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

Here's what i think.

Let VM offer this as a OPT IN system. Those that OPT IN have a reduction in the cost of there service. Those of us that value our privacy OPT OUT ans continue to pay what we are paying now. Those of use that OPT OUT should be given a guarantee that our data will NOT be sold to anyone at ALL.

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

OK, here's my take on the situation. Apologies if this is wrong (particularly on the legal side - I am not a lawyer) as it is quite difficult to sort actual facts from panic..

Virgin and Talk Talk plan to trial this system.

BT have already trialled this system, yet deny they have. All three currently plan to introduce it.

The system itself, put basically, monitors people's browsing habits, and serves "relevant" ads to them based upon their browsing habits.

The system appears to require that users opt out. It is unknown if the system supports opt in, but the stuff posted by The Register (originally sourced from a BT presentation) appears to suggest it does.

The system requires a cookie be sent to prevent the adverts being sent. It seems the system can be configured either to terminate monitoring, or carry on and just stop serving ads.

The system replaces ads in websites that have opted in to the scheme.

Not entirely sure where the profile Phorm generates is stored. Some reports say it's in a cookie stored on your computer, but the fact that Phorm don't seem to be storing the data in a country covered by any UK, European or US law (despite being a US company) but have a data centre in China is suspicious.

If the profile is not stored locally, and there is more than one person using the Internet at a location, then the system will not be able to distinguish one user from another, so may serve inappropriate ads to other people using the Internet.

If the profile is stored locally in a cookie, then it may be possible that simply blocking that cookie would stop them being able to track you.

There are two Parliamentary acts that may be violated by this system. The Data Protection Act (1998) and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2001). The DPA requires that people giver permission if their data is processed in a country without an equivalent to the DPA. RIPA prevents monitoring of connections, or interception of data sent along those connections (as Phorm does) without either the permission of the customer (express or implied) or a warrant.

Now, the key point in both those violations is permission. The ISPs appear to be playing up the anti-phishing side of the system while barely mentioning the monitoring side (if at all), so people who are less technically savvy than us may consent to be monitored based on the anti phishing promises alone. This may offer some protection to the ISPs and Phorm. Not too sure if either the DPA or RIPA require that companies explicitly state what people are opting in to when the ask if you want to opt in.

It helps that (whether justified or not), people seem to percieve the ISPs as trustworthy, so may listen to them even if other organisations (such as Mozilla, Microsoft and Opera) mount massive campaigns stating that their browsers already do protect against Phishing. It also helps Phorm that the various authorities and companies have been hyping up the threat of identity fraud. Thus, people may be more likely to percieve the system as valuable protection rather than a threat, and more likely to opt in.

A lot of ISPs need to make more money than they do to maintain the investment needed to keep upgrading their networks, so unless at least a sizable percentage of us are willing to pay higher prices than we do, some sort of advertising (whatever form that takes) is, sadly, inevitable.

Although I have tried to avoid expressing my opinion, and just present my perception of what is happening, it may have creapt in.

The above doesn't really change my opinion. I still do not think people should be monitored (whether or not advertising is served or a profile is built up) without their expressed permission, and I think people should be fully informed before expressing that permission.

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

Well that provides a pretty good starting point - and I agree that ideally they shouldn't be doing that, but just thought I'd throw it out as a suggestion. I must say I hadn't realised they had so many other ways to make their business more efficient - shame they haven't either!

Actually, dav - that's another point that perhaps someone on here can answer. Is the VM infrastructure up to seperating out business connections from residential in the Phorm system? I'd imagine that businesses would be deserting en-masse if they thought all their confidential, commercially sensitive data was going via Russia!

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

the DPA requires permission for ANY processing taking place no matter were it is, including in the UK (hence the entrys in all the consumer T&Cs you look at).

and also as a seperate matter, it required permission to Export said personal data outside the UK (for the likes of the contracted offshore Ccare processing).

Peter Fairbrother this morning on the
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03...ripa/comments/
makes the RIPA clear enough.

they NEED the permission of both the sending AND the receaving ends to intercept any such traffic lawfully.

