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

No worries, I did wonder if it had anything to do with my username and swapping two of the letters!:)

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

Subliminalalalal messaging......

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

Does it matter who owns the bugging device? Our ISPs are only allowed to listen in on our data traffic for network routing purposes. If our ISP or Phorm wire-tap our data traffic for other reasons then isn't it interception as defined by RIPA?

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

You don't need to convince me of that I am in the process of writing a legal article about it.

Alexander Hanff

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

I think that it's the layer 7 DPI kit that Phorm are going to "gift" to the ISP to get around the "none of your personal data is transmitted outside the ISP's network" issue. Once "anonymised" by the "anonymiser" hardware (?also gifted to the ISP by Phorm, and therefore allegedly still "inside" the ISP's network), the profile is then passed outside the ISP's network to the Phorm-owned ad channel server box (which could still be located physically inside the ISP's data centre, but is considered to be outside the ISP's network because it belongs to a third party). Apparently this final relay of data does not include the customer's IP address, so Phorm can claim that they receive no PII about the customer.

None of the above alters the fact that the interception, even if it's done by the ISP, is being done for reasons other than essential maintenance of the network, so is illegal within the terms of RIPA without explicit consent of both parties to the communication.

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

Sorry, I am now sure that I've misunderstood your earlier post, although I am not perhaps bright enough to work it out.:(

I think I was trying to say that I believe Virgin Media would be responsible for the wire-tapping of my data, because they agreed to the installation of the Layer 7 equipment and the web faking and data anonymising computers that would be used for the interception and processing.

Edit: I see lucevans posted while I was still (de)composing:)

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

Yeah but my point was that in one of the PR "Questions and Answers" articles, Phorm state that the ISP have no access to the hardware, other than it physically being on their network. They have no access to the OS/other software running on the hardware.

Yes it is still interception.

Alexander Hanff

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

So it all boils down to trust and accountability when things go tits-up. I personally don't trust a private company with a history in malware production to process my private data with any integrity whatsoever, and quite apart from that, I'm infuriated by their assertion that they somehow have a right to do so simply because it will be anonymised. :mad:

Just because you think that you have the capability to handle something that belongs to someone else safely doesn't mean you therefore have the right to.

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

Which is something our present government has been so bad at.;) If they can't get it right...

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

I have added the following to the article based on my interpretation of the English version of the Computer Misuse Act 1990:

Alexander Hanff

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

Which makes it, in my professional opinion, something I would not be prepared to tolerate on any network for which I was responsible. It's an alien, unknown quantity. Unable to be checked, monitored, managed and reported on.

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

It seems this is trickling as high profile as slashdot now

-> http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/04/208225

It is not anything new to us but I think this classifies as prominient coverage for the IT sector if nothing else (not to urinate on El Reg of course ;)).

Interesting, there is a 'related' news item listed on there that says US ISP's have been using DPI to intercept users communications - within the numbers of 100,000 customers. BT have been slacking compared to that ;)

-> http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/05/1232206

If you find yourself really bored, Alexander it seems there is always the option of braodening your article on US law regarding data interception, seems there are a few folk over there that may have been violated too. Once you've gotten really fed up on concentrating on our side of the pond first though :) Had first read of your paper today, wanted to let it build before I sampled it - really impressed, well done. Wish I was as passionate about a subject when I wrote my dissertation now.

Get this man some more coffee!

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

I am about to start on Trespass to Chattels (Torts (Interefence with Goods) Act) hope to have that finished tonight and maybe even the Fraud Act 2006 tonight as well. In fact I will probably start on the Fraud Act 2006 first, since it follows on directly from the explanation of the Layer 7 technology.

Alexander Hanff

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

Another very short blog from the guardian today:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...nto_phorm.html

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

I see Phorm have spun Richard Clayton's latest report, you know the one where he states
You can see the Phorm spun post here: http://blog.phorm.com/?p=12

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

Interesting point in the comments there:

Conspiracy theories, doncha just love 'em... :D

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

Yes it's a bit cheeky that quote cropping. Also notice how they look forward to Richard posting more on his blog? Funny, kind of seemed they wanted the opposite regarding the comment they left on his blog about not publicising security concerns.

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

Woah. I have to admit that really does make me wonder now. The bbc have gone from almost ignoring the issue to then covering it but giving BT spokeswoman an easy ride. The more I learn about this the more I dislike it.

Having said that, I am really glad that Phorm did invite Dr Richard Clayton and Becky from ORG in so that we could finally get some of the answers to our questions on the technology although I note yet again nowhere is the issue of "research and debug logs" being stored for 14 days raised or explained. Debug logs dont worry me but that word "research" gives them a whole lot of scope.

