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

back online

still there, just i think

peter

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

you find they been doing that since the birth of radio and monitor the data and calls of every thing been transmitted, want proof say a few key words on the phone and you may here the line change just a little :P:D

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

Fair enough. :)

It's just an interesting exercise to consider how they could try and work round problems. Invariably it shows that they are likely to come up with other problems. I'm pretty confident that when (if) they do launch, the uids will leak, phorm will be able to get at PII, profiles will be filled with bogus data and the phishing filter will cause more problems than it solves.

Ah, you mean using the 'master' cookie in phorm's own domain? Fair point. If the users in control of their pc's want to tamper with their uid they still can though.

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

We have a new direction someone new on the scene who might be able to address some of the issues, Gavin Patterson is from now a non-executive director with immediate effect appointed by Media group Johnston Press Plc.
Patterson is a director of BT Group Plc. and is chief executive of BT Retail.

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

If a third party were able to intercept a company's private commercial communications with its customers, how would that I tell the difference between that and any other form of industrial espionage?

Phorm must be stopped.

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

Phorm at close today:
925.00 -37.50 (-3.90%)

:angel:

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

i got http://www.londonstockexchange.com/e...%20B1WTNC4PHRM

937.500 -25.00 -2.60%

peter

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

Make sure they chase the right Phorm. The one with the unregistered trademark, the nicked logo, and the unregistered product name. I'd hate them to sue those nice guys in Barnsley who think up their OWN company and product names, and design their OWN logo.

Still - I suppose as their name and logo were on the internet, Phorm maybe thought copyright didn't apply.

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

Astonishing TV interview with Tim Smart CEO of BT Global Services UK.

Tim Smart discusses benefits and downsides of surveillance. Mentions monitoring verbal conversations and delivering contextual advertising based on the content of the conversation.

States that the challenge is making sure both parties to conversation find it acceptable.

Watch here (click on chapter 5 and 19 to skip to Tim Smarts piece)

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

Not just plain stupid - they are arrogant, ignorant and incompetent as well.

Lots of companies make bad decisions - anyone remember New Coke or the Ford Pinto - but BT's refusal to answer the most basic questions without having to refer the questions to Phorm shows incompetence while their refusal to respond directly to their customers is totally ignorant.

The worse element for me is their arrogant refusal to admit their mistakes and at least acknowledge that they acted in haste. They have allowed their company to be humliated and degraded in the eyes of many people. BT seem oblivious to fact that some of those offended by their actions and behavior will also have control of substantial business contracts with BT which are not going to be renewed not because of privacy concerns but because they feel that BT is untrustworthy and has crawled too far up it's own backside.

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

For the 2006/7 trials, they used js to call the ads off an external server.

Logically, they can only have one database for the ads which will either be called by the virtual site they host at the ISP or the actual site.

Either way, blocking the domain in the hosts file will prevent the display of ads.

There is one big problem with all ideas about blocking and boycotting advertisers. So much of the press I have read has talked about the top 4,000 brands being used for the various BT type profilers. We almost HAVE to buy them because that is all there is in the market place.

On the other hand, the other day in the supermarket - own brand ginger beer @44p, sprite/7up etc all around £1.45. A good £1 being paid for the non-supermarket side of the branding, which will include advertising costs. That, on its own, is a good enough reason to boycott all brands (at least the top 4k)

I for one don't want to pay more for branded goods just because their advertising budget is going up.

---------- Post added at 17:49 ---------- Previous post was at 17:47 ----------

If you exchange UIDs - the UID is still collecting data about global surfing habits. Better to have no phorm than just find ways of getting round it.

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

This is actually a very useful approach and I think should be used more against BT in particular. (It won't work against Phorm)

1 - demonstrate that their current proposals on Webwise are illegal/insecure/technically unworkeable or preferably all 3 (we've done that)
2 - make an informed guess about alternative ways they might do it.
3 - wait a while (so that they get committed to exploring the alternatives)
4 - point out that the alternatives they might be exploring, are also illegal/insecure/impossible
5 - go back to 2 and repeat

I like to give them a month or so between cycles.

It is also important to intersperse, simultaneously, a spattering of (valid and justifable) regulatory complaints at strategic intervals, preferably from different directions - ICO one month, Ofcom the next, so that as they are working on a "new" solution to try and retrofit Webwise for legality, they simultaneously have to invest a lot of time arguing that the previous solution was not illegal - they have to do this at the same time as they are devising a NEW solution because actually they already know the original solution WAS illegal, but can't admit it. The potential for wrong emails/briefings going to the wrong people is enormous because they are having to think about diametrically opposed things at the same time.

Certainly from the public statements from BT that we have seen in various media, there is every evidence to conclude that at BT, this has already happened.

Think of it as ordering a suit from the tailor, and then sending in a different member of your family every time you go for a fitting. Eventually the tailor will become completely confused- you may even drive him completely mad. Obviously you would not want to do this to any tailor unless he had really upset you in the past.

Then, there is of course my former flatmate's utlimate nuclear deterrent method for dealing with awkward organisations with a toxic bureaucratic structure, and a lot of inefficiency and leakage.

Start to refer, threateningly, to non-existent correspondence. This method is explained clearly in the management training film (released as a commercial cartoon entertainment) called "Asterix and the 12 Tasks" - where Asterix, after being given the run-around in a manner which anyone familiar with customer service phone messaging systems will recognise, eventually asks for a Permit A39 as stipulated in circular B65 (or something similar). Neither documents actually exist, and the building eventually explodes or collapses with all the staff running out into the Via Whateverus gibbering and screaming.


Footnote - the above paragraph was a joke. (but only the above paragraph). The rest is serious.

---------- Post added at 17:54 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

I wonder what his email address is? FirstnameDOTlastnameATbtDOTcom ? like the usual format?

Tim Smart deserves mail.

Update - I got an immediate reply and have initiated a correspondence. Can't quote at the moment. We'll see how it goes.

If you do email him, be polite. I was impressed at the speed of the reply.

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

I refer you to Alex's post #10957. ;)

---------- Post added at 18:13 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------

Couldn't you just give BT a piece of paper with PTO written on both sides. I think the end result would be the same. Confusion!

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

make sure the email has lots of adverts in it well the 2nd one you send off after your scanned it looking for key words to match the advert :)

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

I cannot understand why Virgin Media have not come out with a statement totally removing themselves with any relationship with Phorm and this type of DPI targeted advertising methodology. If they cannot see by this day that this in-line 'spyware' not going to to be ignored by the authorities for ever they must be fools as well. There must be a point where they must see that the outrage is only going to get bigger and bigger, and bigger and bigger as time goes on.