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

Im a BT subscriber and got "cdr logged" on both clicks 'so what next?
TL-S

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

I got the no because I am with an ISP not signed upto phorm or in talks with phorm so not a risk. Keep clicking the links so to help him perfect the script to trap phorm and win them at their own game charging for clicks.

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

Oops just accidentally deleted my own rather longer post.

To repeat in a nutshell, what next?

Either

1) No come back for you. Longer term higher BT subs, or perhaps BT block high value sites.

or

2) A very embarrassing invoice from BT stating that they have been asked to pay costs amounting to £2.5M as a result of your 'anonymous' surfing, and listing the sites and associated charges you have incurred.

Because they told you that your Phorm surfing was legal and anonymous, I guess you won't receive that invoice. ;)

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

I see that in the latest PC PRO magazine (the early July edition) on page 17, there is another Anti-PHORM article, quoting Dr Richard Clayton. That will spread the Anti PHORM/WEBWISE coverage a little further with their readership.

Colin

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

Might be best to start small at first though. I think the limit for the small claims court is £5k.

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

talking about "commercial exploitation" i think it would be a very good thing to include in any future system the badphorm thread is talking about, some extra billing expansion and growth to allow for the inclusion of the mobile networks data plans for "commercial exploitation " of this same data.

the UKs mobile networks generate massive profits from chargeing per Mbit, again profiteering off the backs of the free content peoples work,they too need to be potentially included in this evolving system in the future.

with WiMax just around the corner, the ElReg reported Orange Mobile selling/moving into the mobile Phorm like system, and the expectation from the UK networks to move over in a very big way to the Wimax data Mb model as their largest ever cashcow, both data pimping and wholesale Megabit charging, its only a matter of time before we might need to include this talked about billing option to reclaim our cash generators back, or put a stop to the "commercial exploitation " practice and force them to move over to a "reasonable" real fixed fee for a fair amount of data model.

pass this comment to the BP thread if you like as im not reged there (dont like being forced to register anywere just to make the odd comment now and then...).

---------- Post added at 23:51 ---------- Previous post was at 23:33 ----------

it is, iv said for a long time now though, if as happened with the banks and the unlawful charges, if enough small claims were to find their way into the court system for long enough to cause a backlog, then you will find the county courts wanting to move the strongest cases to the higher courts, and so getting real industry wide action and justice in new and updated "commercial exploitation" rulings in the small users/business favour perhaps.

in affect, you need to send the bill, then a letter before action, and fill in an N1 form from the local small claims county court ( send a copy of it unsigned to show them your serious and have it ready lol) , or you can do it online from the small claim moneyclaim HMC service.

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

See here's the fun bit.

That invoice is the sum of *all* the web sites you ever visit over the course of say 6 months sending hundreds even thousands of invoices to BT.

At £10, £100, £1000 per page the money would add up quickly too if you frequent the 'wrong' sites.

But never fear, the cashflow problem is all BT's.

You're anonymous, aren't you? :) And Webwise is 'free'.

No one knows your browsing history. So you couldn't possibly get an itemised invoice linked to your UID.

BT assured you in writing that would be impossible.

Pete

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

Hi im new here, and Ive only just found out all the gory details about phorm :shocked: I cant believe the big isp's are going through with this! More people need to know about this, there should be a campaign like firefox did awhile back, where people had there banner everywhere and "get firefox" as a sig!

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

:welcome:

Hi Ice Fyre,

Well, so far, the big isp's are not going through with this. Every day that passes that they don't start a trial is one more day we've won.

Failure by the ISP's to start a trial can only mean that they have been unable to rework Phorm's business model to an use an opt-in that conforms with the law.

To be honest, with an opt-in requiring explicit consent the ISP's are going to make next to nothing from the deal - certainly not enough to cover the amount of people who will migrate away beause they have deployed it!

:)

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

:welcome: Ice Fyre.

You have hit the nail on the head. Many more people need to know about this.

---------- Post added at 02:54 ---------- Previous post was at 02:47 ----------

But Pete, I'm itching to invoice the 3 stooges for my intellectual property. So much so that i'll set up a web site to do it.;)

Only thing is, I will need to keep the invoice down because I will pursue it in the small claims court. Nice and easy and doesn't cost very much.

Cost's the ISP's plenty though to defend.

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

You've got it..!

You can claim as much or as little as you like. And stay within the limits of the small claims court (initially).

Long term we've been chatting over on badphorm about a community billing system (like Peforming Rights)... creative people join and get a royalty cheque every month.

If you run a big site, eg cable forum, with thousands and thousands of hits a day... you need to talk to a proper lawyer because you could be due a very very big cheque.

:)

Pete.

---------- Post added at 08:45 ---------- Previous post was at 08:01 ----------

One last push please, especially welcome clicks from talktalk users... haven't had any so far (or the script needs a twiddle). If you've clicked already, please click again, a few times for good measure...

http://www.dephormation.org.uk:8080/..._cdr/usage.php
http://www.dephormation.org.uk:8080/...ge.php?debug=y

To recap, this page demonstrates the ability to log royalty billing information for Phorming ISPs. The debug link sets a temporary Phormalike UID cookie (won't opt you into Phorm or anything nasty like that, don't worry) used to mimic Phormed users.

No invoices will follow. :)

I plan to provide public code shortly. Then retire to the Bahamas on the income from my web site (at £100/page impression for unauthorised commercial copyright violation).

many thanks.
Pete

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

There are banners somewhere sure popper did some I had one on ISPreview but it suddenly vanished so I presume the admin removed the link leaving just badform link.

they were posted earlier in this thread but it is soo long it could take weeks to sind. :D

:welcome: to cableforum

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

Originally Posted by Ice Fyre
"Hi im new here, and Ive only just found out all the gory details about phorm I cant believe the big isp's are going through with this! More people need to know about this, there should be a campaign like firefox did awhile back, where people had there banner everywhere and "get firefox" as a sig!"