Alexander if you do get to have a chat with Kent Ertugrul could you please raise this issue with him? I dont doubt the need for them to keep debug logs. I do, however, want to know precisely what data is stored in them and what research they are going to do with that data for the 14 days they store it.

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

OK the article is really coming along now, so far I have covered:

1. European Convention on Human Rights (1950)
2. Human Rights Act (1998)
3. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000)
4. Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003
5. Computer Misuse Act 1990 (both Scottish and English versions)
6. Fraud Act 2006

I still have to write about:

1. Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1997
2. Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
3. Data Protection Act 1998
4. The Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime

That will be the legal stuff finished I think which will then leave my conclusion. So far, I can only believe that the trials of 2006/2007 after careful analysis of UK Law were incredibly illegal, led to multiple criminal offences under multiple laws and leave BT open to litigation under Tort Law.

You can see the article so far on http://www.paladine.org.uk/phorm_paper.pdf

Alexander Hanff

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

WOW, that needs more than a simple link or people might forget it.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle3688387.ece
again, you might be needing to read SurlyBonds old CRA thread there.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...d-removal.html

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

Could you add this as a comment to the Guardian Blog at http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...nto_phorm.html

or let me know if you'd like me to add it? Thanks.

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

Don't remember seeing this previously, but there's an interesting piece over at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/03...ng-isps-honest

It mentions a number of software applications to monitor ISP behaviour that may be involved in profiling

This might be of use too http://www.eff.org/wp/detecting-packet-injection

Seems we have EFF Europe too: http://www.eff.org/issues/eff-europe

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

Done.

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

Thanks to Lucevans and Amateria. I have used your suggestions to enhance http://www.inphormationdesk.org by updating "What is Phorm?" and "What does it do?"

I've also reworded "Has It started yet?" to make it clearer, and revised unanswered question 7 on opt out.

If you have a moment, please review these changes.

Later this evening, I'll include acknowledgments and a site icon (thanks ManxMinx). Also I want to add a page giving ISP postal addresses to write to. For Virgin I have the complaints address and Sir Richard Branson's address. Can people suggest an operational postal address and an appropriate executive postal address for the other two ISPs?

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

it must have slipped right by you there ceedee, right there on the top wiki, they give the game away.

you always need to keep in mind all the CRA's customers/Clients are the other companies, NOT you or i as end users, we are just the sheeple that bug them with our DPA requests etc.

its no wonder they are not really interested in the ad space as their primary goal.

theres far more money in collecting the end users data directly from the ISP's and they know it, be sure they have learned from the surlyBonds thread i pointed to and they will be trying to fool you at every step, dont fall for it my friend.

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

Hi Portly,

I've just done some digging and have found this info on Charles Dunstone of TalkTalk

Charles Dunstone
Cheif Executive
1 portal Way
London
W3 6RS

Sources: http://www.the-scream.co.uk/forums/t21030.html
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?p=1589638

Hope this helps :)

EDIT: Richard Clayton has also updated his blog entry on the positive spin Phorm have put on his review of the system
http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

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

Even Better ;):tu:

Just one point about the update on question 7: "will all my web traffic still be intercepted by Phorm...." the language needs to be tightened up, because I've already heard Kent Erturgul deflect this particular point by saying that Phorm don't do the intercepting; your ISP does it, then passes the results on to Phorm. (He's the King of carefully-worded evasion!)
Maybe change it to: "Will all my web traffic still be intercepted by this technology...." ?


Have you read some of the names on the petition? (Sorry - bored- waiting for the kettle to boil). Apparently we have the support or Fox Mulder and Tony Blair, amongst others :nutter:

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

By the way, if anyone who reads my article works for a group like Privacy International, ORG etc. or are really wealthy; I would be happy to consider offers of funding for my LL.M ;)

[Edit]
The above does not extend to Phorm or other such organisations :)

[re-edit]
Actually all joking aside, it turns out that the LL.M I want to do might not be running in 2009/2010 due to lack of applicants, which is a shame. There is another LL.M at the same University which has a similar scope (although leans more on International Relations than European Law) so if all else fails I can do that, but now I have to seriously consider whether or not to try and get accepted for 2008/2009 in order to do the LL.M I was initially interested in. I honestly can't see how I could do that since the last couple of years have seriously depleted our household funds but I will see if it is possible.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 21:32 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------

Oooo maybe I could sell myself on eBay? Now there's an idea!

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

After all the help you have given us freely I wish there was someway to help you, do companies sponsor people to go through their higher education to ease the finacial burden. Anyone who has a company using Alexanders information to help with phorm can you get tax relief on helping someone further their education, is there a loop whole there to help.

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

Over in the VM newsgroups, the author of dephormation has posted about something similar to the above that he has developed.

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

he has a good point....

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle3688387.ece?
"
As Intercepting communications is illegal the bigger question is why is the ICS allowing BT to do yet another trial.