"
Some RIPA points answered

By Peter Fairbrother
Posted Wednesday 5th March 2008 05:10 GMT
Re: opt-out, opt-in
Opting in would give BT "reasonable grounds to believe" that you have consented to the interception - but not opting-out would not, as failing to object to something is not the same as granting consent, and granting consent, or a reasonable belief that that has happened, is what is required under the Act.

And accepting a cookie you never see on your browser is not granting consent!

However, in any case the granting of consent must be done by _both_ parties if it's to make the interception lawful:

Re: What about the data being sent by websites to the customer?
_Both_ the sender _and_ the intended recipient have to agree for consensual interception to become lawful under S.3(1).

I raised this very point with Peter Sommer last week, so I doubt he got it wrong - but perhaps he thinks the data is only looked at if it comes from sites which have agreed to Phorm intercepting it, and only when the customer has also agreed - though that is contrary to the little we have been told of how Phorm operate...

Re: Difficult Call- Contradictory RIPA :
S.3(3) The "purposes of a telecommunications system" - and note, it's a system, not a service or an ISP - are defined in S.2(1) to be the "transmission of communications". There is no "out" here for storing or passing on anything more than traffic data.

S 1(6) is about private telecomms systems - BT is not a private telecomms system as far as RIPA goes. There is no contradiction.

I can't see anything which would or even could make the interception lawful.

in fact I can't see any grounds to suppose what they are doing could possibly be considered not to be interception, or could possibly be considered to be lawful interception - and unlawful interception, unlike most breaches of the Data Protection Acts, is a criminal offense punishable by up to 2 years in prison.

Which is where they belong. All of them. Though whether the wimpy Commissioner, or the DPP, will agree to a prosecution is another matter ..

BTW, if you want to break your contract with BT, Virgin etc - this is good grounds to do so. They are breaking the law. It's also good grounds to sue them .. :)
"

---------- Post added at 13:31 ---------- Previous post was at 13:20 ----------

VM, BT, and the other one would be MAD to include any business class BB contracts in this Phorm mess, and the commercial businness would NOT be leaveing before they took VM/BT to the courts and cleaned them out good and proper.

one point you might consider though, the ordinary consumers that have taken the business class VM package in the hopes to improve their lot, are in a bit of a mess as far as their T&Cs are concerned, as they are not covered by the same consumer contracts and safegards the ordinary users are.

the general rule for the UK consumer classes are they are to lazy to do much of anything to harm the UK ISPs in court etc,so we can do as we please type boadroom/upper management thinking..

---------- Post added at 14:50 ---------- Previous post was at 13:31 ----------

another BT/Phorm item from thereg again
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/05/bt_phorm_trial/
"BT targets 10,000 data pimping guinea pigs

Privacy policy being ripped up for Phorm

By Chris Williams → More by this author
Published Wednesday 5th March 2008 14:22 GMT

BT is preparing to test Phorm's advertising targeting technology on 10,000 of its customers this month, to gauge people's reaction to their web browsing being exploited for extra revenue.
The trials will begin mid-March and guinea pigs will be drawn from BT Retail's consumer broadband subscriber base. The firm believes customers will be impressed by what it calls a "safer, more relevant experience".

Phorm will read the websites the test subjects visit and use their contents to serve up targeted advertising when that computer is used to visit other popular sites, including The Guardian and MySpace.



BT sent us this statement about the imminent experiment:

The trial invitation will be presented through a special web page that will appear when those customers start a web browsing session. At this point, those customers invited can choose to switch on BT Webwise, choose not to take part, or to find out more information.

The www.bt.com/webwise site also contains detailed information on the service and a one-click option to switch the service off, which can be activated at any point during the trial. The BT Privacy Policy and BT Total Broadband Service Terms will be amended accordingly.

