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

Thanks for that....I was a little worried then :)

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

With regard to how DPI may be used by Internet Service Providers - the laws specifically state interception may only occur for reasonable network management and explicitly state not for marketing or advertising.

:)

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

Unlikely, my shop site will run in https only, the https site is a mirror of the http site apart from the checkout etc does not run in http

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

If this DPI rootkit system ever gets off the ground, consider using HTTPS in your Product Browsing area to prevent unfortunate users & your Products from being scanned & profiled.

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

Unfortunately, so many suppliers require you to enter personal information on a non-https page, and only use the secure page for payments.
I always email the webmaster, and explain that I wanted to purchase, but will not do so, unless all personal information is secure.

Colin

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

This is one reason why this type of intrusion should never be allowed, The person running it has already shoiwn contempt for public for his own gains with rootkits. The chances of temptation making him revert for material gain again is high. Sorry to say this is one person who has wronged many people and always managed to avoid the consequencies.

It is almost like puttng bank robbers inside an unlocked bank with an open safe would they empty the safe or walk away from temptation..

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

:(

(deleted bogus info; Google does index https I was wrong)

Encryption is not necessary unless you've got crooks stealing content, and spying on traffic. The solution is not encryption, its putting the crooks behind a firewall [a brick firewall, with bars in the window, and a shower where no one dares pick up the soap].

Pete

---------- Post added at 19:48 ---------- Previous post was at 19:32 ----------

13,991... 13,992 ...

8 chances, just 8 chances to be in the elite 'fourteen thousand club'. Image the kudos...

:nworthy: 'My family were *ALL* in the first fourteen thousand' :nworthy:

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

I also found this out only relatively recently. However, I think you were about to make a valid point. Not everything that indexes the web is going to be happy with HTTPS. As well as general purpose search engines, there are many more specialist services. Examples of these would be comparison websites that either spider a very limited portion of the web or use real-time site scraping. I’m not saying that this should prohibit the greater use of encryption, just that it’s something that needs to be born in mind.

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

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7441693.stm [ same LINK as above ]

This leads to a short video "Keith Vaz, chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee on the misuse of data", a few nods and winks in the debate regarding concerns over data. On the whole Keith Vaz made all the usual political fluff talk about assurances and eluded to how the 'Information Commisioner' will save us from abuse!?!

So data abuse gets a 5 minute slot on the BBC with all the warm words of comfort and platitudes about safety. No mention about data abuse by ISPs and collaborations with criminal outfits such as 121Media(Phorm). Vaz did acknowledge 'mission creep' in relation to local councils abusing RIPA powers for none national security reasons.

What the politicians need to get a grip of is how companies like Phorm will abuse private personal data through mission creep. We have already seen an example discussed by licensed private investigator Steven Rambam how government bureacrats in America circumvent data laws by allowing private companies to do the dirty work of collecting information and profiling citizens. This is exactly what Phorm will do if they are given half a chance to, if they can abuse it they will.



Steven Rambam material
Parts 1,2 and 3
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...01334&q=&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...76329&q=&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...89975&q=&hl=en

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

I've now included this as a major point at
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/whyitswrong.htm

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

14,001

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

Interesting followup showing justice can be done:
http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20...-for-6-months/

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

Having "contibuted" to the happyhackers club in my younger years this makes me more determined than ever to see this phail.
As for Vaz bleeting about Mission Creep: as an technical ex-armed forces member I know for a fact that BT and Labour/Tory/Liberal governments will, as in the 70`s/80`s, be mirrored any and all profiles once Webwise/Phorm comes into effect.
I`ve spent the last 6 weeks bookmarking and visiting terrorist websites in the hope that the top 10 words/per page are:
Weapons: Infantry/5.56mm/7.62/L96A1/Sniper/Area Denial/IED/Liquid/HME/Co-oP/
I wonder just what kind of ads BT/Phorm can serve up to an exserviceman.

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

Most likely get you marked on the governments list as apossible terrorist..