Here is a link to some banners available on Badphorm.

http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi...wtopic.php?384

and :welcome:

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

Fully agree that it might be a good idea to initially hit them with just a 'token' charge to keep the court fees down.
The costs of pursuing a claim, even through the Money Claim Online service, are not peanuts (unless you're receiving certain benefits).

:eek:

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

Slightly off topic here but have a read of this then imagine it 10 years down the line combined with a function-creep heavy phorm:

"Ofcom has outlined a wide range of advances and innovations for wireless devices over the next 10 to 20 years, including "in-body networks" to help doctors monitor patients."

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/22...es-vision-life

Just imagine these "in-body networks" combined with Phorm 10 or 15 years down the line. You are surfing the net one day and your blood pressure is high and the implants pick up on it and transmit it somehow to the phorm servers and up come adverts for blood pressure medication....

Tin foil hat? Yes quite possibly but it does open up the possibilities.

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

The thoughts of what Phorm/webwise can do once programmed to is almost like taking a shower on blackpool prom in the nude. Nothing is left to the imagination all the inner secrets are out no privacy, human rights nothing is left.

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

No dignity.




taken from
Privacy Lost How Technology Is Endangering Your Privacy
David H. Holtzman

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/518KAWND8FL.jpg



regards

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

Well it's nearly 5 weeks since my MP said she had written to the Rt Hon Stephen Timms MP, Minister of State for "Competitiveness" at the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (or "Department of Business and Enterprise" as she first termed it in her original letter - I think mistaking the name)

Still waiting to hear from them!

The Earl of Northesk only had one of his three questions answered so far:

The Earl of Northesk asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they are taking any action on the targeted advertising service offered by Phorm in the light of the questions about its legality under the Data Protection and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Acts. [HL2635]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (Baroness Vadera): The Office of the Information Commissioner made a statement on 3 March 2008 that it was in discussion with one company about the nature of its service and the way it uses information about ISP customers. My department will consider the continued relevance of the current safeguards and legislation in the light of the outcome of those discussions.

And is still waiting for these answers:

HL3267 Earl of Northesk [CO] and HL3268 Earl of Northesk [HO]

Earl of Northesk to ask Her Majesty’s Government which law enforcement agency, Department or other statutory body has responsibility for investigating and prosecuting possible criminal breaches of (a) the Data Protection Act 1998, (b) the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and (c) the Computer Misuse Act 1990. [CO] HL3267

Earl of Northesk to ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any official or Minister in the Home Office has offered written or oral advice to any executive of the company Phorm as to the legality of their targeted advertising software product; if so, what was the advice; in what circumstances was it given; and what was the justification for giving it. [HO] HL3268

Eagerly awaiting the answers....

Hank

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

Take a look at the microsoft roadmap.
EVERYTHING is geared towards online use. Reverting back to a setup simmilar to the 70s where people connect to a mainframe via a dumb terminal.
Eventualy widows will be nothing more than a glorified browser.
You install that and all your programs are executed via the internet, like MS office, notepad, hell even solitaire.

The benifit of the system is you will need a miccrosoft account in order to do almost anything, making piracy seriously difficult.
Now think about Dr's, Employers, Employees, Teachers, Social Workers, Government officials, Insurance companies, basicly anyone with confidential data regarding you, your partner and children all working online and running through Phorm.

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

If there were no internet suppliers left to supply a connectioin without phorm I would quit and find other activities I certainly wouldnt pay to access the int ernet through anything as intrusive as phorm ever.

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

You don't have to do that Florence. Technology is available to us all, and that means we can build our own Internet without wiretap surveillance. It's just a network and that means we can build our own world wide interconnected network. All you need are a few determined people and some routing gear. The wires can be optical, RF wireless, fibre, copper, satellite... How do you think Africa is going to have widespread internet? through homebrew mesh networks.

Of course a simpler network that uses the existing system (while we build a new one) is the TOR network. We need more people willing to become 'exit nodes'.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2008/05/17.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_%28anonymity_network%29 [ LINK ]

http://www.torproject.org/ [ LINK ]


https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2008/05/18.png

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

Can we do that? Can we circumvent all this Phorm and ISP cr@p? Massive undertaking... huge opportunity to ensure freedom and privacy perhaps. Would need to start a new "W3C" or RFC process perhaps etc. Lots involved but you make a very good point...

Hank

---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------


And when I clicked on the link today...

Shame. I've sent a note to the BT Forum Research Team where the request to complete it came from and asked if they have closed the survey deliberately or if there has been an error etc.

Hank

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

Interception
from wiki
In September 2007, Dan Egerstad, a Swedish security consultant, revealed that he had intercepted usernames and passwords for a large number of email accounts, by operating and monitoring Tor exit nodes.[6] On November 15, 2007, he was arrested on charges stemming from discovering and publishing this information. As Tor does not, and by design cannot, encrypt the traffic between an exit node and the target server, any exit node is in a position to capture any traffic which is not encrypted at the application layer, e.g. by SSL. While this does not inherently violate the anonymity of the source, it affords added opportunities for data interception by self-selected third parties, greatly increasing the risk of exposure of sensitive data by users who are careless or who mistake Tor's anonymity for security.

sounds like phorm to me but me not a that bright.

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

It's quite easy really. Using existing PSTN phonelines, this is how the Internet started. A 56K modem is connected to the telephone line and a Linux server is setup with mgetty and pppd. IP over serial cable was what we used before broadband! To be an Internet provider all you need are a bank of telephone lines a number of servers and a thicker/faster cable to connect to the next upsteam Internet provider. And with the LLU (local loop unbundling) you to can become a communications provider.

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

We can always go back to using bulletin board systems ;)

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

Or join one that has high standard, morals and respect for their customers who cannot be bought like the greedy larger ISPs.