By letting BT test the system, the ICO are aiding and abeting a criminal act.

colin stone, manchester"

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

I've been thinking about the contractual angle:

1. the Virgin terms and conditions don't cover the planned disclosure of information to Phorm
2. Virgin would have to change those terms and conditions to allow for Phorm
3. at that point, even people who are locked into 12 month contracts could leave without penalty, and go to, say Tiscali (£20 for up to 8MB, phone rental and unlimited national and international calls - and Freeview is free)
4. Refusing to provide an internet service that is free from surveillance might be an unfair contract term in accordance with the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA). Particularly if no other ISP is available, or if the only other available ISPs also conduct surveillance. Furthermore, my credit card conditions of service forbid me to disclose my password to anyone. Virgin will have access to my password, whatever they say they are going to do with it. (I think I will write to my credit card and ask them for their views about these risks. I am also thinking of asking an insurance company to quote me for the cost of cover against the risk that someone at Virgin or Phorm uses my credit card details. The answers to the questions would be relevant to the court's consideration of the UCTA issues. Come to that, I should ask my bank if it is still safe to do internet banking.)

I am continuing to mull this over!

(The contract interpretation argument:

See clause G, "Your details and how we look after them". A lot of people think this allows Virgin to sell data to Phorm: I don't think so. You need to bear in mind the principles of contract interpretation used by the courts. Some of the main ones:

1. the contra preferentum rule. This means that the court will construe an ambiguous contract term against the party that wants to rely on it.
2. Words are to be given their normal and natural meaning
3. Any given contract clause is to be construed in the context of the contract as a whole.

If you look at clause G:

"We [not Phorm's customers, third party advertisers who have nothing to do with Virgin] may also, *subject to your consent*, use your personal information [there isn't a contractual definition of "personal information". The definition is not necessarily limited to the DPA meaning. The court will give the words their ordinary and natural meaning. Information about me, what I read, but etc., is "personal" within the normal meaning of the word.] to contact you with information about special offers and rewards. We and other Virgin companies (e.g. Virgin Atlantic) may also, *subject to your consent*, use your personal information to contact you with information about their products [i.e. the products of other Virgin companies, not those of Phorm's customers] and services including special offers from them, and we may disclose your personal information to other Virgin companies and sub-contractors and agents *for these purposes* [i.e. for the purposes of giving us information about the products and services of other Virgin comanies]. But don't worry, [condescending!] we won't share your details with companies outside the Virgin group for marketing purposes *without your consent*.[So disclosure to the subcontractors and agents must be with our consent. NB: Phorm is not a subcontractor or agent of Virgin - Phorm is a Virgin customer - it buys marketing data from Virgin. As the planned disclosure of our information is not to enable the provision of information about Virgin products and services, then disclosure to Phorm, with or without consent, it is not covered by this clause. Which brings us to consent: the repeated use of the word "consent" can only mean separate, express consent independent of the passive agreement to these terms and conditions. If consent meant - by signing these terms and conditions, you have consented - then why would this clause keep referring to consent? Consent clearly means something else - separate consent.]

If you have given us the consent referred to in paragraph G3 above, then from time to time, we *and other Virgin companies* [NB: not Phorm's customers] may contact you by mail, telephone, email, other electronic messaging services (such as text, voice, sound or image messages including using automated calling systems) or fax with information about Virgin products and services (including discounts and special offers). [NB: but not via advertisements from Phorm's customers on their (or perhaps their customers') websites.])

---------- Post added at 23:27 ---------- Previous post was at 23:23 ----------

I wonder if they really understand the interception angle: have they been distracted by the complexities of the personal data processing (although admittedly they go that equally wrong).

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

Quote:
sandinista


while i dont put that Conspiracy label on any of this,not even jokingly as it belittles the real seriousness of the subject matter.

it does yet again, come back to my view that 'people are the Company'
a person sits down and choses to instigate this practice or idea.

and he does seem to like this interception cashcow idea doesnt he, after all it gets installed in some form or other were ever he goes.

did anyone look at AOL for any of this type of interception?.....
are they still operating on the exC&W/exTW/exNTL/VM cable with that re-badged cable modem, and if so, will they also be effected by any Phorm DPI interception kit?.

lets not forget the mobile phorm story in all this ,here...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/12/mobile_phom/

"
Qualcomm buys into Phorm-alike firm

Data gathering on the hoof

By Bill Ray → More by this author
Published Wednesday 12th March 2008 13:14 GMT

The ad-fatigued may groan at the news that Qualcomm has splashed out $32m on data-gathering outfit Xiam. The Irish company specialises in analysing the habits of mobile phone users in order to target advertising at them, and has customers including Orange UK.