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

According to Kent that's not a product friendly profile.

If you're not aware of this, you should be.

(Update; looking back through your posts I see you're already aware).

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

Just come across this on Digg http://digg.com/tech_news/Wikileaks_..._Broke_the_Law

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

@ Florence
I`m being paid by HMG to be a "stay behind" in case of war as per "bad old days". I`m already fingerprinted/DNA`d and on numerous Gov files which is part of the deal. If it tweaks the Security Services tails so much the better. As IMO I`m only keeping abreast of technology by using both those search terms and using certain websites to keep my knowledge current.
@ Dephormation
Yes thanks to yourself and many others (Peter N, Mark H and many others), I`m trying to stay current with what`s happening although a lot of this is wayyyyy above my head. I`m a doer not a thinker lol.

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

For anyone else in the same boat, Portly_Giraffe has done a great job of filtering out the complexity;

http://www.inphormationdesk.org/whyitswrong.htm

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

Yes it's a very good job of getting a complex problem in a simple and easy to understand format. However I believe some readers would prefer an even simpler presentation, maybe not quite telly tubbies level graphics. A professional clear display of graphics, good colours and easy to read details.

Maybe those Phorm designers in Yorkshire (good Phorm not Phormscum) would like to help design some nice stuff ;)

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

Just Emailed my MP Rob Wison Reading East as the 06 trials were carried out in his constituency pointed him to all relevant sites for info hope he doesn't get confused with the record industry this time.

Tarquin

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

With reference to:
http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/th...ID=25682#25682


So if a Group of Website Owners take out a Civil Action against BT for Copyright Infringement, and refuse to settle out of Court, making it a matter of Public Record.

Will "MR Plod" be obliged to regard this also as "criminal" with regards to the same Copyright Act.

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

@ Mr Hanff

So does that 14:00 Deadline for BT/Phorm to server you papers still exist.

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

If it does, and is not withdrawn then BT will have someone else repeating the claim that Alex made (ME!).

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

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

To paraphrase a bunch of Roman slaves...

I am Alexander Hanff.

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

Sorry not ignoring people just been busy. I haven't had a response from Emma yet with regards the email I sent her on Friday evening, I will update people once I do. I suspect they might be another article on ZDNet in the not so distant future.

Alexander Hanff

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

I also haven't had any reply from my last email to her think I was too technical with the question well if no reply by end of week from either Ian or Emma I can only presume they knew what they did was not in the company’s best interests.

Looking for another front to try and fight off phorm what are the many virus/security software suppliers doing and would contacting them trying to make sure they leave phorm as malware/spyware etc and not to reclassify it.

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

Not Quite if they do not remove the threat, which is disproportionate & could well have been served on other people/organizations far more able of resisting BT & informing the Public, then they will know who I am & why I assert my Claim!

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

http://bseshadri.blogspot.com/2008/0...ernet-ads.html

;)

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

If BT went head with the legal action against Alexander then ti wouild be the worst thing they did since to prove him wrong/slanderous or what ever they would have to prove their phorm is legal claims which the ICO said only a court could say if it was legal after hearing all the evidance.

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

Oh sorry, I was a bit ambiguous.

Let me clarify, these are my words to BT; I am Alexander Hanff.

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

I don't think much of the comment at the end of the article :(

Personally, I don't feel this is a major violation of customer's privacy data. Customers have agreed to view ads in content pages. How these ads are customised shouldn't get them worked up too much.

Posted on BadPhorm http://www.heise-online.co.uk/securi...--/news/110875

There are links on the page to two reports from the Government Committee A Surveilllance Society

It's worth ploughing through the reports to see what was said aaabout data retention and the remarks about the commercial data miners.

More importantly, both Reports have rather tidy lists of the MPs that were part of the enquiry. They should perhaps, all be written to.

Is anyone able to think about doing this. These Committee members are a lot more up to date on the issues than most.

