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

Page 86 of 143

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Virgin Media Internet Service (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=12)

- - Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33628733)

BadPhormula

10-06-2008 01:39

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34571833)

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!

Ah, so what R Jones is actually saying is "BT misled the ICO", they lied to the ICO in order to try and get away with the data interception crimes they have commited with their criminal partner 121Media(Phorm) and the guy responsible for overlooking this caper was Stratis Scleparis former CTO of BT retail (now CTO of Phorm).

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this double think / double speak Gorwell thingy. Now how do I phrase Richard Thomarse should resign as the ICO because he is negligent in his job? Do we have to use Gorwell double-double speak so he gets the message?

---------- Post added at 00:39 ---------- Previous post was at 00:31 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deko (Post 34571861)

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 ?

WHAT? Phorm paid the ICO off? Scandal!!! Resign Thomarse

Cumulus

10-06-2008 02:27

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

Sorry Mark, I see you've written more posts since I started writing this one and it's clear I'm a bit behind :( Though hopefully some of the info. below will be useful to those who haven't had much time to read the British_Telecom_Phorm_Page_Sense_External_Validati on_report.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34571778)

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.

You are correct to question the relevancy of Dr Clayton's Webwise to the PageSense system used in 2006 as the technologies worked quite differently. The key difference being that the web page analysis for PageSense was performed on the browser using Javascript, whereas Webwise does the analysis on the server.

In PageSense, BT injected a small bit of Javascript to webpages before delivering them to the browser, which caused the browser to retrieve more Javascript but this time from sysip.net (called the "channel server" in the leaked document). Some of this Javascript analysed the page and sent a summary of the page contents (e.g. common keywords & phrases + unique ID etc) to sysip.net for further processing.

Clues to the cookie question are on pages 7 & 46 of the leaked report. All that would be needed technically would be for the channel server to detect whether a cookie already existed for sysip.net whenever a page is requested, and if not, create one and send it to the browser. This check would need to be done for each page accessed and would be enough to uniquely identify a user so a browsing profile could be built up on sysip.net and ads could be served to the correct user.

However, the report makes it clear that BT did not want to change terms & conditions for its broadband users which prevented this "standard" approach. This is just a guess (IANAL), but by setting the cookie for sysip.net beforehand, but only affecting users who visited certain popular sites, presumably it's the T&Cs of those sites which would apply, not the T&Cs of BTs broadband service? And once the cookie has been set, there's no reason for it to change as it only contains the unique ID, and therefore BT's T&Cs are not affected.

So as far as I can see, there was no need for cookie forging, nor for keeping track of IP addresses.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 02:41

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank (Post 34571776)

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

I got an email this evening. Emma is "disappointed" that I have declined to remove the comments about them misleading ICO and has stated they will continue to monitor the situation. No more talk of legal action. So yes basically it would seem BT were indeed trying to menace me. I will look into this but I am sure there is something in the law with regards to threatening someone with legal action if you never intend to follow through with the threat.

Alexander Hanff

Florence

10-06-2008 02:52

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34571921)

You had an email from Emma tonight wonder why she didn't answer my questions then well suppose it is time to put the questions on the forums so others can see what she is avoiding.

Quote:

1. BT Retail BT Retail serves consumer customers and small and medium-sized enterprises in the UK, providing a range of *innovative products and services*. It also comprises BT Ireland and our Enterprises division.

I really think shareholders need to be given a complete rundown on what they are and if they include the targeted advertising?

2. BT Design and BT Operate *BT Design is responsible for the design and deployment of the platforms,* systems and processes which support our products and services, and *BT Operate is responsible for their operation.

*Here I highlighted two sections since both are relevant. I have read where BT ran phorm without BT design involved in this operation is this correct?
On the second bold reading the news leaked and other things about phorm BT Operate didn't do the operation of Phorm it was 121media why are the shareholders not being made aware of this?

3. Going back on the ICO where I have many emails on one of my questions I had this reply.
> My understanding is that BT made a public statement that "a small scale
> technical test of a prototype advertising platform took place for two weeks
> during September - October 2006 [and that] no personally identifiable information was processed, stored or disclosed during this test".
>
Since BT design and BT Operate didn't have total control over these trials you cannot be 100% sure what was processed, what was logged or if it was in a way that they people could be identified. Scripting only needs a small line with a get command and the PC would tell them everything. Unless you are a extremely good scripter you wouldn't understand the scripts. Looking at the paragraph from ICO plus post around the forums you excluded the very people who could read the scripts was there a reason why? Plus to the shareholders you make it look like BT Design and BT Operate were handling Phorm, this puts them in bad position since you openly say they are responsible for the operation when they had no control 121media had total control. That is how it looks at present many are now wondering how much control you are passing onto Phorm?

Tharrick

10-06-2008 04:08

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

Quote:

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' ..

OK, I can understand being angry about the 'too dirty' comments, but I thoroughly agree with stopping people and reminding them to put some sensible clothes on while riding two-wheelers.
I'm a biker myself, and even in this mini-heatwave I wouldn't dream of going without my armour, head to toe. I came off once at 50mph, and skidded myself about 25-30 feet into a crash barrier, and it's only due to the armour that I still have legs.
The average figure for 'road rash' is around 2 inches of flesh lost for every 5 feet that you skid. You don't HAVE 2 inches of flesh thickness on your arms before you've hit bone, and a 25-foot skid is sufficient to remove more than enough flesh to kill you outright. And good gloves are pricey, but if you come off without them you will lose fingers. My gloves set me back something like Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£70 (real top-of-the-range stuff), and I came down on one hand when I skidded out, and the only damage was some slight scuffing to the glove. If I'd have landed even at 30mph on my palm, it would have destroyed my hand.

popper

10-06-2008 05:15

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimllfixit (Post 34571569)

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.

your, and indeed everyones very first thing to do, is send a registered post letter Data Protection Act Notice to the companies removing any and all rights you may have given them unknowingly for the purposes of direct marketing in any T&C contract.

see the link below to a search for your companies registered data controllers address to send it to, and make sure you head the letter "THIS IS A Data Protection Act Notice" to avoid any confusion on their part .

