly. Again, feel free to use this as a base to educate and inform people.

"Dear Lord Northesk,

I understand that you have responded positively to an acquaintance who is concerned about an internet privacy issue.

As a member of the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee I should like to bring to your attention a number of worrying recent developments in the field of internet privacy and of the failure of the Office of the Information Commissioner to investigate what appear to be two clear breaches of the Data Protection Act and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act by a major communications provider working with an advertising company.

You may already be aware that three major internet service providers (ISPs) have signed agreements with a company known as Phorm to sell to them the internet browsing data of their users as part of a "targeted advertising" scheme.

Computer news site The Register has uncovered a number of disturbing facts about Phorm including its previous involvement in spyware under a different name. Phorm prefer to spin this fact saying they were involved in adware. A cursory look at http://blogs.zdnet.com/Spyware/index.php?p=820,
http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/peopleonpage.shtml and http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/apropos.shtml suggests differently.

Phorm make a number of claims about their "product" being "a gold standard in user privacy" but despite being present on The Register, CableForum and a number of weblogs they have failed to openly and honestly answer detailed technical questions and concerns put in the public domain.

The technology which causes greatest concern is that of Deep Packet Inspection and its use by an advertising company. This unit is installed by Phorm - the ISP has no access to it so cannot test, check or verify anything about the unit - and it inspects every packet of data which passes through it.

Everyone who works at home, be they home workers, members of Parliament, judges, would find their data being subjected to the kind of inspection only intended for law enforcement activities and which would only ever be available to ajudge following due legal process but here will be available to a company with a very questionable history. Confidential Crown material worked on by yourself or your Right Honourable colleagues, critically confidential business, personal or even security information could well be tapped under such a scheme.

A simple analogy is your daily post. Imagine if every piece of your post was opened, read, its contents noted and then resealed before being given to you. But you don't know who the person reading your post is. You don't know where that information could reappear or how it could be used. You don't know how many confidences will be betrayed. Every piece of post. Letters from constituents, Parliamentary colleagues from both Houses, business colleagues, friends, family, others raising issues with you as I am.

That is what Phorm is about. Financial gain from your personal activities and information.

You will understand now why I refer to the growing belief that Phorm is illegal under RIPA. Government advisors The Foundation for Information Policy Research has published an open letter to Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, stating this belief. This letter is at http://www.fipr.org/080317icoletter.html

Soon after this open letter appeared The Guardian newspaper recently rejected Phorm, saying that their "decision was in no small part down to the conversations we had internally about how this product sits with the values of our company." As polite and as devastating put down as I have ever seen.

More recently The Register obtained proof that BT not only secretly tested this "product" in June 2007 but lied to cover up this fact. Customers were given various excuses for their concerns, but no customer was told the truth. The report is at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/17/bt_phorm_lies/

This issue took an even more serious turn when The Register revealed that it had seen documentary evidence confirming that "BT secretly intercepted and profiled the web browsing of 18,000 of its broadband customers in 2006 using advertising technology provided by 121Media, the alleged spyware company that changed its name to Phorm last year. BT Retail ran the "stealth" pilot without customer consent between 23 September and 6 October 2006."

Please read the full report at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...rm_2006_trial/

This in addition to the secret 2007 tests. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 makes intercepting internet traffic without a warrant or consent an offence. It seems to me that illegally intercepting 18,000 customers' internet traffic is in breach of that legislation. As was the first secret test. I contend that BT must also be in breach of the Data Protection Act as the data was collected without customers' consent and that it is also in breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (European Directive) Regulations 2003.

If I quote the full text of the relevant legislation this e-mail would be huge. I will, however, quote Article 15 of said Regulations, you will see that the Article clearly does not state "For targeting customers with adverts":

"Article 15

Application of certain provisions of Directive 95/46/EC

1. Member States may adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of the rights and obligations provided for in Article 5, Article 6, Article 8(1), (2), (3) and (4), and Article 9 of this Directive when such restriction constitutes a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure within a democratic society to safeguard national security (i.e. State security), defence, public security, and the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences or of unauthorised use of the electronic communication system, as referred to in Article 13(1) of Directive 95/46/EC.

To this end, Member States may, inter alia, adopt legislative measures providing for the retention of data for a limited period justified on the grounds laid down in this paragraph. All the measures referred to in this paragraph shall be in accordance with the general principles of Community law, including those referred to in Article 6(1) and (2) of the Treaty on European Union."

BT then claimed that there was nothing illegal about the trials but refused to answer a number of direct questions asked by The Register about Stratis Scleparis, the BT Retail CTO who became Phorm CTO after the first successful secret trial. BT preferred to hide behind a bland statement and refused to apologise to customers.

The report is at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...orm_interview/

A number of people have already complained to the ICO but had little back in response.