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

from your ilago linked url

:wavey: simon
" The committee commends the Information Commissioner for his work on Privacy Impact Assessments, but expresses concerns that they could in practice end up as mere bureaucratic exercises." :)

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

"Watchdog rules out punishment over Phorm trials "

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1...9431420,00.htm

:td:

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

Well what can one say about that? I think Richard Thomas should be fired is the short answer.

Alexander Hanff

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

How can the police say they have not received any complaints? As far as I know every attempt at reporting this has been met with a refusal to issue a crime reference number?

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

We are told by HMG that Police are responsible for investigations of RIPA violations though. Does this mean a formal complaint is needed?

ICO investigates DPA, not RIPA?

EDIT : @tarka - RIPA complaint specific to the leaked document?

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

Alex, did you really say lol

And why are the Police required to have someone formally make an allegation? Can't they think for themselves and say "hmmm, here's something dodgy looking, perhaps I'll investigate a little".

They seem to be taking the stance that it's a political issue rather than what it actually is, a breach of uk criminal law. I'm pretty disgusted at Police attitudes over this and clearly shows how much of a puppet organisation they have become.

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

I can't believe I'm reading that, despite all the evidence they do nothing, because Phorm and BT have told them it's OK.

And as Tarka has already stated every attempt to report this crime has been ignored.

Look like the ICO are in Phorm and BT's pocket.

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

some thing stinks about it all who is really behind it all who?

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

It is the inability of the IC to think for himself and not ask for documentary evidence that what BT are saying is actually true that is really disappointing.
It really wouldn't take much to convince him that the sky is green.

"Hey, Richard, look at the sky. Isn't it a lovely emerald green?"
"Why, yes it is" :rolleyes:

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

What is becoming increasingly clear is that the authorities have an ulterior motive in wanting the Phorm system to go ahead. If there are commercial systems in place which completely track every move a person makes on the internet there is little argument left to prevent the same thing being done by authorities.

George Orwell may have got the year wrong, but in every other respect his predictions are coming true.

A thought which might make politicians start to take notice: How about we start a new political party with the aim of having a candidate standing in every constituency at the next general election?

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

This guy's opinion is worthless from a British point of view. Badri is Indian and Indians probably have a different cultural perspective of privacy (large families with typically less personal privacy). British culture is traditionally a lot more reserved with greater boundaries of people encroaching on our personal space.

Of course British society has undergone a cultural renaissance over the past few years. Voyeuristic reality TV shows everywhere, ASBO yobs showing their drunken @ss in town centres, imported USofA trashy business practices (Hi Kent), and loads more cr@ppy stuff etc etc.

Phorm/*Privacy/K~nt Ertugrul and his sycophants just see Britain as a place to take one huge great dump (sugar coat and polish his turds) then expect us to swallow it down and ask for more. [[ And if you want to see what effect it has take a look at Emma, she's been using it for face cream! :D ]]

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

Well it's quite clear from this latest statement that the ICO isn't there to protect the public at all, and now they've said that despite the documentary evidence they'll do nothing, I think it's time I got back in touch with Viviane Reding, EU commissioner for information society and media and inform her that the UK's body to protect the public are totally ignoring the issue, in fact It sounds very much like Phorm and BT are calling the shots there.

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

hope the eu take over and go about picking it apart.

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

I think you only need 50 candidates to get a party political broadcast. Remember the bouncing yoga lot?

Unfortunately, this government is not going to go to the polls until the last minute, which I think is a couple of years off.

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

Well we go over the ICO's head and complain in detail to our MEP's and through them to the European Commission. We link our complaint to the discrepancies between what BT said in public and what was revealed in the leaked document. We clarify the issues revealed in the leaked document and ask the EC to have a chat with the ICO and lean on him heavily.We make it clear that we are unhappy at the ICO behaving like a little puppy and waving his legs in the air while wagging his tail, when he should be taking BT by the throat and squeezing hard.

And of course - every one who has had an individual complaint rejected by the ICO, take it through the official review procedure.