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

Well at the exit point out comes your plaintext request (assuming you don't use a HTTPS service) to the destination server. This plaintext can be monitored for private details and so it would be the responsibility of the user not to put private details into the plaintext system in the first place.

However for general profiling usage (without a private detail) the snooper has no way of knowing who that person is as it cannot be traced back to an individuals IP address. Another more extreme system (I'm sure we will see more of these in the near future) is 'cloud surfing'. Only one trusted person needs to read an entire website e.g. 'The Register' and this individual would then become 'The Register' proxy, the next guy is responsible for surfing the entire 'Slashdot.org' and so on and so on. As far as 'The Register' and 'Slashdot' are concerned now they have just 1 (one) reader! Goodbye Advertising revenue! (I just used those sites as an example because they are popular and have thousands of readers, they could potentially exploit - not that they probably would But who knows these days???)... Also note this will probably run into copyright problems, as it is an Internet guerilla tactic. (but needs must when the devil drives ;) )

---------- Post added at 14:19 ---------- Previous post was at 14:16 ----------

;) retro

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

"He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name". You know the rest... (Rev. 13:16-18)

Gulp :D

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

I'm sure there are less sinful ways of defeating 'the system' I was merely opening peoples minds to the possibility that solutions can be found to problems.

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

Ah apologies, I was referring to the Phorm system with the biblical reference as a means to illustrate doomishly the potential for control and/or the possibility for abuse ;) I wonder if the internet will ever become our only means to buy and sell...

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

Not so sure about that but that article about OFCOMs vision for the future and "in body networks" sure has got me thinking that in the future we will no longer use cash and will pay for everything using a body implant of some kind.

Going to go to make my tin foil hat now so I am ready LOL

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

Since Port 8080 is also a recognized Web Server Port I would assume that Phorm may well also try to remove any such cookie from this Port as or when the their system is tested.
It might be wise to test on other ports as well!

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

Darn it. We'll all have big boobs if they get their way :D

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

Dilli may not necessarily see that as a problem... :D

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

They can't win (or be allowed to win) :)

They damn themselves if they do; let me explain why.

And so I move to 8088. And they start fiddling that about too. So I move to 8083. Or 7080. Or 6080. Today's value is 4080. Tomorrow will be 2080.

These guys haven't got a hope. So they start reading all traffic to try and suppress their leaking cookies? I can rewrite their cookie client side as '2008-05-11=PETESf4frjesa23a$FsVmH44e||COPY". Today. Tomorrow I'll write it as 'PETES=2008-05-11COPYf4frjesa23a$FsVmH44e||". Day after I apply a ROT13 algorithm. Day after that I split it, and join first x chars to last y chars.

And even if, they filter all traffic, all ports, accurately remove only their UIDs. including the rewritten and encoded copies I try to make.

Guess what? I sue them anyway using the evidence of BT/Virgin/TalkTalk visits. And they can dispute the bill on the basis of their actual usage (which I will compare with the stats they give advertisers saying "99% of our customers are signed up to Phorm").

They won't escape the royalty bill. Particularly so if I can show they are maliciously concealing the usage to avoid the liabilty. That will look very silly in court. "Are you trying to conceal your usage?" "Err yes" "Scorched earth on your house".

They really are screwed (in the engineering fasteners sense) by copyright. Utterly screwed. They might not realise it yet, but without a doubt, they're screwed.

Pete.

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

Anti-Phorm Campaign


http://www.antiphormcampaign.org.uk/image009.jpg


http://www.antiphormcampaign.org.uk/page0002.htm

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

Just filled int he BT question thingy nice little bit of text in the box ref to them not answering anything on webise or phorm and locking off Q&A threads about it.
bet it end up virtual trashcan

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

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

:D

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

I did the same earlier and politely but firmly made my thoughts on the subject known. Especially mentioned that having staff (Adam Liversage) start a Q&A forum and then not A any Q's was a rather pointless and frustrating exercise and would they mind not doing it in the future as it rather upset their paying customers. As with yours, I expect it went straight in the bin. Ah well, every little bit ....

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

:rofl:

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

Tor is not the be all and end all of security. There have already been cases in the US and Germany where exit nodes were forced to give up their logs to the authorities.

The danger of tor is most of the exit nodes are out of UK jurisdiction and therefore subject to different laws. And of course government agencies and commercial ventures can easily setup exit nodes without your knowledge.

Tor also causes significant latency on your connection (and I mean significant) so it is not ideal under any circumstances. Furthermore wtf should we have to jump into sneakernets just to ensure our privacy, the law and our rights under those laws are supposed to do that.

Instead of jumping to Tor people should be fighting the principles of privacy erosion. I have been working on some stuff over the past couple of days which I can't disclose as of yet but hopefully early next week I should have some pretty big news from a publicity standpoint.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 22:16 ---------- Previous post was at 22:12 ----------

Running a VPN based darknet on your existing broadband service is far easier and far cheaper, I have run several in the past with full domain name resolution and custom TLDs. But as I said above, we should not have to resort to sneakernets or darknets in order to be able to communicate "freely" (as in liberty not beer), by going underground all we do is turn our backs on the problem instead of fixing it.

Alexander Hanff

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

Oooh - looking forward to hearing what you've been up to Alex... hope we don't have to wait toooo long (we've been doing too much waiting already, not for you, but for others and you know what I mean... videos, PIA, BT trials...) - this is waiting I'm hoping turns out to be well worth it (especially if your past work was anything at all to judge by!!) - Can't wait :hyper:

Good point on the 'going underground' suggestion. It is attractive but dead right that it is something nobody should even have to consider, not yet anyway, there's plenty of obstacles for old Kent to get over first and I trust you're just finding more nice big things to put in his way...