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998...en_3#pt2-l1g11
"11 Right to prevent processing for purposes of direct marketing

(1) An individual is entitled at any time by notice in writing to a data controller to require the data controller at the end of such period as is reasonable in the circumstances to cease, or not to begin, processing for the purposes of direct marketing personal data in respect of which he is the data subject.

(2) If the court is satisfied, on the application of any person who has given a notice under subsection (1), that the data controller has failed to comply with the notice, the court may order him to take such steps for complying with the notice as the court thinks fit.

(3) In this section ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œdirect marketingÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â means the communication (by whatever means) of any advertising or marketing material which is directed to particular individuals.
"

then also send another registered post letter Data Protection Act Notice removing any and all rights to Collect, Process,store, or Export outside the company, your personal data ,except for the specific purposes of supplying and billing for the contracted services.

---------- Post added at 04:15 ---------- Previous post was at 03:45 ----------

ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œdata subjectÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â means an individual who is the subject of personal data;

ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œpersonal dataÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â means data which relate to a living individual who can be identifiedÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Â
(a)
from those data, or

(b)
from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller,

and includes any expression of opinion about the individual and any indication of the intentions of the data controller or any other person in respect of the individual;

ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œprocessingÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â, in relation to information or data, means obtaining, recording or holding the information or data or carrying out any operation or set of operations on the information or data, includingÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Â
(a)
organisation, adaptation or alteration of the information or data,

(b)
retrieval, consultation or use of the information or data,

(c)
disclosure of the information or data by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, or

(d)
alignment, combination, blocking, erasure or destruction of the information or data;

Anonymouse

10-06-2008 08:21

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tharrick (Post 34571928)

OK, I can understand being angry about the 'too dirty' comments, but I thoroughly agree with stopping people and reminding them to put some sensible clothes on while riding two-wheelers.

I did PM the poster just now, not wanting to go OT, but what the hell...it is sensible to wear leathers - I have a biker's jacket myself even though I currently ride a pushbike, and the previous one (now honourably retired after 12 years of faithful service despite all kinds of abuse, including my accident) saved me from some degree of scraping injury (not the cracked ribs, unfortunately - OOOHHH!!!) - but it's not a legal requirement...though you have a very good point in that it probably should be. Nor is it illegal to have a scooter/bike/car/tank/whatever in need of cleaning unless the registration plates and/or L-plates are partly or completely obscured.

I'd prefer it if they had the power to stop cyclists who don't wear helmets or use lights. The former isn't compulsory, but it should be.

Right. Back on-topic, everyone! :)

popper

10-06-2008 09:36

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

OMG, remember that Phorm DID NOT register with the ICO Data Protection Register until 30 January 2008

search on "Phorm" here url: http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/Search.asp?EC=1

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/06...t-excuse-ever/
"BT's Phorm trial - the worst excuse ever
June 9th, 2008 Barry Collins
' "
BT did not discuss these trials with the ICO as they were technical in nature," the ICO claims in a statement sent to PC Pro. '
..."

"....Information Commissioner, which is presumably waiting for Mrs Miggins from the corner shop to lose her paper-round book before clamping down with the full force of our stringent data laws?"

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/204711/b...missioner.html
"
...
Speaking to PC Pro this morning, Phorm spokesman Alex Laity said the company was always confident the service was lawful. "We are confident that we are fully compliant with all relevant laws," he said. "We did go to the ICO before launch, we did go to the Home Office before launch, we did do due diligence to make sure what we did is fully compliant with the law."

"

---------- Post added at 08:36 ---------- Previous post was at 08:00 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo (Post 34571603)

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.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1...20,00.htm?r=16
"The ICO seeks to resolve issues informally," said an ICO spokesperson. "We didn't have the internal [leaked] document, but Phorm and BT did present us with information [after the trial]. We've worked with BT and Phorm and we are not going to take any punitive action at this stage."

"

what exactly this "Phorm and BT did present us with information" is though, is still a mistery, perhaps it was a link to this information ?
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...A240_SH20_.jpg
http://www.amazon.com/AdWords-Dummie.../dp/0470152524

http://www.amazon.com/review/product...owViewpoints=1
"By John Forman "Author -The Essentials of Trading"https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2008/06/32.gif (Boston, MA USA) - See all my reviews
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2008/06/33.gif I think a slightly better title for this book would be "Online Marketing with AdWords for Dummies". I say that because the book goes beyond just AdWords to talk about the peripheral systems involved. Personally, I was after purely AdWords information, so the extra stuff was just something to be ignored and bypassed.

That added material aside, if you want a VERY thorough walk through AdWords, this book will serve your needs quite well. It is dense, full of very useful information and techniques. The author also includes a great deal of supporting info and tools on a support website, which helps to keep things up-to-date.

All in all, a fantastic investment.
....
"

;)

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 09:51

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

Here is something you might all be interested in:

https://nodpi.org/?p=20

Alexander Hanff

Dephormation

10-06-2008 09:59

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

If Phorm spokesman Alex Laity said "we did go to the Home Office before launch" then he could not have been talking about the trials in 2006/7 because Simon Watkin at the Home Office said the following to me in an FoI response;

- Whether the Home Office were made aware of the secret trials conducted by Phorm in 2006/7

It wasn’t.

- Whether the Home Office authorised secret trials conducted by Phorm in 2006/7

The Home Office was not aware of the trials/tests.

- When you first started advising BT and Phorm (and other ISPs)

Asked for a view we gave that view to all parties who asked for it on or after 4 February 2008.

Phorm did not, repeat DID NOT, advise the Home Office before trialling the software in 2006/7. I'm still hopeful we might get more information about the Home Office involvement prior to the public announcement on February 14 2008.

Pete

BetBlowWhistler

10-06-2008 10:09

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34571972)

Here is something you might all be interested in:

https://nodpi.org/?p=20

Alexander Hanff

I see that this was written back in October 2007.

Quote:

The benefits of WBMC are:
ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â¢ Provides a platform for BT Wholesale to provide additional functionality at the connection point such as Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) and content hosting, security (content blocking / virus filtering and harmful application screening) and voice gateways.

Whilst I'm all for giving BT enough rope to hang themselves with, this might not be related to Phorm. I'd be very interested to hear Emma's response to this development. It certainly isn't a blatant advert for ad-serving though is it?