I've already been in touch with my MEP's, and Don Foster via my own LD MP. Unfortunately one of my MEP's is Giles Chichester MEP Conservative, so don't think I will get much out of him as he is too busy calculating his expenses. Another is Roger Knapman (UKIP) who would never want to use the EC to lean on a UK official, so that's him out the frame. I haven't found the MEP's very responsive to their constituents, compared to my own local Westminster MP.

Presumably we can encourage the press to approach the Metropolitan Police again on 17th July to see if they have had any complaints by that date. Incidentally - shouldn't that file be in more than one person's hands? Including a fairly anonymous member of the public who can stroll in quietly with a witness, to Charing Cross nick on Thursday morning 17th July, just in case the official file-carrier gets detained for 42 days on suspicion of whatever it is they may decide to suspect and the file got lost?

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

https://nodpi.org/?p=19

Alexander Hanff

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

Speechless

ICO are not going to take action ...because?

I now firmly believe, Richard Thomas ought to be sacked.

Because if tens, even hundreds of thousands of people are not entitled to see their rights enforced by him, why is he being paid?

And the Police, not investigating any formal allegation in relation to Phorm ...because?

This absolutely reeks now.

What do I need to do, who do I write to, in the EU?

Because my government has completely failed (in the deepest sense of the word fail).

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

New letter to Tim Boswell:

I'll write to Viviane Reding later.
Bah, and I'm supposed to be going to my graduation party tonight, this hasn't half soured the mood ¬_¬

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

Some notes on the structure of the e-crime Unit which may become helpful.
IMHO. The Unit which seems to be doing a "Nelson" for Political Reasons!
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/securi...--/news/110783

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

Not necessarily to do with the leaked document itself, although that complaint will be made after the protest at the AGM I assume? But I was sure that at least two people have tried to report a contravention of RIPA (I can't remember who though).

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

Pete

You can find contact details for Viviane Reding at the following page

http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barro...t/index_en.htm

And you can find your MEP details (and contact them) through this site

http://www.writetothem.com/

Hope this helps

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

another reason for saying no to Phorm

I do apologies if this has been mentioned on this thread or any other threads but phorm , in its previous incarnation as 121media was responsible for one of the of the nastiest pieces of spyware of 2005 - 2006 the apropos rootkit. even more reason not to trust a company with such a history in spyware to intercept their communications

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

"It only takes One Bad Apple to..."

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

Looks like a Freedom of Information request to the MET is in order.
Then again, if they refused to accept the complaint and no CRN was issued I suppose a request for 'how many complaints' will return zero!


'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.'
...Edmund Burke

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

Actually I have my call reference number :)

Alexander Hanff

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

I've been sent a link about a project that Mozilla are working on called Site Security Policy

It's way over my head, but some of the more techie types might like to take a look

http://people.mozilla.com/~bsterne/s...curity-policy/

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

WTF!!!

The ICO are toothless wnakers, I was spied upon in the workplace a few years ago by the then called NHTCU. This I found out from a single fax cover left in my HR records when i did my subject access request.

The ICO wouldn't make a judgement on getting my then employer release the full info they had, Citing prevention of crime etc.

Wen't thru all the hoops and eventually lost momentum on following it up the twunts...grrr

ICO FAIL.

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

I sent one to Richard Thomas at the ICO (a few days back) asking for stats such as number of complaints received, number of complaints investigated, number of complaints dismissed, number of complaints resulting in a prosection, and evidence provided to the ICO by Phorm.

Naturally, the ICO have ignored it so far. As they do every email/letter I write to them.

Something similar for the Met would be good.

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

If anyone is feeling a little sleepy and wants to experience an upsurge of anger, then check this post and my reply over on BT Beta forums.
http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/me...ID=25763#25763

Please note my willingness to have the post copied. At this rate we should soon have an entire text based transcript of the leaked report on line.

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

I haven't read all the detail yet but it seems to be a client side plugin. The idea being that a web site owner can specify a set of restrictions on the client side.