Hank

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

I posted about this back on page 408, but it got swallowed up in the 'heat of battle' .. I don't know anybody had a chance to have a look ... it might be useful as an anti-phorm measure!

any thoughts folks?

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

Agreed there are problems with TOR.

but... with regard to your later comments.

It sounds like running for the hills the way you describe it. Laws can be broken, 128bit encryption cannot. Phorm is a wake up call and you are fighting to slow them down (and I sincerely wish you the best of luck) but those sneaky parasites will never stop exploiting this open system. Look what Mark Klein uncovered at AT&T if you don't believe they will break the law. What happens when you throw the law in their face and take them to court, they lie, they get away with it on a technicality, then they modify the law. Encryption will STOP them dead, and when they outlaw encryption we will resort to encrypted steganography.

It's not turning our backs on the problem it's finding ways to guarantee the communications have not been intercepted and looked at by unwanted parties. Even if you managed to get privacy laws to stop Phorm I doubt it will stop some devious entity out there from exploiting this open system.

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

I'm not convinced TOR is a good workaround - If you wanted to test a system like webwise, then it seems to me a free public proxy or a TOR exit node where you would find lots of "volunteers" could be a good place to start.

The javascript leaks from the 2006 tests contained a variable that appeared to indicate the ISP, and one of the plain text ones that cropped up was "PUBLICPROXY".

See the javascript in this forum post:- http://www.teens411.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=971

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

Yes there are several VPN services like 'Relakks' but it comes down to trust. How do you know you can trust Relakks? I've read their site and all the T&C and all the nods to privacy laws, but what guarantees do we have? Where are the testimonials and who vetted them in the first place.

There are some VPN service providers that sound really great and they offer good deals but then they go and spoit it by having just a PO Box office address in some far away country and no contact with a real person that can be held to account.

Sorry I don't want to throw cold ice water on your new discovery, and I hope you get what you think you will get which is a privacy solution for $5 per month. That is the value you have put on your privacy.

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

I dunno really Wild Oscar; why should we trust them?

Incidentally, in that 'heated battle' did you notice that the principle of Oblonsky's suggestion was a bit of 80/20 thinking?

Apparently, the 80/20 principle – the fact that 80% of results flow from 20% of causes – is the "one true principle of highly effective people and organisations. The principle shows how you can achieve much more with much less effort, time and resources, simply by concentrating on that all-important 20%.

It is suggested that if we can latch on to the few powerful forces within and around us, we can leverage our efforts to multiply effectiveness. Most of what we do has trivial results. A little of what we do really matters. So if we focus on the latter, we can control events instead of being controlled by them, and achieve several times the results".

Perhaps that is what Oblonsky was getting at?

Intriguing.

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

Don't worry .. I'm not advocating it's use, just asking for opinions as I'd never heard of these sort of things before!

Obviously getting Virgin to give Phorm the elbow is the only way to go ...

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

There is Stunnel

http://www.stunnel.org/

Its an SSL wrapper

but to be honest you're better off dropping virgin altogether. Thats what I intend to do

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

Firstly Tor is not secure, a proven fact that has been reported on several times.

Secondly even if it was secure, it doesn't fix the problem. Sure you can go and use Tor and your surfing will be "safer" and maybe 0.01% of the UK broadband population who are tech savvy enough to know about Tor might be too. But what about the millions of others out there, are we to just forget about them and only look after our own interests? And of course if a significant number of people start using Tor, how long do you think it will be until commercial organisations start setting up Tor exit nodes and harvest everything going through it in pretty much the same way Phorm are doing right now? It simply offsets the problems for a little, and it certainly isn't a wakeup call.

That isn't what I am about, my ISP won't be using Phorm or similar technologies so I have no personal threats to my privacy from Phorm, my involvement in this entire issue is to try and help to protect the 10s of millions who are not so lucky, not so technically minded and not so aware of the issues.

Alexander Hanff

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

with reference to post #6267 posted yesterday but now six pages back.
Have you, or anyone else, heard or seen anything about such an investigation?

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

You're right there are 10s of millions of potential victims for Phorm(and Phormlikes) and these people may not be able to defend themselves with a raft load of encryption techniques many of us take for granted. But end-to-end encryption is secure and reliable via SSL/TLS and it is very simple to use and built into most browsers. People need to be educated in the value of their privacy and what reliable systems they can use to secure that privacy, because when Phorm is defeated there will be another threat along similar line to Phorm just around the corner. More servers need to adopt HTTPS as standard until such a point there will be nothing left for Phormlikes to read.

So if you like the problem isn't the clients side, it is the server side. Eventually people that run servers will move over to HTTPS because there client/customer/readership will demand it.

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

Yes but the problem with Tor is that it isn't end to end encryption. The exit node is open to all sorts of abuse of equal severity to Phorm (including DPI).

I agree HTTPS is the way to go, but perhaps pressuring browser developers to include OpenCA support as an authentic CA would be better than just switching to Tor. Then SSL will be available to everyone for free.

Alexander Hanff

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

No, Tor isn’t much to do with security, in the sense that most people think of the security of a network. By default, Tor doesn’t produce any logs that might be useful to the authorities. If forced to produce such logs, those running the node would probably just shut it.


I hope you’re not suggesting that Tor is a sneakernet. :)


There’s a thread on BadPhorm called Relakks - A Phorm workaround? Relakks works fine. Note, though, that it’s only PPTP. This is not as secure as L2TP or OpenVPN. L2TP is apparently currently problematic to support. Relakks used to provide L2TP, but gave up on it. OpenVPN is built upon SSL/TLS, which we all know from HTTPS.