Targeted advertising is all the rage these days, but the ways in which the necessary data is gathered is still the subject of hot debate. Xiam makes great play of its ability to profile users just by watching what they do without requiring configuration, and Orange UK apparently "supplies Xiam with data including billing information, mobile browsing logs and purchase history".

Orange assured us that the "browsing logs" only refers to on-portal usage (within Orange World), and "billing information" relates to purchases made from the operator.

However, Portal Relevance Manager Jim Small is quoted as saying that 2008 will be the year when the service is "rolled out fully into all download content areas and beyond into browsing content in third-party off portal services".
We asked Orange if it was serious about this, but met with silence. ...."

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

This quote below comes from the forums I moderate i thought it relevante to copy over here.

The post can be seen here

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

Meh there is going to be a slight delay on getting the next section of the article finished because I did a stupid earlier tonight. Rule #1 never try and refill your radiator reservoir in the dark, now I have to drain my power steering fluid reservoir tomorrow :/

Alexander Hanff

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

But that is the return you get for signing up. And the discounts can easily be in the 5% range if you convert the vouchers for other things. It also tracks your shop spending to your Tesco home shopping account which is a convenience, pick something up in store and you can see what it is next time you do a home shop.
Thats the big thing with many of the comparisons used here. The whats in it for me is not there for Phorm, better targeted ads, whoop de doo, anti phishing, well IE7 does that for me.

Snooping on all my IP packets (and while at the moment they say they will drop https and non 80 traffic there is nothing to stop them changing those rules in the future).

---------- Post added at 21:48 ---------- Previous post was at 21:45 ----------

and how do the two most popular papers in the UK do that, by writing the paper with a reading age of 7.

---------- Post added at 21:57 ---------- Previous post was at 21:48 ----------

It is not that hard to get a legal opinion agreeing with you if you ask enough lawyers.

---------- Post added at 22:07 ---------- Previous post was at 21:57 ----------

Though they have linked to www.badphorm.co.uk from this new article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7331493.stm

---------- Post added at 22:20 ---------- Previous post was at 22:07 ----------

But both cover completely different things.
RIPA on how you get the data in the first place
DPA what you do with your data.

Now I do agree with Phorm that the data they have is anonymised blah, blah and most likely complies with DPA in those respects.

What is wrong is that they are taking it without explicit authorisation of both parties and even when you ask them to stop they still get a copy they just say they don't look at it. Data like that is like a car crash, you can't help but slow down and take a look. I work with people who are employed to surveil the company email traffic. They know what to look for and what not to look for or at and despite best efforts not to end up knowing peoples personal business they do because you open a mail that looks like it should be subject to review and find the content is not what is expected. Knowing people are pregnant before they announce it, or never do and never develop a bump, they have seen everything.

---------- Post added at 22:26 ---------- Previous post was at 22:20 ----------

No we have been led to believe that Phorm have gifted it to the ISP as such it is the ISPs.

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

in fact Badphorm is another campaigner's site, not my original website which is now at
http://www.inphormationdesk.org

I've updated and tidied up inphormationdesk into a more-or-less final structure now. Anyone know who to contact at the BBC to get them to link to it?

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

No, Phorm explicitly stated in one of their question and answer sessions that BT have zero access to any of the kit. They also stated that they themselves don't have remote access to the kit and then a few answers later revealed they do have remote access once they ask BT to let them into their network.

I will find the session later and cite it.

Alexander Hanff

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

Ok this is interesting. My third petition has finally been rejected. First reason is the one i expected; duplication. The second reason is quite fascinating. Let me quote:

* Outside the remit or powers of the Prime Minister and Government

Since when has it been outside the powers of the Prime Minister to ask the Crown Prosecution Service to examine an issue?

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

More importantly, since the head of the Home Office is part of his cabinet (at least that's my understanding correct me if I am wrong) how is it beyond the remit of the PM to question his cabinet members?

Alexander Hanff

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

Why does this response not come as a suprise, well there is a voting session come May what if members of the public told labour their feelings with a no vote to loabour. Help us or we will move your power from local authorities. They forget that they need our votes to be in power.

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

I see the PR robots have been booted up . Hello..

Anyway, I'd like to ask them a question...

What, in your opinion, gives you the moral right to look at what people are doing online and make money out of it?
Note that this is subtley different to the debate raging on whether the process is legal or not. I would contend that your system is morally bankrupt and indistinguishable from the actions of a hacker. How would Phorm defend this view? Maybe a quote from Kent would be useful?

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

Ken Macdonald is reported as being the Head of the Crown Prosecution Service and Director of Public Prosecutions by the Cabinet Office website.

The CPS website has a complaints page at http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/c...omplaints.html but no mention of where to contact Mr Macdonald.