An example pertinent to this discussion could be...

A web site owner specifies that clients can only run javascript that is served from the same domain. In the case of the trials where javascript was inserted that made requests to dns.sysip.net, the web site owner could specifically say that the javascript was not allowed to run and the browser would obey that restriction.

At least that is what I am reading into that. I think it's a great idea, although for it to be of any use it really does need the major browser vendors to adopt it by default. Look at what happened to p3p, probably something that would be of interest to most of us here... http://www.w3.org/P3P/. I'm not sure if the idea has been dropped entirely, but it appears to have stalled due to lack of support from the major browser vendors.


"After a successful Last Call, the P3P Working Group decided to publish the P3P 1.1 Specification as a Working Group Note to give P3P 1.1 a provisionally final state.
The P3P Specification Working Group took this step as there was insufficient support from current Browser implementers for the implementation of P3P 1.1."

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

This is going to be a really simple questions to answer.

How would I know if my surfing experience was being looked at right now.

What are the Tell Tale Traces that someone has implemented PHORM on any network not just Virgin Medias.

Is there a tool? A device or some simple command that tells me somone is not feeding me the pages as I want them but as they want me to see them?

I sat down this morning and just picked up on some string of some Google update in an e-mail. I havent stopped surfing all day looking in to this PHORM thing. I'm trying to be objective, I've contacted Virgin Media support who have told me it's not running but when it does start (or to be fair they said if it does start) I will be given the option to opt out. Having looked at as much detail as I can I'm struggling to see technically how I can opt out.

I've been in Telecomms and ISP business for 19 years now and while I fully understand the very real issues of trying to derive revenues from a market that is slashing it's own throat on price, while trying to build solid performance networks and pay those gents at BT huge Central charges. I never thought I'd see us hawking through the deritas of our customers surfings looking for a few spare pennies.

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

You might like to get back to them on that, and ask them, didn't they mean "the option to opt-IN"? That is what the ICO kindly very politely suggested that if they really didn't mind, he'd be very grateful if they could do it that way. (Think of the ICO as Mr Barraclough in Porridge, but without Mr Barraclough's overt aggressive tendencies)

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

At the moment it is difficult to know for sure. All we have to go on is the technical information they have given out. "IF" what they have said is true then the dephormation firefox plugin should be able to pick up the existence of any webwise cookies that are placed on your machine. Although again "IF" they implement it the way they say they will you should be redirected to an opt in page once they turn it on (or opt out page if they are feeling brave, or is that stupid? ;))

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

Lets get /.'ing folks - http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=712283

Vote it up, leave some comments.

Alexander Hanff

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]
 

It does make me angry when I read the 'tale' written in such an eloquent and readable manner. Excellent post Mr Jones, you have clearly shown some of BT's inconsistencies.

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

What the hell are the ICO there for to prevent a very unseemly demise of a failing ISP and its failed sidekick or to provide a line where the small person can with ICO help get to the facts of dishonest ISP,s

We vote we pay taxes and in return you get what?

Tarquin

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

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

I wrote to the ICO on Friday. I do not know if today's announcement is in response to my letter or they made the announcement before 'reading' my letter.

The letter was a follow up to the letter they wrote to me on the 30th May. This is the letter where they said

I asked them if they had seen the report on the 2006 trials.
I pointed out to them the folly of BT saying they could not contact me.
I asked them to confirm that they had seen the "legal advice" which BT said they had sought.
I asked them about the 'small scale' quote and asked them to confirm how big a scale the trials would have had to have been in order for them to take action.

Along with a few other questions I stated this:

"May I inform you that I am in full conversation with John Penrose MP and that I am asking EU Commissioner Viviane Reding to investigate this matter, as I believe the ICO is failing in it’s duty to protect personal information.

If I do not receive a satisfactory response I will be forced to not only ask the EU Commission to intervene but also initiate a complaint with the Parliamentary Ombudsman."

The EU and the Parliamentary Ombudsman it is then.