For instance, I'm aware that there have been traffic-shaping units within the BT network for years, but the one I know about was configured for pass-through during my tenure! (20k's worth of kit acting as a transparent bridge :dozey: )

Tarquin L-Smythe

10-06-2008 10:09

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

"OMG, remember that Phorm DID NOT register with the ICO Data Protection Register until 30 January 2008"

And the ICO just forgot to mention in all their nice little pre-launch meetings "Oh by the way tou should register with us " .If I got it right is the ICO just a way of paying your mates for not doing a job.And for cats to have any thing done with claws they had to have some first ,clearly not in this case.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 10:44

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler (Post 34571978)

I see that this was written back in October 2007.

Whilst I'm all for giving BT enough rope to hang themselves with, this might not be related to Phorm. I'd be very interested to hear Emma's response to this development. It certainly isn't a blatant advert for ad-serving though is it?

For instance, I'm aware that there have been traffic-shaping units within the BT network for years, but the one I know about was configured for pass-through during my tenure! (20k's worth of kit acting as a transparent bridge :dozey: )

Well I have made it very clear in the article that DPI can be used for lots of things. The point is, because of that there needs to be transparency, not only from BT (whom I have contacted for further information) but also from the ISPs using WBMC.

ISPs reselling BT Wholesale products should be completely transparent and make sure they have information on 3rd party services, particularly how DPI is being used, available on their web sites.

Since ICO and the Home Office appear to be refusing to offer any form of oversight on these issues, it is up to us to do it instead.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 09:44 ---------- Previous post was at 09:21 ----------

I will also be sending an official complaint to the ISPA this week as I feel BT (a member) have broken section 2.21 and 2.4 of the ISPA Code of Conduct (at the very least) with their trials in 2006/2007.

I will post a letter template on NoDPI once I have finished it and I would recommend as many people as possible send a complaint to the ISPA (either with my template or their own) at the earliest opportunity.

Alexander Hanff

Rchivist

10-06-2008 10:59

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by popper (Post 34571960)

I've had this dream - in it I am thinking of running a technical trial of various ways available to me of sniffing and hacking into my neighbours' wireless routers, I would be looking for the most transparent technical model for this, so that I could theoretically explore the possibility of profiling my neighbours's browsing and possibly their bank and shopping details. I've been wondering about the possibility of there being money to be made, collecting their personal data as I understand it can be sold for a decent price to some shady outfits in Moscow.

I was going to chat to the Home Office but have decided against it. This trial is purely technical in nature and of course I won't be telling my neighbours although I monitor the chat over cocktails to see if they have spotted any problems with their internet connection. (Helps me decide about how compliant the various technical methods are)

I'm wondering about setting up some Core Success Criteria to measure things like "transparency" (whether the neighbours noticed) and "integrity" (did it crash their network or mine). My business partner, Oleg, newly arrived from Moscow, tells me that if I wanted, he could set up the other end of the business, for marketing the data. He's here under an assumed name, but seems to have the skills for that sort of thing.

Blow me down with a feather - the ICO have been in touch and told me it's illegal and I'm in for 42 days detention without charge, and interrogation after rendition to another country. Do you think I could claim that as it was merely a technical trial, the ICO shouldn't "push it"? Apparently they caught me and Oleg chatting on the CCTV covering our back garden.

Do you think the ICO will be lenient with me? After all it was only a technical trial.

Remember - just a dream. I've woken up, stepped out of the shower now, and back into the REAL world where these things don't and can't happen because of the wonderful protection offered to ordinary multinational corporations by our marvellous ICO.

Frank Rizzo

10-06-2008 11:08

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

Alex. I made a complaint to the ISPA asking them to suspend BT whilst investigations were taking place.

I received the typed letter equivalent of a raised middle finger.

The ISPA also advised that I should complain to OTELO instead. I see that as buck passing.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 11:17

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo (Post 34572007)

If they suddenly get 1000+ letters of complaint to deal with, they may not take the matter so lightly. Letter writing campaigns en masse can be very effective as they take real time and money to deal with (as opposed to emails which can be blocked by filters in minutes). It would take a significant amount of time to deal with a mass influx of letters numbering in the thousands which means a significant amount of money. Often it is easier to get action out of an organisation when administrative costs start to hit their bottom line.

Furthermore, we have good solid evidence of the 2006 trials now, so I intend to go through the entire report and indicate which sections of the Code of Practise they are in breach of and comprehensive reference/citation of relevant laws. It is going to be a very long letter.

Alexander Hanff

jelv	10-06-2008 11:22

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

I've been using Google Alerts to monitor postings in any groups containing "webwise" or "phorm". What is very pleasing to see is that they are cropping up in more and more different groups - many to do with security. If Phorm's PR team were aiming to contain and manage "information" in the hope that in a few weeks the storm will have died down they have to date failed dismally!

SelfProtection

10-06-2008 11:44

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

A question keeps making my head spin, maybe someone can clarify how BT & others may manage it.

BT are trying to produce a non cookie option as the cookie clearly leaks & could easily be proved to breach DPA requirements.

In the absence of Cookies, which I believe were also being used to prevent infinite loops on the infrastructure. How would this Infrastructure properly detect infinite loops, specifically in the case of a Firewall or Router blocking the Webwise System. (hosts file would resolve to 127.0.0.1 & not go through the system?).

If this cannot be done reliably then a 100% CPU load could easily be reached with resulting Power & Load Balancing problems.

I specifically ask this because there have been spurious reports on Forums about users having to lift their Software Firewall in order to connect to http port 80 on both the BT & NTL Service, even though they can still receive e-mail etc, over the last 4-6 weeks.
This seems to intermittent & annoying for some users?

jelv	10-06-2008 12:05

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

I think I can see where you are going here:

One of the stated objectives in the leaked document was that the system should be transparent to the user. BT have therefore, having re-engineered the system, started the trials without giving the promised 24 hours notice to see if they have succeeded in making it transparent.

mark777

10-06-2008 12:21

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by jelv (Post 34572043)

Conducting 'technical' trials to test the infrastructure before starting the 'user' trials (for which they will give 24hrs notice)?

IMO that's exactly the sort of stunt they would pull.

A small leak about this sort of thing could have fueled the mini-recovery in the share price we saw about a month ago.

BTW, the shares seem to be moving in the opposite direction to which I would have expected, given yesterday's announcement of the strategic alliance with the ICO. Good volumes as well.