El Reg continues the coverage of the BT & Phorm alliance at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/07/bt_phorm_ico/ including a mention of the Wikipedia pages about Phorm.

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

WEll seems VM are clutching at straws. As you all know I have moved to BT line ADSL is now active so at present have both. Pleased to say even though I have long line I am syncing at over 7meg. Now to my call from VM today just had the nice person from VM on asking why I was moving my phone and BB away, I mentioned phorm and was supprised by his reply. He said he knew nothing about it and asked where I got my information from I mentioned BBC etc and he still said he hadn't seen anything about it...

Told him to look in the news.virginmedia.com, cableforum.co.uk/board since it is plastered all over both his reply was to tell me he is an employee of VM and this is all news to him. :O where do we stand on this VM have their heads stuck firmly in the sand if they don't surfice soon they will die from lack of oxygen.

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

Phorm posted a rather patronising comment on Richard Clayton's blog today, explaining that a linkback to his report was not originally included in their own blog due to a "tech glitch".

Never heard anything so laughable in my life.

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

Which is very interesting. The latter part is appropriate you should not let someone through your firewall to access hardware within it without permission.

The former is most strange, to allow kit inside your network that you don't know or understand or have access to, wow, you could never get away with that kind of installation in any corporate environment I have worked in.

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

Hello again Phorm team!

Can I ask another few questions? (Please feel free to add it to the list of my other questions which you still haven't answered!)

In reading the technical writeup of your system (specifically points 20-24) it is obvious that any website could obtain my webwise UID as you forge the cookies it sends back to me and insert it into them. For example, by visiting a site that uses http and https, they'll be able to read it.

What is to stop other websites from using my webwise UID and profiling me?
What if these websites then share this data too, or publish it?
Did you know that some cookies might have personal data in them?

Bearing that in mind, do you still claim that your system 'creates a gold standard for user privacy' and 'fully protects user privacy'?

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

Same here. If I can't monitor it, report on it and manage it then it doesn't go on my network.

I've asked ConservativeHome if they would consider giving the Phorm/BT issue some coverage on their site.

Talking of blogs, Political Penguin has reached his conclusions about Phorm at http://www.politicalpenguin.org.uk/blog/p,304/ and he's no supporter of them either.

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

Apologies for this as its offtopic but I see bill gates has been involved in a late aprils fools joke claiming that windows 7 will be released within a year :rofl:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7334123.stm

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

I've just had an email from my MP which was just a forward of the email he got from BT. It contained a short PDF entitled 'BT and Phorm - 4 April 2008' here's the text;
It also has a picture of the house of parliament in the top right :confused:

This is only what I'd expect from BT (an attempt to obfuscate the truth where possible) but I want to know what my MP thinks - I shall reply...

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

Please put your MP right!

There's an HTML version of the letter I sent to MPs and peers at http://urltea.com/33rt if it's any help.

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

That made me laugh. I assume this research was the secret trails they conducted in 2006/2007 that noone knew about. *shrug*

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

Ok its been almost 3 weeks since I wrote to my MP and I have had no response whatsoever from him. Not even an aknowledgement of having received my letter. Time to draft a second letter to him this time asking what steps he intends to take to ensure that the home office investigate the criminal breaches of RIPA by BT and Phorm. Suggestions are of course welcome.

Edit: I have just seen the link to CaptJamieHunters letter and so will base my letter around his although naturally I will rewrite sections. We dont want to flood MPs with identical letters as that will just switch them off. Thanks for posting the letter online Jamie.

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

I've had another email from my MP (while I was doing the last post) and I'm not the only constituent to contact him. I didn't ask if I could post his reply but he's raised his concerns with the Minister and he's not convinced by their (BT & Phorm's I guess) claims regarding privacy :)

I've pointed him to http://www.inphormationdesk.org/ :D

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

Each letter I send is only based around that - it's tweaked depending on the person getting it, their interests and backgrounds. If you can aim the part about their data being intercepted at mentioning the people they are likely to know and deal with the impact should be better. It's there for people to use and spread the word.

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

Ok, someone mentioned in the comments on The Register Website that we could make a petition regarding RIPA on this site: http://www.petitiononline.com/

I would welcome input on the following which I am considering posting to that site:

"We, the hereby undersigned, petition the United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown to ask the Home Office to launch an investigation into British Telecom and Phorms criminal breach of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) during secret trials in 2006 and 2007.

BT have recently admitted to carrying out secret trials of Phorms technology in 2006 and 2007 without their users consent or permission. Many experts, including the Foundation for Information Policy Research and also the Open Rights Group, contend that these trials constituted illegal interception and as such were a criminal breach of RIPA.

We ask that the Prime Minister require the Home Office to launch an investigation into these breaches which constitute a large scale intrustion of online-privacy."