Today I and others became aware that despite these facts coming to light, the ICO have said that there is definitely no official investigation by ICO with regards to Phorm. Neither is there any investigation with regards to the BT secret trials of 2006 and 2007.

I am led to believe the ICO are claiming that RIPA falls under the remit of the Home Office. The ICO seem unwilling to accept there should be an investigation into the activities of BT and Phorm. I should also add that the ICO were also extremely reluctant to divulge this information to a colleague
and refused permission to quote them.

This cannot be acceptable from a public servant organisation.

This cannot be acceptable from the organisation created to "protect personal information" "provide information to individuals and organisations" and "take appropriate action when the law is broken."

If the ICO cannot or will not take responsibility for an investigation, why is this the case? Who has the legislative power to investigate this breach of 18,000 customers' privacy?

On its website the ICO claims that "We enforce the Data Protection Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations and the Environmental Information Regulations".

Why are the ICO flagrantly ignoring their obligation to enforce the Privacy and Electronic Communications (European Directive) Regulations 2003 with regards the BT secret trials?

Can the ICO publicly and satisfactorily explain how unlawful interception is not covered by their office when the very regulations they claim to enforce on their website specifically relate to interception?

A major telcommunications company in the UK has betrayed the trust placed in it by its users. Both BT and Phorm should surely be brought to book for this flagrant violation of privacy legislation. Is this really going to be allowed to pass by unchallenged?

One cannot help but wonder if the lack of action by the government and ICO is influenced in any way by the presence of former Labour minister Patricia Hewitt on the board of BT.

I am sure you appreciate that I and many others cannot understand why BT and Phorm are being allowed to breach internet users' privacy with complete disregard for their customers or the law.

Please take the ICO to task for its failure to fulfil its remit and protect customers' privacy and take appropriate action in the face of the law being broken.

Thank you for your time. I apologise for the length of this e-mail. You will see that it is an issue which can become very technical very quickly. Regardless of this I contend most strongly that laws have been broken and those responsible must be taken to task before more customers' privacy is lost.

If I may be of any further assistance to you please do not hesitate to get in touch."

THAT is what I endorse. I reject Phorm completely. I do not need it nor do I want it.

Is that clear enough?

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

But are not allowed to, and they don't, read our letters or listen to our telephone calls. I am concerned about the privacy of my letters, my telephone calls and my electronic communications. They are all subject to my human rights to privacy of correspondence and intercepting them is illegal.

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

I can't possibly read all the posts but it is obvious from reading a cross-section that the general feeling is indignation and anger. As I've said, I'm undecided. I may or may not act as a guinea-pig if and when the time comes.

I think it is true that as soon as Internet privacy is mentioned, there does seem to be a knee-jerk reaction. It immediately throws up a barrier against any other point of view. Minds are made up and closed and that's that I suppose. Nothing that Virgin, Phorm or anyone else says is likely to be given house-room.

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

Ok lets look at this from another angle for you then Mart. You give information to hospitals. Do they provide you a useful service? You provide infromation to councils. Do you get a useful service in return? Same with banks? Useful service, yes or no?

Now to Phorm and webwise. Anti-phishing that already exists in IE7, Firefox, various anti-virus/anti-spyware applications. Useful to you, yes or no? Then "more relevant adverts", useful to you yes or no?

Personally I see absolutely no value to me as an end-user of Phorms WebDumb and yet I see a huge cost in terms of my privacy rights and right not to have my communications intercepted without a warrant or due legal process.

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

The point is YOU decide whether you want to be a guinea-pig or not, the way the phorm system works, as we understand it noone will have a choice whether to have their internet traffic intercepted or not.

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

I think you underestimate the intelligence of people who have looked at this thing (in disbelief) and have been appalled by what they see. I normally don't react to Internet privacy stories. Neither does my wife. Yet when we see (for example) BT's arrogance and utter contempt for the opinion of their customer base, and the sheer pervasiveness of the system and the slimeballs they're happy to work with, then we're both hopping up and down in front of the TV seething and wondering why business ethics have gone right out of the window.

I don't believe this is your average internet privacy story, and that's why you've seen such a strong reaction from the public and press. It's breathtaking in its scope.

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

Hi PR Team,

Be confused no longer! Go and have a quick look in a dictionary, and look up the words "informed", "consent", and "opt-in" (if "opt-in" counts as one word). I know Kent Ertufhdisijf doesn't understand them as he's stated before that he doesn't see what the big deal is, but believe me the consent issue is part of what's getting people really wound up about the spyware your bosses are peddling.

Not that many people here would be rushing to sign up for mi-info or any other suchlike service, but as you can see from the survey and the sheer level of vitriol being spat at Phorm across the web, if people weren't being railroaded into the Phorm system then very few people would be signing up for it either.