Perhaps money bods get nervous when big companies feel the need to make legal threats to try to gag critics.

EDIT : A compromise Alex :)

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 12:30

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34572053)

Perhaps money bods get nervous when big companies feel the need to use the law to gag critics.

I would change that to "regulators" because they certainly aren't using the law, abusing maybe, but not using.

Alexander Hanff

Rchivist

10-06-2008 12:44

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34572053)

I'm not capable of interpreting this, but I am beginning this week, to see occasional blank pages when I attempt to refresh a web page especially within the BT sites. For example I just clicked on the BT logo on the top of the Beta forum page. Result, blank page with Done in the status bar, and www.bt.com in the address bar. Took three refreshes to get the BT Home page to actually display.

Looking at the Dephormation logs reveals a request (among all the cookie data, my primary BT email address and the .js requests) to
http://www.bt.com/static/includes/ho...//logging.html
which does give a blank page. - I wonder if it is sticking there - and why?

Please note ICO - this is a little technical trial, I can't be breaking any laws, and anyway it would be too difficult to explain owing to the technical nature of my investigation so you just carry on chasing Mrs Miggins.

Incidentally the url above
http://www.touchclarity.com/
is also completely blank and has no source code either. But no error message.

Seems to be on my MVPS supplied hosts file under
# [Omniture][Wildcard DNS]
Interesting?

Touchclarify seem to be involved in behavioural targeting.
http://www.prlog.org/10031979-halifa...targeting.html
Omniture TouchClarity works by building rich individual visitor behavioural profiles combined with automated predictive modelling and direct marketing techniques in order to enable real-time targeting of each visitor with the most engaging content. This results in higher conversion rates, and measurably increased revenue. The visitor response to online creative elements is also measured to ensure the best-performing creative execution is served.

Other industry-leading companies using Omniture TouchClarity include HSBC, BT (British Telecom),
Lloyds TSB, and Barclays.

vicz	10-06-2008 12:52

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

Would this detect what they could be up to?

http://vancouver.cs.washington.edu/

SelfProtection

10-06-2008 13:01

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572062)

I'm not capable of interpreting this, but I am beginning this week, to see occasional blank pages when I attempt to refresh a web page. For example I just clicked on the BT logo on the top of the Beta forum page. Result, blank page with Done in the status bar, and www.bt.com in the address bar. Took three refreshes to get the BT Home page to actually display.

Looking at the Dephormation logs reveals a request (among all the cookie data, my primary BT email address and the .js requests) to
http://www.bt.com/static/includes/ho...//logging.html
which does give a blank page - I wonder if it is sticking there - and why?

Source Code of that page

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html><head><meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"></head>
<body>
<script language="JavaScript">
var container = (document.layers ? window : parent);

function tc_create_content(cc_id,co_id,str){container.tc_se t_content(cc_id,co_id,str);}
function tc_send_report(){container.tc_report();}
tc_swf_content=container.tc_swf_content;

if (typeof container.tc_log_call!='undefined') {
if(typeof container.tc_referrer!='undefined') tc_referrer=container.tc_referrer;
document.write(container.tc_log_call);
}
</script>
</body></html>

Please note ICO - this is a little technical trial, I can't be breaking any laws, and anyway it would be too difficult to explain owing to the technical nature of my investigation so you just carry on chasing Mrs Miggins.

BT seem to have been do something on their pages for the last few weeks, particularly on refresh & linking from them to other sites.
The system inside BT gets very slow with persistent timeouts at times!

vicz	10-06-2008 13:22

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimllfixit (Post 34571569)

These guys are trying to develop 'tripwires' to detect eg NebuAd. Whether they would pickup phorm depends on how it eventually gets implemented I guess.

http://vancouver.cs.washington.edu/

Dephormation

10-06-2008 13:22

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

I was going to spoof this up, but apparently there is no need...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/04...pt#reader-page

Flick through the contents to viii, see the entry for page 42, "The Right to Have Your Data Protected".

I think I might purchase a gift wrapped copy for our friends in the ICO.

Florence

10-06-2008 13:34

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

I had noticed recently when I log in to the Beta forums I am getting a lot of redirects where I have to click on a link since I disabled redirects for a while was wondering which sites were redirecting the most so far BT hits the mark as the one with most redirects.

---------- Post added at 12:34 ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34572073)

Aww amaozon has stoped ppl looking inside that book of to staples to read the page..

Dephormation

10-06-2008 13:36

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florence (Post 34572074)

The Dephormation status monitoring feature will show you the redirects as 'location change' entries in the Error Console (and you can log the changes to file too). It will also reveal any monkey business with the cookies.

Rchivist

10-06-2008 13:38

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

Another good selling day on Phorm shares- over Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£400K sold today and the price is nudging down again to 1100p

Privacy_Matters

10-06-2008 13:47

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572062)

Incidentally the url above
http://www.touchclarity.com/
is also completely blank and has no source code either. But no error message.

I was redirected to the link below:

http://www.omniture.com/en/products/...rget?s_cid=824

Wildie

10-06-2008 13:53

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

just done a trace route having issues with ff crashing out pages been blank, here is a old trace 20 may
Tracing route to www.l.google.com [66.249.93.104]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 32 ms 100 ms 99 ms xxxxxxxx [192.168.1.254]
2 27 ms 23 ms 25 ms esr5.sheffield3.broadband.bt.net [217.