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

Might be worth pointing out that if public feel we are being let down by the government we will vote with our feet and vote for a party that will help protect us from this illegal activity.

---------- Post added at 17:07 ---------- Previous post was at 16:57 ----------

screenshots from the new windows 7 http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/win7_6519.asp

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

Bearing in mind this looks like their standard response to MP's queries, it might be worth picking it apart, line by line, to point out the spin.

An MP will take exception to a deliberately evasive reply, and lot's of MP's have probably had one.

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

Just remember that the petition will not get a response until AFTER it ends, so make the end date not too far in the future ;)

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

Well its getting a broader coverage now still tech press mainly.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/185310/f...-on-phorm.html

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15511

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communicatio...9381035,00.htm

http://www.telecoms.com/itmgcontent/...017520841.html

http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9386/Ph...rials+Continue

http://www.computing.co.uk/computing...bt-phorm-trial

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

;) you beat me to it, i was collating todays mentions links so far too.

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

http://www.datamonitor.com/industrie...&type=NewsWire

http://www.research-live.com/news_st...=y&newsid=4477

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articl...rm-privacy.htm

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

I've had the following reply from my MP:

That's looking positive then! Keep on sending those letters!

I've also had a personal reply from one of my MEP's office to say that my MEP will reply personally in due course.

I also sent an altered version of CaptJamieHunters letter to my local councillors (warning them of the danger of their web browsing being intercepted etc). No reply as yet.

Ali.

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

If Phorm is "spoofing" cookies into other sites domains and that site has a published cookie policy, where does that leave the site?

I hear from BBC radio that the Chinese Gov. is looking for a PR company to help spin them through the Tibet issues. I bet they end up with a UK one.:td:

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

Be quick

Submit a question to Gordon Brown

http://www.labour.org.uk/

I've asked "why are government departments ignoring British Telecom and Phorms criminal breach of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) during secret trials in 2006 and 2007."

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

Coo, thanks. I've asked why the Home Office and the Information Commissioner's Office have refused to investigate the illegal actions of BT and Phorm which shatter privacy legislation.

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

I have submitted a question with similar points also. Hopefully if enough people submit the question something will be done.

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

She's giving him a real grilling isn't she.;)

At least we will get the follow-up e-mail propaganda to respond to.

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

It's all a PR stunt, but it's worth a try :)

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

I asked what the governments views were on our internet being intercepted to force adverts onto us that I had already blocked on the internet and the possibility of this action being illegal?

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

Finished and I see we got no response. Big surprise there then:rolleyes:

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

We can always kick their butts at the local elections to make them take note..

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

Well, my resubmission of Alexander's original petition has been rejected as follows:
It does make me wonder what we pay them for?

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

"Why is your government ignoring the fact that the company known as Phorm is being allowed to install surveillance equipment in UK Internet Service Provider networks and monitor all their customers web activity, when this is clearly a gross invasion of privacy and a criminal offence under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ("RIPA")?"

Done.

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

before it finished i did as you about RIPA, but also asked why BT were working with unauthorised copyrighted users datastreams, and passing to their partners in crime, Phorm, before they had a legal data controller licence
“Date Registered: 30 January 2008"

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

New Petition please sign it:

http://www.petitiononline.com/BTRipa/petition.html

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

Signed

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

Also signed.

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

Reddit and Twittered

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

I decided that spending hours resubmitting petitions on the downing street website was a waste of time. May as well start the new petition on another site as was suggested in a comment on The Register so I decided what the hell and did it :D

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

Hmm... just noticed a new call on my landline... 08454 540000.

Looks to be a Virgin Media number. Wonder what they're calling about? If I've written to them (as I have) then surely a written response is called for. It's rather rude to not reply using the same method that the customer used to contact you.

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

Done.

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

i'm using M at the moment ;), and i started passing the petition round http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/...comment-163493

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

Done.

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

done also thought this would be worth a look http://www.ispreview.co.uk/talk/show...86&postcount=3

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

Thanks all. Keep up the good work getting the word out. Time for me to go to bed. I am back at work tomorrow so have to be up early in the morning.

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

This may not be at all relevant but according to the ICO website the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations seem to be fairly strict about direct marketing. Surely this would fall under that, as I understand the way Phorms system works its using targetted adverts based on your own browsing history. I admit I havent read the detailed guidance (IANAL and legalese doesnt half seem to be complex for the sake of being complex). To quote a part of their guidance:

Marketers cannot send, or instigate the sending of, unsolicited marketing material by electronic mail to an individual subscriber unless the subscriber has previously notified them that they consent, for the time being, to receiving such communications. There is an exception to this rule which has been widely referred to as the ‘soft opt-in‘ (Regulation 22(2) refers).

&

Oops - missed the last sentence:
It all seems to refer to opt-in - in that you have to give your consent.