BT's current privacy policy states: "We do not use this [browsing] information to analyse your visits to any other websites." Once Phorm is deployed that is obviously no longer true.
...
"

---------- Post added at 15:03 ---------- Previous post was at 14:50 ----------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...internet.phorm
Phorm fires privacy row for ISPs

Web users are up in arms over what they see as an invasion of privacy by a company that will track surfing patterns to serve targeted ads
Charles Arthur guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday March 5 2008Marc Burgess has the sound of a man trying to keep a pack at bay. "Our privacy claims have been audited by Ernst & Young; they have been through our system and seen that it does what we say it does," he says.

Privacy International have done a privacy impact assessment, and they will be doing spot checks. We have spoken to the Information Commissioner's Office. All of the privacy groups in the US, UK and Europe have been impressed by our approach."

The problem for the senior vice-president of technology at Phorm, an Aim-listed company which recently tied up a deal with the UK's three biggest internet service providers - BT, Virgin Media and TalkTalk, who between them have more than 10 million customers - is that it's not the privacy groups who he really needs to convince.

It's the millions of people whose services will be affected by Phorm's scheme, because some are up in arms over what they see as an invasion of their privacy through Phorm's intention to categorise all of their web-surfing habits in order to target online ads at them.
...
The data about what websites you tend to visit is then categorised to generate a profile.

When you then visit a page whose adverts are sourced from the Open internet Exchange (oix.net) - set up by Phorm - your browser will see adverts targeted to your profile.

(Adult, gambling, political, drugs and smoking-related adverts are not allowed.) Your browsing history is not retained; instead the profile for the cookie is refined as it "sees" more of your browsing.

Sites that join OIX are told they will get a better per-click payment than with other services. (Disclosure: The Guardian is one of a number of media websites that are signed up to OIX.)
...
"

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

Another approach to this is to let the advertisers know in no uncertain terms that adverts served up by OIX/Phorm will be ignored and the advertised products/services avoided at all costs. If the people advertising through OIX can see that it actually has a negative impact on their quarry, they may think twice about getting into bed with Phorm in the first place. How do we find out who wants their ads serving by this method?

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

Here's the most telling part imo

ISP Ad Partners NebuAd and Phorm Eye Overseas Expansions
By Jack Marshall, The ClickZ Network, Mar 5, 2008

With NebuAd up and running in the U.S. and building its U.K. operation, Phorm may fancy a slice of the pie across the pond in the U.S. The company already has a New York address, and although Sarday did not explicitly state that Phorm is eyeing the U.S. market, he did tell ClickZ News that senior U.K. staff are currently in the U.S.

NebuAd's Goad said the firm is currently continuing discussions with a number of U.K. ISPs, and suggested he wasn't overly concerned about competition from Phorm. "I don't think it's a winner-takes-all market," he said. "Different ISPs have different needs and different business models. There's definitely space for more than one company."

article here - http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3628633

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

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ispphorm/

Almost 500 people have signed it since it was created yesterday. Imagine how many more will sign once this news reaches millions.

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

And the now official links from VM

http://www.virginmedia.com/customers/webwise.php

http://www.virginmedia.com/customers/webwise-faqs.php

Sorry if this has been posted already.

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

A typically saying nothing statement from Virgin then :(

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

...and heres the part that will be of interest,

"We are currently at the early stages of working to deliver the Webwise solution and will be writing to you nearer the time to advise when the solution will be ‘switched on’ providing more detail of what this will mean to you."

The fact they are writing to customers to inform them of this 'new service' illustrates to me just how worried they are with this whole situation. That and the covering of their own asses, legally speaking. So they can say, look we told you about this Webwise service and you accepted it by not canceling your service etc etc.

Thankfully this will almost certainly mean a change to their T&C's which will enable us all to switch providers without penalty, if indeed you are still under contract.

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

I think that is almost a certainty as BT have admitted that policy changes will have to be made if their trial works.

Article in the reg already posted.

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

CF Article posted also.

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

*nods* if you're not running Windows then they don't want to know in my experience.

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

So if you call and complain about your XBox or PS3 or fridge not working when you plug it into their modem and that is the only web enabled device in the house how would that work!

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

Bye bye Virgin, i've been looking at a solid excuse to get rid of you for a long time!