3 25 ms 25 ms 25 ms 217.47.73.13
4 26 ms 24 ms 25 ms 217.41.176.17
5 96 ms 207 ms 202 ms 217.41.176.66
6 25 ms 25 ms 24 ms 217.41.176.78
7 25 ms 25 ms 24 ms 217.41.176.46
8 26 ms 25 ms 25 ms 217.47.19.114
9 25 ms 24 ms 26 ms core1-pos4-1.sheffield.ukcore.bt.net [
.181]
10 26 ms 31 ms 30 ms core1-pos8-0.birmingham.ukcore.bt.net
146]
11 33 ms 32 ms 32 ms core3-pos0-8-0-4.ealing.ukcore.bt.net
.253]
12 31 ms 31 ms 31 ms core1-pos10-0-0.redbus.ukcore.bt.net [
254]
13 33 ms 33 ms 33 ms 195.99.125.110
14 41 ms 43 ms 74 ms 72.14.232.149
15 76 ms 43 ms 42 ms 72.14.233.79
16 43 ms 50 ms 51 ms 216.239.47.229
17 43 ms 42 ms * 216.239.47.229
18 42 ms 42 ms 42 ms ug-in-f104.google.com [66.249.93.104]

Trace complete.

today

Tracing route to www.l.google.com [66.102.9.104]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 93 ms 99 ms 99 ms xxxxxxx [192.168.1.254]
2 25 ms 24 ms 23 ms esr5.sheffield3.broadband.bt.net [217

3 24 ms 26 ms 24 ms 217.47.73.13
4 25 ms 24 ms 25 ms 217.47.73.170
5 25 ms 25 ms 33 ms 217.41.176.17
6 26 ms 25 ms 24 ms 217.41.176.66
7 26 ms 24 ms 25 ms 217.41.176.126
8 24 ms 24 ms 26 ms 217.41.176.38
9 25 ms 25 ms 24 ms 213.123.110.114
10 24 ms 24 ms 24 ms core1-pos14-0.sheffield.ukcore.bt.net
1.165]
11 28 ms 27 ms 28 ms core1-pos8-0.birmingham.ukcore.bt.net
146]
12 30 ms 30 ms 30 ms core1-pos0-6-4-0.ilford.ukcore.bt.net
58]
13 30 ms 30 ms 30 ms core1-pos6-0-0.redbus.ukcore.bt.net [
98]
14 31 ms 31 ms 30 ms 194.74.65.38
15 31 ms 31 ms 31 ms 209.85.255.175
16 42 ms 45 ms 42 ms 209.85.251.190
17 43 ms 43 ms 44 ms 72.14.232.237
18 46 ms 54 ms 53 ms 64.233.174.14
19 41 ms 43 ms 42 ms lm-in-f104.google.com [66.102.9.104]

Trace complete.

notice the extra hop this time round.

Rchivist

10-06-2008 14:01

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Privacy_Matters (Post 34572090)

I was redirected to the link below:

http://www.omniture.com/en/products/...rget?s_cid=824

that's on my hosts list too.

---------- Post added at 13:01 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34572080)

What's the Error Console Pete? - I've got 2.1 version.

tarka

10-06-2008 14:12

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

Again this is just an opinion but the share price could find some "psychological" support at Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£10 a share....if the price drops below that for more than a few days it's will probably struggle to climb back above it without any positive news (positive as far as Phorm are concerned).

---------- Post added at 13:12 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

also I have noticed getting the odd blank page when browsig too (I'm with BT but no longer tied in to a contract). The only site I can remember it happening on was cableforum when I have refreshed a page but it has happened on other sites. I didn't think anything of it until it was brought up here.

Rchivist

10-06-2008 14:19

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarka (Post 34572110)

Do you run a hosts file?
Mine is the MVPS one which is pretty rigorous.

tarka

10-06-2008 14:29

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

no I don't run any hosts files at the moment. my reason for staying with BT as long as I have is in the hope I would be invited to the trial so I could attempt to analyse it's effects. Firstly without any hosts file or blocking in place, then with various types of 'countermeasure' in place. If I do get invited I will swiftly be requesting my mac code and gathering as much info as I can before switching to another provider.

Edited to add I'll be switching to another provider either way as BT no longer deserve my custom. ;)

SelfProtection

10-06-2008 14:52

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

[QUOTE=Wildie;34572092]just done a trace route having issues with ff crashing out pages been blank, here is a old trace 20 may
Tracing route to www.l.google.com [66.249.93.104]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 32 ms 100 ms 99 xxx.xxxx.xxx [192.168.1.254]

It's not a good idea to post that leader information on a Forum I could tell not only a name I might have wanted but also the IP address looks like the default value for a particular type/make of router, "Please tell me that you have at least changed the Default Password", if you haven't change it immediately, because your system looks vulnerable to a particular type of attack!

Wildie

10-06-2008 15:11

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

it`s known they have issues but to answer your question you dam right i change the pwd and its very very very long

Privacy_Matters

10-06-2008 15:12

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34571921)

Maybe this will help:

2 Offer to make amends

(1) A person who has published a statement alleged to be defamatory of another may offer to make amends under this section.

and;

3 Accepting an offer to make amends

(2) The party accepting the offer may not bring or continue defamation proceedings in respect of the publication concerned against the person making the offer, but he is entitled to enforce the offer to make amends, as follows.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts1996..._en_1#pb2-l1g3

It seems to me that BT hilighted the issue; you offered to sort; they accepted; Chapter closed - however you must ensure that you live up to your promise (which we have no doubts you will).

Anyone with more legal experience, and object to this view, please respond.

SelfProtection

10-06-2008 15:13

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572118)

Do you run a hosts file?
Mine is the MVPS one which is pretty rigorous.

The blank page could be a sign of a Browser Page Capture, but that would mean that the capture system is running slo.....w!

mark777

10-06-2008 15:21

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

"EU mulls intervention over BT's secret Phorm trials"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...t_phorm_trial/

---------- Post added at 14:21 ---------- Previous post was at 14:17 ----------

There had to be something hitting the share price. :)

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 15:29

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

Saw that one coming :) Way to go Chris!

Alexander Hanff

warescouse

10-06-2008 15:37

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

I have mentioned this once before. On my laptop at work Google Maps currently does not work most of the time but now and again it works perfectly for about an hour. When it's working badly I get incomplete maps whatever I try in an attempt to fix it. This only started a couple of weeks ago. At work internet is accessed using a BT Business ADSL line. I wish I had a little more time to investigate!

At home (same) laptop always works perfectly for Google maps all times of the day faultlessly. (Cable Virgin Media).

Any thoughts or anyone with similar experiences.

Rchivist

10-06-2008 15:45

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34572144)

Okay - just getting an email off to Mme Reding. Any simple urls to quote with reference to the ICO gums issue? I am afraid I haven't time for a long email.

mark777

10-06-2008 16:08

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572163)

Okay - just getting an email off to Mme Reding. Any simple urls to quote with reference to the ICO gums issue? I am afraid I haven't time for a long email.

I think the only real reference we have to the ICO lamb is in Mr Mainwarings letter, as referenced from the register article.