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

You should all be starting to realise by now the purpose of regulators is not to protect the people from big business but big business from the people while trying their best to give the opposite impression while allowing them to maximise profit and control.

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

DEPHORMATION WITHDRAWN

Regret to announce Dephormation site will be taken down later this evening and replaced with a notice demanding the resignation of the Information Commissioner.

This temporary protest will last for 7 days (or until Richard Thomas has resigned). During this period Dephormation will be unavailable to new users.

If you haven't downloaded already, I'd urge you to do so immediately. The software remains copyright and is owned by me. Do not copy or redistribute the software without my consent.

Why am I doing this? Because there is no point me providing software to express a wish to 'opt out' if there are no legal consequences when ISPs flagrantly ignore or even fail to obtain consent from hundreds of thousands of users.

The ICO has brought the IT and communications industry into complete disrepute.

Richard Thomas, please resign now.

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

Just a quick one for the tech bods because I can't get my head around it.

Two weeks prior to the trial, advertising space was bought on non-phorm advertising platforms to do the cookie drop (as it would otherwise have breached BT T&C's).

Does this mean that the cookies would have been dropped into the 3rd party ad host domain?

Does this also mean the ad hosts must have been complicit? (Although I can't think why, they are rivals).

Presumably, then once the trial started, BT/Phorm would need to wait for the user to visit that ad domain again in order to retrieve the cookie and read the UID. Then it could forge cookies into all domains?

Why would this still not breach BT's T&C's?

Or have I got it all wrong?

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

Pete, did you send a FOI request via writetothem? I can't find anything on there: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/ico
Just wondering if it has been 'misplaced' or perhaps you wrote directly to Richard Thomarse?

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

Ah perhaps I mis-spelt his name? That might explain it ;)

---------- Post added at 20:15 ---------- Previous post was at 20:09 ----------

Dephormation will vanish at 10pm precisely. Sorry.

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

Surely you must realise our police force have far more important things to do!

Only today for example both my nephews were stopped by the boys in blue while out riding their scooters .. one was told his vehicle was illegal because 'it was too dirty' .. the other was told to go home and get properly dressed 'you must wear a leather jacket and gloves' .. :mad:

excuse this moment of madness ...

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

@ Alex, did you legal papers turn up before 1400 today or did the sabre rattlers go quiet ?

Bt/Phorm will not take this to court as it means eveidence would have to be produced , and they know this is bad for them.

Shame really.

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

I have it on authority of friends that he's a very good man who won't ignore this... well, we shall see - I will update of course (although I may have to paraphrase as, again, I have not advised that I would post the reply here (still not quite got the hang of this have I?!)

Hank

---------- Post added at 21:08 ---------- Previous post was at 21:00 ----------

Sorry but right now I'm disparing and the ICO seems to me to be more like an insanely grinning cheshire cat who just occasionally flicks their tale but other than that, it's claws are completely retracted and it's got nothing about it. Just laughable.:td:

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

retracted, no, it's been declawed.

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

Yes, so it seems... the question is: Who took kitty to the vets and had this done? And will they be allowed to grow back? And will kitty use them after it has had a knap?

Seriously though, do we think that the ICO can be stirred into action?

Hank

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

Disclaimer: The following is NOT fact.. it is just a possible scenario for what happened and is only guesswork based on the information available. :D

My guess is that when they purchased ad space, the banners were served from a phorm (or then 121media) server, eg rather than supplying the ad company with the image files for banners they just gave them a link to point to (eg http://www.phormadserver.com/banner.php). So when you visited www.apopularshoppingsite.com (i hope that isn't a real site :D), a banner was served from the phorm server which also dropped a cookie on the users machine.

This would seem logical, but I imagine when they ran the actual ad part of the trial, they purchased ad space again supplying the same link instead of an image (eg http://www.phormadserver.com/banner.php) meaning that all cookies dropped previously would be readable when ads were served. This would allow them to decide if you should be served a default advert or a targeted one.