I know it all refers to email but is it at all similar?

WinstonS

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

Submit your questions to the London Mayoral candidates for tomorrow nights Newsnight.

I suggest the Liberal candidate as being more likely to clobber HMG. Boris will probably just say "Gosh". It will probably help to put a London spin on it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/7331578.stm

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

yes winston its been pointed out here before, but its good to keep pointing it out for new readers and we are getting a lot here lately ;), you have it right they cant but they do.....

---------- Post added at 23:32 ---------- Previous post was at 23:30 ----------

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0...rasite-cookie/
"
April 7, 2008, 4:04 pm Phorm’s All-Seeing Parasite Cookie

By Saul Hansell

Cookies have gotten a bad rap.

They are a little bit of Internet technology that has been associated in some strands of popular discussion with the darkest strains of Big Brother online.

In fact, cookies do help some Internet companies track some information about users, but there have been significant limitations on what they could see.

One interesting aspect of the plans by Phorm, a company building an advertising targeting system, is that it has found a way to make cookies do what so many feared they could: track every page you visit on the Internet.....
....
If you follow all this, it raises troubling and heretofore unexplored questions about who has rights to do what with cookies. Is it acceptable for Phorm to ride, almost like a parasite, on a cookie set by another company without its permission?

Kent Ertugrul, Phorm’s chief executive, says it is acceptable, because the users are notified about Phorm’s system and given the opportunity to opt out, and it is their computer on which these cookies reside."

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

Just read that by Saul Hansell and came here to post it but you beat me to it popper :) Should keep an eye on what else they have to say, doesn't look like they were taken in by Kent.

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

Just a thought

Alexander, as you attempted to make a complaint about BT to the police, and they refused to accept the complaint.

Have you thought about raising the matter with the independant police complaints authority


http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/index/complai..._complaint.htm

What can I complain about?

The Police code of conduct sets out the standards police officers must follow. These include requirements to:

* Act with honesty and integrity
* Treat members of the public and their colleagues with respect
* Not abuse the extraordinary powers and authority police officers are granted
* Act in a manner that does not discredit or undermine public confidence in the police
service.

I would have though that you would have justification in making a complaint at least under point 4, and possibly 1 as well

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

We all know that this Phorm thing is all about money - they care about nothing else - and they're aiming to get it from the advertising industry which, according to this BBC article is growing fast on the web.

But I barely see an advert when I'm browsing and neither do most people I know (as I sort their browser for them ;)) but there must be a huge amount of web users who view these ads, mustn't there? But are they influenced by them to buy or is there success just measured by click throughs? And would bombarding someone with ads about things they have already looked at be the best thing anyway?

My view is that Internet advertising is overestimated and targeted ads may well prove to be worse than opportunistic ones. The only ads I see are the emails I get from on-line retailers that I've opted in to and the products I've been interested in from them have been ones I hadn't thought about.

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

the "Stealing Phorm's business model" newsgroup thread is interesting
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pi...il/084109.html
"Paul Barnfather ukcrypto at chiark.greenend.org.uk
Mon, 7 Apr 2008 14:36:47 +0100

• Previous message: Stealing Phorm's business model
• Next message: Stealing Phorm's business model
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> On 07 April 2008 12:59, Richard Clayton wrote:
> > This cookie can then be used in an access to the webwise.net domain in
> > order to fetch an advertisement, and analysing the nature of that
> > advertisement will permit the website to serve their own targeted-by-
> > behaviour advert.

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM, James Firth <james2@jfirth.net> wrote:
> Say I'm a website owner, and I have registered users' details, and I want to
> find out a bit more about these users. Next time they visit, I steal their
> Phorm UUID.

If the GUID is easily available then any website operator has access
to a very valuable data set: GUID + registration info (which may
include name, address, email, credit card, etc). This data can (and
presumably will) be sold on by unscrupulous operators.

Any site operator purchasing this data will be able to instantly
obtain personally identifiable data on every visitor by simply
recording the GUID.

Surely this would enable a privacy invasion of spectacular proportions?

---------- Post added at 04:42 ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 ----------

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pi...il/084087.html
"Peter Fairbrother wrote:
>>
>>
Come to think of it, it may be worse than that - the webwise ad server
will know the UUID, keywords and the user's IP - so there is zero
anonymity anyway.

Rereading Richard's summary, it seems that security-wise Phorm are
pretty complete clowns. They don't have a clue. there is no "impressive
new technology to protect privacy" - it's just another snake-oil sham.

I'd bet that a complete analysis of their method would reveal many more
security breaches - in fact I don't think it is even possible to do
targeted advertising based on web browsing with guaranteed anonymity.

I certainly couldn't do it, and I'm reasonably good in the field.