I assume that the EU Commission would also have an interest in the repeated obstruction of any attempt to get a RIPA investigation started. Links for that abound.

One question for the thread in general. Should we not send notice of our feelings about this via snail-mail?

A pile of letters has a physical presence and may have more impact, especially if it's a big one.

EDIT: ICO also needed 3 stabs at a document before even confirming it must be opt-in.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/about_us/news_...e_and_oie.aspx

Related reg article.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...phorm_tougher/

This will need a lot of thinking about. Without the scrutiny/opposition of the public, phorm would now be running 'transparently' and opt-out. None of the UK authorities have done their job.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 16:16

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

http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=714031

Vote it UP!

Alexander Hanff

SimonHickling

10-06-2008 16:18

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

Well the latest contact I have been given form BT just answered some questions. I have no explicit agreement to quote, so the gist of it was to avoid profiling

Use HTTPS
Use HTTP authentication
Block Googlebot
Tell us what your sites are an prove you are the owner.

I have replied as follows and copied my MP in for good measure. My MP has so far seemed quite supportive on the issue, but we'll see how it goes.

Quote:

Hi,

a) I do not see why I should have to pay for the certificates to make my sites SSL encrypted to ensure my rights to privacy.

b) My sites use cookie based authentication (as do many, many sites out there), so this is a non-starter. but at least this is an admission that you will in fact be intercepting data from parts of sites which are password protected.

c) As I have previously stated, I am happy for Google to index my site as it directs visitors to my site - the Phorm system does not. In fact it actually uses the content of my site to direct your customers to other similar sites which may interest them - quite the opposite. I find your use of the Googlebot rules to be crass at the very least - you should have the bottle to use your own separate user-agent string rather than pretending to be Googlebot (computer misuse???)

On your next point I see no reason why I should have to provide you (and any other ISPs who use this type of technology) with my details in order to block access. Doing so would help to give your policies credence which they do not (in my opinion) deserve. You should not profile my site unless I specifically give you (not Google) access.

As the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (Chapter 1 Section 3) states

(1) Conduct by any person consisting in the interception of a communication is authorised by this section if the communication is one which, or which that person has reasonable grounds for believing, is both—

(a) a communication sent by a person who has consented to the interception; and

(b) a communication the intended recipient of which has so consented.

As it stands, but "pretending to be Google" you cannot in good faith have reasonable grounds for believing the person sending the communication (website owner) has consented to the interception. I know I don't consent and I am aware of a number of other site owners who feel the same way.

If necessary I could examine the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, with reference to you copying my pages, and creating a derivative work, for financial gain in its use for directed advertising.

Aside from the expensive route of HTTPS, I also have no guarantees (other than your word) that you will not profile my site. Nor have you provided, to the best of my knowledge, any way of telling whether or not my site has been profiled, so that I may check that you are doing as you say you will. Given the way in which BT has conducted itself with this matter and Phorm's history as 121Media I am not inclined to take your word for it.

As such could you please provide either the ip address ranges (Alternatively use your own user-agent for robots.txt) or a method by which I will be able to tell whether my traffic has been profiled?

A copy of (my portion) of this reply will be posted to the cable forum thread regarding this issue, and unless advised to the contrary I will assume that as I have access to your reply it is OK for others to read it also and I will post it up.

Regards

Simon

If anyone would care to provide anything they think worth mentioning in the next installment, I'm open to suggestions.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 16:19

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

And yes, everyone should send a postal letter to Commissioner Reding applauding the news and reiterating their concerns over ICO's inaction on this issue and the wider issue of Phorm as a whole.

We have the ball in our court now, we are very much in the game and we need to take advantage of this news to make sure the Commissioner knows that this is a major public issue and not just a bunch of geeks whining.

Please, if ever there was a crucial time to write a real letter, now IS that time.

Alexander Hanff

tarka

10-06-2008 16:27

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

Just a thought, but I don't think that it is only the ICO that we should be focusing on. Haven't they said they are only interested in the DPA? The refusal of the police to investigate numerous complaints regarding RIPA should not be forgotten and should probably be pursued just as rigorously.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 16:29

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

Well we need to get the case file to the police at the protest before we can realistically start complaint procedures, since then we will have a much stronger argument given the case file will be handed over in a public fashion.

Alexander Hanff

mark777

10-06-2008 16:35

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34572199)

Perhaps we should not be waiting until the protest. It's 5 or 6 weeks away.

Maybe we should get the file together, all download it and make a coordinated mass complaint at our local nicks.

No joy there, make a complaint to each Chief Constable, stressing that no action will result in complaint to the IPCC and EU commission.

We can still do the same at the demo.

EDIT : Looks like Phorm are shoring the share price again.

davews

10-06-2008 16:53

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by SimonHickling (Post 34572190)

Well the latest contact I have been given form BT just answered some questions. I have no explicit agreement to quote, so the gist of it was to avoid profiling

Use HTTPS
Use HTTP authentication
Block Googlebot
Tell us what your sites are an prove you are the owner.

I have replied as follows and copied my MP in for good measure. My MP has so far seemed quite supportive on the issue, but we'll see how it goes.

If anyone would care to provide anything they think worth mentioning in the next installment, I'm open to suggestions.

And you can add to your comments:

None of those methods are available to those who use free hosting provided by their ISP (ie BTOpenworld/Geocities/NTLWorld etc). We have no facility to use https or set up robots.txt.

(I have just noticed that one of the sites I am responsible for hosted elsewhere can be accessed by https. But that comes with a drawback in that the supplier of the space has a self-signed certificate which flags an insecure warning in many browsers. Nothing I can do about it myself but complain to the hoster, but people have already been doing that for years and failed to get it changed. I would prefer my visitors not to be put off by a certificate warning outside my own control..).

mark777

10-06-2008 16:57

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34572188)

http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=714031

Vote it UP!

Alexander Hanff

Given the discussion a few days ago about digg and sandboxes, should we be doing this by clicking on the URL or should we be pasting it into a new browser window?

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 17:07

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

Might be safer to do it straight from the browser as opposed to clicking.