The question arises however... how were they updating that cookie information to assign you to the advertising channels? My brain cogs are whirring... I think another read of Dr Claytons report is in order.

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

I would also like to guess something, based purely on the facts and evidence we have - in the absence of any indication from BT or the ICO to the contrary:

BT may have misled the Information Commissioner's Office and not given them all the facts until they had to speak to them again after the leaked release of the BT report on the 2006 trials.

As I understand it they (BT) were seeking legal action to make Alexander H remove this suggested possible situation from the www.nodpi.org website but that by close of play today they had neither given any information to confirm or deny the case, nor had they issued any legal papers to insist that Alexander complies with their initial request to remove said statements.

All just my thoughts and comments, given what I have read. I could be wrong but currently I think not!

Hank

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

If they were not forging cookies in other domains once they had obtained your UID from the previous cookie drop, they couldn't profile all pages.

Unless they linked UID to IP?

I'm not sure how relevant Dr Claytons report would be to the version used in the 2006 trial, but I can't see how it could work without forging cookies or using IP.

EDIT : Was IP classified as PII in 2006?

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

Gone :(

http://www.dephormation.org.uk/

Depending on developments, it may return in 7 days time.

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

Pete, I congratulate you on your cunning. I know from your previous posts that the Dephormation site has become popular, and using this popularity this way borders on genius.

May I make one small suggestion - that you post a link to the petition? I noticed of late the petition struggling to make even 50 sigs per day, except when the BBC run a story, and has been overtaken by the (deserving) fuel price petition and beat into 4th place. Can we get it back up to 3rd?

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

A smart plan. I will do so after I've visited the gents. Sorry, that was too much info wasn't it?

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

Alex-

It's a disgrace the way the ICO has acted in this situation. Of course, the fight has just begun. Have you considered contacting various US government agencies, NGOs, and privacy advocates regarding the way Phorm and BT have operated in the UK? Given that you have first-hand knowledge and a great deal of information (including the leak) which may be useful to them, it might help them fight the battle in the United States.

For example:

http://tinyurl.com/535upx

It might be helpful to get in touch with these privacy organisations, as it may help them compile a case against Phorm.

After all, a victory over Phorm in the US is tantamount to a victory in the UK.

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

And lets not forget the TalkTalk team, come on guys we haven't heard from you.

Just make sure you put it back if BT start the next trial :)

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

There is no possible way the honourable people at BT, a blue chip company of international repute, could ever knowingly mislead the ICO. Just because any reasonable person looking at the evidence now in the public realm and in the total absence of any reasonable alternative explanation or clarification from BT, might conclude that, just because a range of knowledgeable people with relevant experience in the ethical and legal areas that are germaine to this area er... iss - specific thingy - have said they should be prosecuted over the secret trials (including Dr Richard Clayton) - I would just like to say - they can't possibly have misled the ICO. It just wouldn't be right. And I can't afford the libel action so I would never make such a suggestion. It would be very foolish. I'd get sued if I said it. So I won't say it.

Hear that BT - because you might sue me for saying that you misled the ICO - I'm not saying it. I'm a BT customer of many years standing, I've been keeping myself well informed about this. I've studied your covert trials and your leaked documents. I'd love to express my opinion - I'd love to see you hammered by the ICO and I'd love to see the police raid your head office but I can't say you misled the ICO.

I am familiar with your management style. I am familiar with the way you do things. And although all the bits of the jigsaw appear to fit in a particular way, although all the signposts appear to point me in a particular direction, I won't say you misled the ICO. Of course you didn't. I can't think of any other interpretation of the facts, but if you say you didn't mislead the ICO then of course you didn't. There may be no explanation that makes the slightest sense, but nevertheless you didn't mislead the ICO.

But I'm very very angry. With BT for their obsession with covert and stealth activity, and with the ICO for being so feeble and guillible. Not that you misled him. Of course not. I don't want to be sued. So I won't say it. You wouldn't mislead the ICO. You misled your customers and called it "transparency" but of course you didn't mislead the ICO.