There’s an interesting alternative in the form of JonDonym. This was previously called Java Anon Proxy (JAP) and AN.ON. While a VPN may tunnel most things, Tor is more restrictive, being effectively a TCP proxy with further restrictions possible at the exit nodes. JonDonym is even more restrictive, being a HTTP proxy only. However, it tries to combine the best parts of VPNs and networks like Tor. Tor’s weakness is that anyone can set up as one or more nodes. A VPN’s weakness is that all your traffic can easily be monitored from a single point. Your VPN provider may find themselves forced, possibly by court order, to monitor your traffic. All you’ve done is move the ‘Phorm problem’ to a different place. JonDonym’s solution is to have a number of nodes in series, but to allow only identified businesses and institutions to provide those nodes.

As long ago as 2003, the service faced the problem of complying with a court order. There was a press release a little while after – AN.ON still guarantees anonymity. You can read more on the Law enforcement page and there’s a detailed paper entitled Revocable Anonymity that explains the process . The important point is that the German courts have only allowed for the monitoring of specific URLs. General logs that the authorities could trawl through have not been allowed. To make the legal process even harder for those who want to brake the anonymity, you can choose to have your traffic pass through nodes in different countries. Thus, court orders in more than one country would be required.

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

Under European (at least) Data Retention Laws they are required to keep logs for a period of not less than 12 months. So whether Tor logs by default or not is not really issue, it would be very easy to force them to without even needing to change the law. And Tor logs have been seized in the past as I mentioned earlier.

The best way to defeat Phorm is HTTPS but unfortunately this is not cost viable for the majority of websites out there due to processing overhead and CA certificates. OpenCA have been working for some time to be accepted as a valid CA and as I said, if this happened across the majority of mainstream browsers anyone would be able to setup SSL for free without the user's browser throwing up a certificate warning dialogue.

Alexander Hanff

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

I was just browsing round some online computer retailers (pcworld, ebuyer, scan, etc) adding items to my shopping basket. If I then go to the checkout all the items and prices are listed, it's only when I go to pay that http: changes to https:

Does this mean that Phorm/Webwise will not only be able to see all the items/prices of everything I want to purchase but will also be able to calculate the value and volume of daily sales of such sites, something I'm sure those sort of sites would prefer to keep confidential.

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

Anybody spotted this one on BBC today? Facebook users warned about ads

This is the sort of thing I can imagine Phorm would be right up to their eyes in, if they ever got going.

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

That’s certainly not the case yet in Germany. There, it won’t come into effect until 2009. Each member state is different. There’s no requirement yet in Sweden, the home of Relakks, either. Also, does this EU directive apply to private individuals, when not engaged in a commercial activity? Even after the start of 2009, would the Chaos Computer Club’s Tor node be required to retain logs for twelve months? Is the directive going to catch every user of Skype with a non-NAT IP address, anonymous P2P client or game server within the EU?

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

Yes I was reading something last week about how these services are regarded as ISP services under the directive. In fact iirc don't even Relakk's state on their website that they are basically seen as an ISP? And the directive is EU wide so all EU countries will have to ratify it. Of course in the UK we are ahead of the game on this issue.

As far as I am aware Skype are already required to retain data and lets not forget the famous ruling by the FCC that Skype have to provide a federal backdoor for any communications which jump from SIPS to PSTN, a backdoor which has existed in Skype for about 3-4 years now if memory serves me correctly.

Alexander Hanff

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

All the content of the http pages will be scanned, so in theory the contents of a number of shopping baskets (for example) could be analysed to calculate this information. However, from what we know about the Webwise/OIX system (see Richard Clayton's analysis), the software does not appear to record information at the level of detail to do this consistently and accurately, and as far as I know there is no intention to do this anyway.

This is an important point you raise as most of the discussion about Webwise/OIX so far has centered on the privacy concerns of the internet user rather than the websites and the individuals, companies and other organisations that are running these websites. My feeling is that there is currently a low level of awareness about Webwise/OIX amongst website owners - I certainly have concerns but until we know more details including which pages are going to be scanned, I can't advise clients as to what actions to take. My feeling is that website owners shouldn't have to take any action - it should be opt-in for website owners as well as for web users.

As a example of how Webwise/OIX can affect a company's business consider an ecommerce site as you described. A company is likely to have spent a lot of time and money attracting people to the site through providing good, relevant content, pay-per-click advertising etc. Any prospective customers and the content they view will get picked up by Webwise, and on visiting an OIX partner site, that prospective customer may be delivered an advert for a product related to that content. Retailers will not be pleased that their hard work is effectively being used to deliver adverts for a competitor!

Another area that is likely to be important to website owners concerns protected content. There is no indication that Webwise can accurately determine whether a user is authenticated (there are a large number of ways that a user may be authenticated) so it looks likely that protected content will be scanned in many cases - this information may be commercially sensitive so this is clearly a concern for the website owner.

I could go on but these are some of the issues that website owners will be interested in, and Phorm's proposed opt-out for websites using a file originally designed to tell search engines which pages cannot be indexed (robots.txt) does not adequately address the issues. And this totally ignores any legal issues there may be with the Webwise/OIX system in the first place.

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

One thing which occurred to me overnight was whether or not Webwise is likely to cause content owners to breach DPA. Anyone who keeps personal data is obliged to register with ICO and follow DPA which includes protecting their users data. If Webwise is able to track what people are buying, how much and when - could this be construed as the content owner breaching DPA by failing to properly protect their customer's data?

Just a thought...

Alexander Hanff

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

Exactly. Phorm cannot know if the user has logged on.

---------- Post added at 06:54 ---------- Previous post was at 06:45 ----------


They haven't explained how it will work because it cannot work. Phorm have indicated that they will password authentication, which can be taken to mean Basic Authentication (RFCs 1945 & 2616) and Digest (RFCs 2069 & 2617).

But so many websites now use bespoke cookie-based authentication mechanisms that it will be a challenge to say the least to work out and ignore each of these.

---------- Post added at 07:00 ---------- Previous post was at 06:54 ----------

The "implied" consent applies only to the website owner. Not the user. The user must still give informed consent. And even this model falls apart because of protected content. This is leads to a very powerful argument against Phorm.