Alexander Hanff

popper

10-06-2008 17:25

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34572144)

LOL, we even got a direct cable forum thread URL reference directly on the main story.

thats good for driving the information home to new readers.
:welcome: :angel:

SimonHickling

10-06-2008 17:46

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by davews (Post 34572216)

Just sent this :

Quote:

I've just realised that none of your options are available on many ISP "free" hosting. The robots.txt is held at the root level, https would only be available if the ISP provided it and made it the only way of accessing and many ISPs do not provide the option for http authentication to the users' folders.

Simon

Rchivist

10-06-2008 17:59

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34572191)

Done -email converted to paper letter.

And request copied over to BT Beta, with a short list of relevant urls to include.

AlexanderHanff

10-06-2008 18:13

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

Send your letters directly to her office at the EU Commission:

Viviane Reding
Member of the European Commission
BE-1049 Brussels
Belgium

Alexander Hanff

Deko	10-06-2008 18:17

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

Mr Hanff

it would appear you can now say what you like about BT/PHorm as long as you make it too complicated to be understood by numptys

Rchivist

10-06-2008 18:25

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deko (Post 34572283)

Mr Hanff

it would appear you can now say what you like about BT/PHorm as long as you make it to complicated to be explained to anyone.

BTCustomers have known that for years - we experience that in every single communication with email or telephone support or complaint departments. Quite frequently with senior management too. We always seem to know more than they do, despite their Stealth management style.

---------- Post added at 17:25 ---------- Previous post was at 17:23 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by SimonHickling (Post 34572243)

Just sent this :

Re: the ISP hosted webspace. I asked them that about a month ago - it was about the time Emma and I stopped writing to each other.

Never did get a reply. Think I heard the sound of a "doh!" as they read the email though.

Dephormation

10-06-2008 18:27

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572095)

What's the Error Console Pete? - I've got 2.1 version.

Sorry - should have explained... (Ctrl+Shift+J) or Tools menu, Error Console... (and click on Messages tab).

Its the same content you see in the log files, but without the hassle of loading the log file. Very handy if you want a quick double check. Doesn't require logging to be switched on.

Rchivist

10-06-2008 18:36

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34572308)

Ta. Luvly jubbly.

Dephormation

10-06-2008 18:36

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

Viviane Reding's web site is interesting; she has got a good grasp of the principles involved, and the issues at stake.

Makes Richard Thomas ICO web site look a bit rubbish. 'My first web site, with pictures, by Richard age 3'.

mark777

10-06-2008 18:51

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34572188)

http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=714031

Vote it UP!

Alexander Hanff

Bumping this forward.

If, like me, you have not used this before, it's the +/- to the left of the article title that you want, after you have registered. (Took me ages to work out!)

Please correct me if i'm wrong, as it means i've not voted yet. :)

(It's a b awful, unintuitive site imho)

Hank	10-06-2008 20:04

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34571921)

I got an email this evening. Emma is "disappointed" that I have declined to remove the comments about them misleading ICO...

Alexander Hanff

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34571975)

- Whether the Home Office were made aware of the secret trials conducted by Phorm in 2006/7

It wasnÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t.

- Whether the Home Office authorised secret trials conducted by Phorm in 2006/7

The Home Office was not aware of the trials/tests.

- When you first started advising BT and Phorm (and other ISPs)

Asked for a view we gave that view to all parties who asked for it on or after 4 February 2008.

Are you quoting the ICO / HO directly? Could they get away with questions about "Phorm" which refer to the time pre-their incarnation (i.e. when they were still 121media).

Hank

---------- Post added at 19:00 ---------- Previous post was at 18:58 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jelv (Post 34572018)

Aye... and the reason they have failed so dismally is because there are soooo many more of us than they could afford to hire from PR agencies :)

In the battle for hearts and minds the ones on the right side of the law and "doing the right things" will win.

Hank

---------- Post added at 19:04 ---------- Previous post was at 19:00 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarka (Post 34572110)

I have noticed getting the odd blank page when browsig too (I'm with BT but no longer tied in to a contract). The only site I can remember it happening on was cableforum when I have refreshed a page but it has happened on other sites. I didn't think anything of it until it was brought up here.

I had this too (and I am with BT - it started last night on Facebook) browser loading but blank pages when complete - I had to refresh to get it to re-get the page. Most times that sorted it out. It happened about 6 or 8 times in an hour or two. About 8:30 to 10pm.

Hmmm, have we spotted something significant perhaps?

Hank

warescouse

10-06-2008 20:48

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank (Post 34572363)

cut...
I had this too (and I am with BT - it started last night on Facebook) browser loading but blank pages when complete - I had to refresh to get it to re-get the page. Most times that sorted it out. It happened about 6 or 8 times in an hour or two. About 8:30 to 10pm.

Hmmm, have we spotted something significant perhaps?

Hank

As I have mentioned before (but ignored). Somebody who has a little time please run Google Maps under packet analysis and compare a BT connection with another none BT one.

There are so many Ajax type calls going on under Google maps on one single page call, I have a strong gut feeling it would show up any Phorming going on in a comparison. Don't forget BT for all we know could be testing the system right now without servicing any advert behaviour. They could be part testing simple redirects etc without the full Webwise / Phorm system in place.

That's what I would do in any stage one. Test as much as you can before the full roll-out. They could do some testing that could be within some legal boundaries, just to test latencies etc.

Dephormation

10-06-2008 20:52

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

Here's curious. BT customers, don't try this at home (because your UID/security credentials will leak to an American server operated by Phorm).

Add this line to your host file (either /etc/hosts on linux, or c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts. on Windows).

207.44.186.90 www.webwise.bt.com

This causes www.webwise.bt.com to resolve to its old US of A address. Now visit www.webwise.bt.com in your browser... tada! Its still there!

Hey welcome to dubyadubyadubya.webwise.bt.com, have a nice day now.

So while they changed the DNS, they didn't actually take the site down.

Anyway, sorry for that irrelevant interlude. I'm off to compose my letter to Ms Reding.

jelv	10-06-2008 21:00

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34572452)

So while they changed the DNS, they didn't actually take the site down.

Which means that anyone who has the old IP address in their DNS cache will still be going to the old site!

Edit: Bet it disappears tomorrow as a result of the PhormPRTeam watching this topic (without logging in).