Perhaps we should all post on BT Beta forums saying "Of course BT didn't mislead the ICO" 1000 times, just like when we were at school doing lines? No - don't do that it would be very naughty.

I've come to the conclusion that neither the BT nor the ICO actually understand rational reasonable factual argument. I couldn't possibly speculate as to why that might be.

Maybe you didn't mislead the ICO. Maybe the Commissioner just doesn't fully understand his duties. Maybe someone is leaning on him. Maybe the ICO is a fig leaf. I don't know.

Maybe ridicule will work better?

Of course if BT write to me demanding a retraction of this post - then in obedience to the legal muscle I will of course retract this post, in which I insist that BT did not mislead the ICO.

I hope that BT appreciate just how loyal their customers are. Just like those who line the streets of Harare to cheer Mr. Mugabe, just like those who chanted in support of Enver Hoxha and Joseph Stalin and Nicolai Caucescu, we loyal BT customers join together, in very very straight row, conscious of your friendly lawyers alongside us, and we say,

Viva BT! standard bearers for integrity, transparency and compliance!

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

I agree that it is entirely possible they were forging cookies. Were the UID's linked to an ip address? I couldn't say, and I'm not sure if IP's were classed as PII back then. Given the nature of cookies being tied to the domains they are assigned from I don't think that part of the model would have changed (at least not much).

It's just that as I was typing that post and trying to imagine the process involved a couple of things occured to me and I wanted to refresh my memory on the use of cookies.

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

If the moderators don't object I will cache this post in case it is ordered to be removed!

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

Do you think I've overdone the loyalty?

:erm:

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

is Kent paying backhanders?


Thats a lot of money to raise isn't it you been paying the ICO and other people off have you Kent ?

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

Attending the BT AGM

Anyone unraveled how to attend the BT AGM and whether its worth it? A friend has offered to nominate me as his proxy, and filled in the proxy card. Do I need to take his Admission Card or will BT send me my own "Proxy Card"? The BT website is confusing, and includes this advice:
Do I need to do this as well as getting my friend to complete the proxy card?

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

I'm trying to explore the cookie issue a bit more, especially in the light of BT T&C's preventing them dropping them directly (clearly BT must have had that legal advice).

Does it matter that they are laundering the cookies via phorm and a 3rd party ad site?

They still know that by taking the decision to proceed, it will cause their customers to receive cookies that are outside their T&C's, but BT will still make use of.

If the list of websites at the end of the document were used for the cookie drop does it make any difference that these sites appear to be all US sites as speculated on Badphorm?

http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi...pic.php?6337.0

I just feel that there has to be something here if we can prove they broke their own T&C's.

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

I would advice everyone to avoid BT total Internet package as this is what phorm will be on if and when 21cn comes round avoid BT and anyone who uses BT managed since the managed will have the DPI available later.

Entanet and LLU internet but again avoid Sky until they do say thye will not use phorm.
So far Be has said they will not be phormed, Zen and all Entanet supplied ISPs perhaps BT need to see customers leaving revenue dropping to pull them up short.

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

@Deko, do you have the link for this?

It says copyright 2007. If it's recent, it's important.

It's also probably wise not to make allegations as you have. You might want to rethink and edit?

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

So at £11.25 per share at today's close, and 2.59 Million shares, that represents £29,137,500 of collateral, against the loan, and for each penny that the share price goes down, the collateral becomes worth £25,900 less.

Suddenly I feel more motivated.

Just think - at the end of February, those shares were worth £34. So that represents a loss in value of Kent's shares, of £25,900 x 2275 = £58,922,500

Just in case anyone was losing motivation. Since the end of February the exposure of Phorm's business model and BT's behaviour to genuine public scrutiny has reduced the value of Kent Ertugrul's share holding by nearly £59 million pounds.

Anyone want to check the maths?

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

The quote is from July 2007

http://www.lse.co.uk/ShareNews.asp?s...vuaempa6tbqm7y