---------- Post added at 07:08 ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 ----------

It's also a small cap with a volatile history and lots of people watching it, making it relatively easy to influence the price. I really don't think anyone involved with Phorm would be silly enought to cross the line into market abuse knowing so many of you guys were watching the stock. More likely speculation growing that they're closing in a deal with an American ISP. AT&T have been touted as a potential partner during roadshows.

---------- Post added at 07:14 ---------- Previous post was at 07:08 ----------

It is believed that JavaScript can get around intercept laws e.g. Googlemail (even though gmail servers are based abroad so not covered by UK intercept laws). The script reads the page after it has been "opened" by the user therefore is not intercept but a consent for someone to come to your house and watch you opening your mail.

HOWEVER because the JavaScript was most likely injected at the ISP level then there would then still be some level of intercept involved to achieve that.

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

If Phorm is 'legal', then content owners must assume that all ISPs are untrustworthy and protect their pages accordingly.

If I had any money to speak of, it would be in SSL certificate authority shares at the moment.

Even so a copyright claim would leave them sitting in smouldering ruins too. Did you see the thread on badphorm?

The Phorm process violates the rights of the copyright holder because

* An unlicenced copy of the work is created for commercial exploitation ('profiler copy')
* An unlicenced derivative work is created for commercial exploitation ('user profile')
* The copying may be aggravated by fraud, deception, and concealment (creating fake cookies, stripping UID usage data)
* Content creators don't get paid a royalty

Fortunatly there is a solution, about to go public. ;) And you're going to love the name too.

Pete

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

Yes it is. Whilst forum discussion can cover 100% of the potential flaws when taking the battle forward and to mainstream media, to parliament and potentially to court it may be better to focus on a few solid arguments. The net result will still be the same, but the message will be stronger through its clarity and brevity.

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

Thing is oblonsky it shouldnt even have to get to court phorms model is already breaking basic rights amongst others, just have to ball watch untill something gets done, if not we leave said isp let them deal with the few users left because it will be my goal to tell everyone who i know and recommended in the past to desert too.

The way you post and the mention that you had to take a back seat to events had me wondering if you had any input on the phorm system somewhere?

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

Whenwhenwhenwhenwhen?:D

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

Alexander, sorry to ask this as I know you are very busy with stuff you have to get done for Uni etc but have you heard anything back from that person you spoke to at the FT about the jump in the Phorm share price?

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

Totally agree (I am sure I made this point somewhere earlier in this monster thread too). It is far easier to win an argument with a few watertight points rather than dozens of good but arguable ones, even if they are ultimately valid. Also, presenting any weaker point gives the opponent an opening to attack. I consider opt-in not out, RIPA as our crucial strong points, the law seems clear and the majority of people will understand and will be effected by them. Website owner (lack of) implied consent, web content copyright, interesting but much weaker points.

Focusing on a few strong points is the key to winning, rather than prolonging and enjoying, an argument. As is continuous repetition of your strongest points. ;)

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

I actually think that you can trust Relakks. I'm from Sweden and the man how started up Relakks is wellknown here in Sweden for his view to people secracy.
For everyone that wonders what Relakks is, or just want to know more... :

I saw a great interview with the swedish owner and founder of Relakks, Jonas Birgersson. He is interviewed by Thomas Crampton and many interesting questions are answered.

Here is a link to the short interview: http://light.vpod.tv/?s=0.0.201364

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

Press release to The Register? The Guardian, BBC and C4 can pick it up from there.

:welcome: pangpang and thanks for the input.

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

Yes, I knew this. I "think" we're in agreement?

The ISP's are claiming that webwise fulfils explicit informed consent on the part of the surfer/ISP customer. (We are challenging that on the basis that they will need to give us a heck of a lot of inphormation for it to be phully inphormed consent - a lot more than "anti-phishing and relevant adverts"

They are "assuming" implied consent on the part of the website operator.
(We are challenging that on the basis that allowing search engines is NOT the same as allowing Webwise, and anyway there are a shedload of problems - such as websites who specifically say they don't allow Webwise, such as webmail sites not on the blacklist, such as protected parts of sites and whether Phorm/Webwise can detect/distinguish them - etc etc - list is quite long including Dephormation's copyright arguments)

And anyway - before we get into that there are fundamental reasons (Alex Hanff etc) why the whole thing is illegal in the first place, on the grounds of the fundamental interception required and the level at which that interception occurs.

Am I summing this up right?

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

From Saturday's Daily Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/mai...xmktrep110.xml

"Online advertising technology group Phorm soared 425p to £17.62½ on speculation that it was close to sealing a large new contract. For breaking news, changing views and trading floor chatter, check out Ben Bland's Market Forces."

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

What it would pick up are the items bought not the prices but then you have just bought these items so the adverts targeted at you from that list would not be relevent as you already had them.

This is one point I did raise and a reason I contacted Amazon, It would seem the ISPs idea is to blacklist sites that dont wish to have visitors that are phormed. If I remember correctly from an earlier post they asked for domain names to add to the blacklist. I feel this isn't the answer since their customers browsing habits will be forcable changed if the site blacklisted is one their customers visit.
On a personal note I have taken my personal website down for now domain name is there pointing to my hosting but the site is down until I decide what is the best way to fight this. After 10years I no longer have my website up just due to ISP greed.

I have to agree if phorm takes the route they are many smaller companies could face closing down due to loss of potentual customers. I also feel that with many people it is a known fact that some can't ressist buying if they are targeted with adverts. Many people over the years have ended up in financial difficulties by people becoming compulsive shoppers. Phorm is anopther case where they could push them over the edge with targeted adds. I quote Kent's words on click whan hit with 100s of adds a few pony ones would be missed. So he plans to hit us with 100s of adds?
As without targeted adverts I am lucky if I see 10 in a month or is that unlucky. :angel: I block them all I have more blocked content than websites in fav's

many forums I visit on a regular basis I am set to auto login so teir is no login screen. On a few I have admin rights so access to members data had I stayed with VM I would have felt I was failing in my obligation to the websites to help protect their members from interception.