-- Peter Fairbrother
"

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

I'm astounded at this persons attitude: http://www.shinyshiny.tv/2008/04/phorm_whats_it.html

Unbelievable . . . :mad:

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

I'm new here. I've signed up specifically to vent my frustrations on this topic.

First of all, I'd like to point out a pretty big flaw in what was quoted above:
This is the sort of thing I expect from Google and Microsoft free web based email, yes, but when I pay for a service on a monthly basis I do not want to have what could be sensitive information sold to a 3rd party. In my opinion, and from what I see from other individuals opinions here, they have no right to do so.

I'm also surprised that nobody is questioning why this service will be monitored on a client side level and why it relies so heavily on cookies. Granted, we might have the "fuxk you" cookie present in our session, but who is to say that these people are listening to what we're telling them to do? This service and any other like it needs to be monitored on a network level, not some weak client side mechanism. Those that want in on the Webwise service and those that don't should be served their internet access from two completely different networks.

I've emailed Virgin Media's CEO, Nick Berkett, but I've yet to receive a reply.

Here's what I had to say:
As soon as I get anything back, including his encoded UTF-marketing-bullshiat, I'll post it here.

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

:welcome:31
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pi...il/084100.html
BTW Alexander, it seems the news threads above are finally leaning to the Injunction possibility if RIPA falls on death ears in govt....

i wonder if its werth joining the newsgroup to see if any lawyers will give real UK Tort clues and advice!.

they are hopeing on the likes of rich google to come save them though Doh!

btw , i skimed the EU papers again looking for that new updated
DATA PROTECTION directive but it doesnt seem to be out.

you might find the http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj...s/index_en.htm
18.02.2008 childrens personal data of use in your usual interests if not for this phorm thing....

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

I have a particular disdain and vitriol reserved for the phrase, "public relations," much the same as "estate agents" or "traffic wardens."
These are words usually uttered through clenched teeth or have their letters punched heavily on my keyboard.

However, in the interests of looking out for the interests of fellow human beings (much the same as Phorm's "anti-phishing service"), are the PR companies involved in this venture leaving themselves open to accusations along the lines of "Incitement to Commit Criminal Acts" when this dog of an idea finally falls foul of the law?

I'm no legal eagle, so I was wondering what was the extent of liability these companies are carrying.

---------- Post added at 08:43 ---------- Previous post was at 07:50 ----------

popper: the serving of ads to minors is an obvious worry and I can't see how Phorm can ignore the fact that they opening themselves up to all kinds of legal woes.
Their assertion that people use individual accounts on shared computers and that kids accounts could be opted-out is clearly erroneous. It only takes one accidental click by the child to opt themselves back in. This is then, by definition, not with informed consent making interception of subsequent traffic illegal.
However where, as in the case of our household, PC's are run on a single account with access open to all, Phorm have absolutely no way of knowing if the traffic is being generated by a minor. Subsequent serving of advertising to said minor is therefore subject to a far stricter set of rules. Has there been any comment from the ASA on this?
Is it something worth following?

A straw-pole of colleagues has shown that very few people operate their home PC's with individual accounts for individual family members. Yet again, planet Kent bears no relation to the real world.

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

I agree with day this pc has one login I use it my husband could use it my daughter does when she is home from Uni plus if my son and his gf visit they use it.

A lot of irrelivant adds there for me, it would be a waste of energy to login and out for every user if they are only looking at a few things so on a few mins search.

I have now moved to a phorm phree ISP but will continue the fight for all ISPs to be phorm phree.

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

Winston,

If you check out my article-in-progress I cover PECR quite extensively. You can find it here:

http://www.paladine.org.uk/phorm_paper.pdf

Alexander Hanff

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

Regarding the Mi-info Press release located at:"No Need for Bad-Phorm Approach to Online Advertising"

Sophie from Mi-info has asked me to pass on the following message:

We are genuine and we stand against spam. Our address is The Coach House, Prince Harry Road, Henley In Arden, Warwickshire, B95 5DD. Our telephone number is 01564 792861, feel free to give us a call- a human being will pick up the phone and we have no connection to BT other than internet provider like many others!

Ali.

(It should be noted that the only connection I have to Mi-info is that Sophie and I have been emailing each other regarding Phorm)

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

With regards the Phorm interview with Kent, I have decided not to accept this invitation due to the way they blatantly misquoted Dr Richard Clayton last weekend on their blog. I refuse to be a puppet in their PR campaign.

I think my efforts are best directed at finishing my article and fighting Phorm in the public domain. Incidentally I put in my application request for my Masters in Law (LL.M) yesterday and have decided from this point forward my life will be dedicated to fighting the dogmatic attack on society's fundamental rights to privacy. Thank you Phorm for helping to steer my career in a direction that will enable me to fight you and your ilk from the legal arena.

Alexander Hanff