Quite apart from the legal issues, people object to the extremely high-handed way they have been treated over this. Working for a PR company, I'm sure (and I hope for your sakes if you intend to carry on doing PR ;)) you can understand how miserably Phorm and the ISPs have handled it all. Have a look at labougies post here. Virgin are, in effect, saying that they have already got all the consent they need and there's nothing the customer can do about it, even though the customer was not aware of any intention to implement Phorm's system when they signed the contract. The customer feels powerless, duped and angry, and not without good reason.

Most people feel, quite rightly in my opinion, that the implementation of the Phorm system by their ISP involves a massive change in the relationship between the ISP and the customer, and legitimate concerns can and should not be brushed aside using Terms and Conditions which did not relate to Phorm's "service" when the customer signed up. Leaving aside whether VM's statement would stand up in court or not, surely you can see what a terrible piece of customer service that is from a PR point of view?

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

WGA was done very publicly and with detailed explanation of the reasons, what it does how it works and how for any legitimatly licenced person there will be no effect. Microsoft needed to do something when their software is so widespread and easy to copy.
Compare to how Sony installed rootkit software on peoples PCs when they played certain CDs to achieve the same objective of preventing copyright theft.
Here we have another ex-rootkit company trying to install software at our ISPs.

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

Hia! Long time no hear from. Great to see you back and posting, don't leave it so long next time eh?

Seeing as it was me that posted the link to http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...4786614&EDATE= I suppose I'd better answer your post.

Let me say first of all that I would never sign up to any advertisement scheme.

However, from reading the info at that link, I feel this scheme trumps your in a few ways.

Firstly, it is opt-in only.
Secondly, no-one hijacks your browsing to ask you if you want to opt out.
Thirdly, no-one hijacks your browsing, full stop. No interception, no scanning of webpages, no mirroring, no on the fly profiling.
Fourthly, as for the information profiled - whoever signs up to this scheme enters their own data into the profiler. They choose what to enter, and what not to enter. Which means . .
Fifthly, the user has complete control of what their advertising profile contains
Sixthly, to view the targeted adverts, they have to browse to a certain page, which means . . .
Seventhly, other users of the computer would not see the targeted ads during their browsing sessions (unless they knew exactly what page to go to).
Eighthly, Clicking on the targeted ads earns points which can be exchanged for shopping vouchers. What does Phorm give me in return for using their system? Nothing!

So, on the basis of what I have read so far about Mi Info, if I had to choose which technology to sign up to, Yours or Mi Info, I would choose Mi Info every time because 1. it gives ME control and 2. does not intercept, mirror, scan or otherwise profile my personal browsing.

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

Er, what s/he said.

:clap:

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

My weekend will be spent informing as many people as i can about you spyware system. Hope you get rained on .

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

You underestimate me if you think I underestimate the intelligence of people who have looked into this thing. I don't. However, surely it doesn't hurt to look at the other side of the wall does it? Doing this and then offering even a suggestion of going against popular opinion on a forum often isn't easy you know :)

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

Richard Clayton (FIPR) has just released his write up of Webwise/Phorm:

http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

Detailed technical:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/080404phorm.pdf

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

I've looked at what Phorm in its various guises has said, how it has answered questions (or not as the case may be) and how it has conducted itself.

My choice is not to have any of my information going anywhere near them. "Trust us, we've changed" doesn't work with me.

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

Did you read the interview in its entirety (see post 2184)? I don't think it will affect your feelings on the issue but in the interest of at least hearing the other side out maybe?

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

kt88man thanks for that link

That invitation has backfired on Phorm now hasn't it :D

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

Excellent, many thanks for those links. Been waiting for these. Now to go read what has been written . . .

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

:clap::clap:

That will do - another nail goes in.

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

It's a much better start to the weekend than PhormUKPRteam's weather report.

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

How about if this jank ever see's the light of day we start a run of leaving virgin media like all the northern rock people did see what happens then ;).

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

And go to BT who already have done the dirty...Sky which I would never do 'cos I hate Murdoch and all he stands for.Not a lot of choice left I'm afraid which I think they may be banking on.

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

I read, watched and listened to everything I could lay my hands on from Phorm during their initial PR offensive and was prepared to hear them out and consider calmly what they were saying about privacy and anonymity.
Having done that, and undertaken further research (including reading the patent application for the webwise technology) I have decided that I do not want this system anywhere near my data. It is true that I have a predisposition towards not giving any personal data to anyone unless I consider there to be a very good reason to do so, and I also have a dislike of advertising generally, but I did not dismiss the possibility of participating in this scheme until I felt that I had all the facts (or, at least, as many as were being made available) Why is that a knee-jerk reaction?

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

I've just had an email from VM about them scrapping the premium rate tech support.

So if you haven't already told them what you think of Phorm leave them some feedback, or you can send them the link to that new report by Richard Clayton :D