I personally feel that if webwise goes ahead they need to contact all websites from the contact us page and get informed consent to phorm the pages if this is refused and they block the sites so the ISPs customers cannot get to them then the ISPs become guilty by association to blackmail of wither website owners or customers by blocking sites they visit in a phree (sorry free) world.


They also need to stop the CS staff from giving out incorrect information saying it is for their protection as to some this very phrase will panic them, when they most likely have enough already. Kent implies that 90% of the web users are idiots and unable to switch on anti phishing in IE7 this browser will warn you the site might be dangerous and do you want to switch on anti phishing now it takes ONE CLICK to switch it on so no need for a degree in computer science.

Totally correct The only way to make this not work for ISPs is for all to refuse to opt-in, refuse to be phormed, refuse to have you privacy radid.

To win Phorm the public at large needs to stand and say no to webwise.

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

Thanks James. I already knew of that speculation but I was wondering if there is any more information on this new contract ie whether it is to do with ISPs here or in the US, new OIX partners etc. I was hoping Alexander may have gotten more information in the mean time but guess I will have to try to learn some patience which is not my strong point LOL

---------- Post added at 13:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:20 ----------

New article on ISPreview. Apologies if its already been posted and I missed it.

http://www.freepressreleases.co.uk/P...2008051219174/

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

Now here's curious.

Not that I'm contemplating setting a business or anything like that. But I was looking at the UK Intellectual Property Office at trademarks (as you do).

I thought I'd see if Webwise was a trademark. And indeed it is.

Xara Ltd of Hemel Hempstead
Hewlett-Packard Development Company
BBC

These all overlap on purpose "09 Computer software, computer hardware, computer peripheral devices; parts and fittings for all the aforesaid goods" including the currently 'examined' but not 'registered' trademark application by Phorm:

Phorm UK

Presumeably this means, if its still being examined, there could be objections which force Phorm to seek a new trademark?

Trademark obviously doesn't matter, its still Phorm.

Interestingly they haven't registered the Phorm logo as a trademark, only this rather shabby effort.

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

Hopefully it will be established that Phorm deliberately misrepresented the potential value of the company by stating they had signed a deal with VM, (who have now made it clear that they never signed any contract to use Webwise). Effectively conning the stock market and share buyers into believing that they had an extremely valuable contract with a huge company.

Phorm could be in serious trouble, their shares could be suspended and they could face fines and possible prison sentences for any individual who is proven to have been involved in what is effectively fraud.

Maybe this current price surge is related? Announcement of a potential non-deal?

It was also suggested on the BT forums that an investigation into this matter is already underway but there is no confirmation of this from any source.

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

VM still backing off

http://www.techradar.com/news/intern...osition-365327

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

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

See they have the news of ISPreviews poll this link takes you to the results and yes the quoted part is the exact question asked and the selected responses. Brettpoos is barking up the wrong tree trying to say it is how you asked the question.. It is phorm and the ISPs that hide the questions behind offers.

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

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

Q. "Would you leave your ISP if they adopted Phorm?"

- No - 2.3%

That would be Kent's "vast majority of users", then? :LOL:

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

I would say that brettypoos is right. It is how you ask the questions. Unfortunately… there are some who warn that you can’t build a new product using surveys. From Identity - should be more about greed than fear:

I shared a few beers with a friend of mine who works at Saatchi here in London and his view is that the data you get from surveys is “complete tosh� - in his opinion, the only way to get good data is to run creative workshops in which you get people to design a product or service they might buy.

I’m sure that Webwise is consistent with the questions that Phorm had members of the public answer. But now, when presented with the final product, we’re resoundingly saying that it’s not something we want. The blog entry also goes to the point that’s been raised before: There’s nothing in it for us. Where’s the good free stuff, the even cheaper broadband or the cold, hard cash?

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

More copyrights fun. Its not just BT who are in deep doodah. Phorm could be in trouble too if copyright is upheld;

24 Secondary infringement: providing means for making infringing copies
(1) Copyright in a work is infringed by a person who, without the licence of the copyright owner�
(a) makes,
(b) imports into the United Kingdom,
(c) possesses in the course of a business, or
(d) sells or lets for hire, or offers or exposes for sale or hire,
an article specifically designed or adapted for making copies of that work, knowing or having reason to believe that it is to be used to make infringing copies.
(2) Copyright in a work is infringed by a person who without the licence of the copyright owner transmits the work by means of a telecommunications system (otherwise than by broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service), knowing or having reason to believe that infringing copies of the work will be made by means of the reception of the transmission in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.

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

Can I just point out on this that ISPreview is wrong about Virgin changing its T&Cs to allow Phorm

The part they have quoted (G2) is in the original T&Cs issued in Feb 2007.

Web archive link http://web.archive.org/web/200702141...ble/terms.html (archived on 14/02/2007)

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

TOR itself might not be a great solution to get around Phorm, but it did get me thinking about some other possibilities... Phorm's ability to match advertising to content is already pretty limited but we could further reduce its effectiveness by create a plugin that:

Screws up profiling with dummy requests
- The more dummy requests are sent out, the more the profiling is polluted and the less use it becomes
Creates huge numbers of Phorm user ids for each user
- Given that Phorm can't store the user IP address they can't know how many user ids a user has. This could seriously damage the efficiency (and scalability) of their system and, of course, it reduces the effectiveness of the profiling. In the extreme, we could even create a new Phorm id for each request.
Shares user ids between users
- The wider a user id is shared the more worthless it becomes
Blocks any OIX adverts
- The less hits the ads receive the less their clients will be willing to pay.
At the end of the day, the point of Phorm is to make money. If we can do anything to make it more expensive for them to do business and reduce their income then we can increase our chances of getting rid of them.

I'm locked into a BT contract for a while longer (unless I can argue my way out due to the T&C changes) so I might give it a go.

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

Thats so true BenMcr, thing is vm put this in when they rebranded and would have been used like ive said all along to test out phorm (in either stealth capabilites, network impact report, testing the profiler or just even the redirect part of the kit) and hope they were covered incase of a big spotted turd being seen in public.

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

Be careful. If Phorm really is legal (and like hell it is) those acts could be treated as a computer crime (misuse, denial of service etc).

You are better serving notice on BT immediately and walking away from your contract, on the grounds that your service has been significantly changed from that which you contracted to purchase (by changes to T&C, or the operation of a system which you consider is a risk to operate).

Its easy to do, click here.

Ultimately, I guess what price your privacy, safety and security?

Its cost me a few quid, but I don't care. VM aren't trustworthy any more, and the quality of my net connection is too important.

Pete.

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

Yes, I agree with the fact they are bespoke makes it very difficult to identify authenticated sessions. Webmasters can currently can use any method that *they* regard as appropriate for their security/privacy requirements as there is no commonly-accepted standard.

And we shouldn't forget other methods webmasters use to protect content such as difficult-to-guess urls (yeuchh!), IP address deny/allow etc. Deep packet inspection techniques ride roughshod over either of these attempts by webmasters to ensure the security of their data, and Webwise/OIX opt-out solutions using robots.txt are clearly inappropriate for either of these, even if opt-out was acceptable in the first place.

Yes you are correct, there must have been some interception to add the Javascript. Incidentally, the Javascript injection in the PageSense system was relatively minor and consisted of not much more than a tag pointing to the rest of the Javascript used for page scanning etc. The bulk of the Javascript was then downloaded from a webserver, typically from one or both of the sysip.net domains (ntp. and/or dns. - I can't remember right now).

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

Shh... don’t spoil a good story. Section G has come from section 8 of ntl’s old Terms & Conditions. What was previously 8.3.i now appears as G.2.

It appears to me that it was intended to cover the purchase and use of services provided directly by ntl, and was never written with Phorm in mind. But, it does mean that when, presented with the question of Phorm, Virgin Media’s lawyers would have been able to say that Virgin Media were probably covered already.

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

In theory, those changes in T &C's could well be directly connected to Phorm. They, Phorm, were in existence then, and we don't know when the initial talks started between Phorm and any possible partners.

Colin

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

The fact that Phorm changed cookies would have resulted in problems on ISPr where I have admin since they use cookies to allow people to be auto signed in.

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

The particular clause we are talking about was added to ntl's terms in May 2005

http://web.archive.org/web/200511302...e/termschanges

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

Just a thought, but the share price might be people who were short on the phorm stock covering their positions. There are usually retracements in a share price against the trend.

This doesn't look like a typical retracement though, although interestingly it happened to close back above a 50 day moving average the day before. There are other indicators showing that the stock is/was oversold and buy signals may have been triggered (certainley with a stochastics crossover). People who trade stocks using technical analysis of price action look for these types of conditions and if there is enough "technical evidence" that a trend is going to reverse they won't always worry about the fundementals of the companys they are trading shares in.

(chart attached for reference)

Regards...

T

Edit: Also notice that the volume is still fairly low.

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

Not Phorm, but ISP intercepts for advertising was being considered well before 2005.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/02...ps_to_control/

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

That link is describing a completely different technology to Phorm.

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

Does that mean it's still a heap of junk? :dunce:;)

Perhaps if you don't mind tarka, someone with an account could post this over on iii for brettypoos comment?

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

Another Virgin CS rep has decided to put his size ten in his mouth and state the following...

BenMcr says this T&C clause change was done back in 2005? So is the above just more spin from reps trying to be clever (or stupid?) or do these leaks have some substance?

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

"Despite Phorm's self-styled aggressive stance on user privacy, UK customers remain adamantly distrustful of the service, reports ISPreview."

More Here :

http://www.marketingvox.com/phorm-st...-to-do-038533/

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

See carol and son seem to think the poll was rigged by tech heads againast phorm..

The poll cannot be rigged unless the person has a different PC and ISP ip number the vote is cast accepts one vote then every time you revisit you only see the results.

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

I now know the user agent that Phorm is looking for in robots.txt and its time to get Google's opinion methinks. I have received confirmation from BT that Phorm is explicitly looking for the Googlebot's permission in robots.txt - not any search engine:

I posed the following question in an email to Emma Sanderson:

(Note I whoopsied and got the name of the Google agent wrong)

This evening I have received a reply which included the following:

The fact that they have corrected it to Googlebot confirms that it is specifically looking for the Googlebot permission.

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

hehe, it may well still be a piece of junk but I'm sure we are all biased. ;)

If you want to post it on iii you can. I'm no expert investor though, I've done a bit of research on technical analysis over the past year but not really jumped in with both feet yet.

I do have to wonder though, when I saw the price was approaching the 50 day moving average, I thought it was going to move in the extreme one way or the other (sounds daft I know). It was either going to hit a wall of resistance and drop sharply, or the price was going to be forced through the resistance, turning the 50 day moving average into an indicator of support.

Todays action looks like there is now a bit of indecision (chart attached), what is interesting is that the volume traded was greater than the previous day yet the price failed rise and closed lower (with a much narrower trading range). If it drops it will be interesting to see if the 50 day average becomes a level of support.

I'll shut up now and let us get back to the main subject, I just wanted to give a slightly different view on the share price. ;)

Regards...

T

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

Interesting video. Jonas Birgersson seems like a genuine privacy advocate.