BetBlowWhistler

10-06-2008 21:12

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34572452)

wouldn't it have been easier just to put the ip into the address bar? :p:

Deko	10-06-2008 21:16

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

@ BetBlowWhistler

I imagine the site uses host headers to know what content to display, the IP itself does not work.

Rchivist

10-06-2008 21:20

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank (Post 34572363)

Disappointed eh? I bet she is. Probably a lot more than "disapponted" too!!!

Did BT mislead the ICO? You might very well say that my friend, but I... I could not possibly comment.

Hank

---------- Post added at 18:58 ---------- Previous post was at 18:39 ----------

Are you quoting the ICO / HO directly? Could they get away with questions about "Phorm" which refer to the time pre-their incarnation (i.e. when they were still 121media).

Hank

---------- Post added at 19:00 ---------- Previous post was at 18:58 ----------

Aye... and the reason they have failed so dismally is because there are soooo many more of us than they could afford to hire from PR agencies :)

In the battle for hearts and minds the ones on the right side of the law and "doing the right things" will win.

Hank

---------- Post added at 19:04 ---------- Previous post was at 19:00 ----------

I had this too (and I am with BT - it started last night on Facebook) browser loading but blank pages when complete - I had to refresh to get it to re-get the page. Most times that sorted it out. It happened about 6 or 8 times in an hour or two. About 8:30 to 10pm.

Hmmm, have we spotted something significant perhaps?

Hank

If you have the Dephormation Firefox addon, even if logging is off, as soon as that happens, leave the blank page as it is and then go to Firefox Tools - Error Console and the log will be on display and is copiable after you highlight the entries you want with a left click, and then get the copy option with a left click. Means you don't have to leave logging ON in the addon which is a bad idea because the logs get BIG.

Tomorrow I will finally post my ICO and Viviane Reding letters snail mail. Duty done.

BetBlowWhistler

10-06-2008 21:40

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deko (Post 34572478)

@ BetBlowWhistler

I imagine the site uses host headers to know what content to display, the IP itself does not work.

Doh! :tired:

um, er, as I was saying, good article on the beeb about Virgin's spying antics (the author alludes to softening up their customers to be spied on too - phorm related comment?)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7444390.stm

Portly_Giraffe

10-06-2008 21:42

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

Apologies for the length of this post. Please comment on this critique for accuracy, let me know if I've missed any points or am making any spurious points. Or indeed if anything could be expressed more effectively. And typos of course. Thanks. PG.

Quote:

CRITIQUE OF THE ICO’S 31st MAY 2008 RESPONSE TO COMPLAINTS
ABOUT THE BT PAGESENSE/WEBWISE/PHORM TRIALS

ICO: BT have explained that two technical tests of a prototype advertising platform were conducted in 2006 and 2007. They have informed us that these tests were designed to evaluate the functional and technical performance of the platform. BT have confirmed that they sought their own legal advice before both trials.

BT have never disclosed who provided this legal advice, whether it was bona fide or what was in it.

Question 1: Why has the ICO does not asked BT for this information?

ICO: Where a purely technical trial is conducted that, in BT's view, is likely to have little or no impact on customers, they have advised that they would not generally seek consent from customers.

The first success criterion of the trials indicates that their purpose was to determine whether the installation, integration, and use of Pagesense/Webwise/Phorm would be transparent to customers. (Leaked report page 10, section 3.1, requirement 1.1). The success criterion for this was “No customer calls to helpdesk related to installation, integration & use compatibility issues of PageSense application with other applications”. So BT clearly expected that problems could arise.

Question 2: Will the ICO explain why they agreed that BT could act without consent from their customers if such problems were possible, let alone the fact that without such consent (and probably even with it) the trials were illegal under RIPA?

ICO: As they did not anticipate the trials would cause customers problems they did not brief their customer service helpdesks about them (hence the problems you experienced in getting advice from them at the time).

Although BT claim they did not brief their helpdesks, they clearly did monitor calls. 15-20 trialists identified the presence of the system and had a negative reaction. (Leaked report page 4, Executive Summary, Point 1).

Question 3: Will the ICO ask BT to explain how they identified these 15-20 users?

ICO: BT have told us that they did not associate your enquiry with the 2007 trial and as they were not able to identify individual customers that had participated (because of the anonymity of the process) . . .

BT appear to have been aware of the IP addresses of the triallists. (Leaked report page 45, under the heading "IP addresses seen through the Proxy Servers – obscured in the leaked copy of the document but present in the original).

Question 4: Will the ICO explain how their statement that BT “were not able to identify individual customers that had participated” is consistent with the leaked report?

ICO: . . . they were unable to get back to you. They have advised that they attempted to contact you after you had expressed concerns online at 'The Register' however they were apparently not successful.

The complainant says that BT logged support, abuse, and customer service records in his name and was always available to be contacted. In his own words: “Was the line constantly engaged? Did they not know my phone number or address? I was a god damn BT customer! Of course they had my contact details.”

Question 5: Why has the ICO accepted BT’s assurances apparently without question when they appear to contradict the triallist’s experience?

ICO: Finally, BT have confirmed that no personally identifiable information was processed, stored or disclosed during either trial. We have no reason to doubt this assertion. Where no personal data is processed the Data Protection Act will not apply.

BT appear to have been aware of the IP addresses of the triallists (see above).

Data in the BT trials was processed at sysip.net, a domain operated outside the BT network, and indeed outside the EU, by adware company 121media, whose products were categorised as malware by at least three reputable anti-virus companies.

Question 6: Why does the ICO accept BT's assurances that no personally identifiable information was processed, stored or disclosed during either trial when it appears that they were and indeed the whole point of Phorm/ Webwise is to do just that?

ICO: As we discussed when we spoke the issues that we have considered in this case relate primarily to the requirements of Regulations 6 and 7 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003.

Regulation 6 requires that where an organisation is using an electronic communications network to store information, or gain access to information stored, in the terminal equipment of a subscriber or user, the subscriber or user should (in most cases) be provided with 'clear and comprehensive' information about the purposes of the storage of, or access to, that information, and the opportunity to refuse the storage of or access to that information. In other words, if an organisation collects information using cookies they have to tell people about that, and advised them how to prevent operating.

… however it is our view that Regulation 6 would likely to apply. BT’s view is that as the 2007 trial was small scale and technical in nature and no adverts were served, it would have been difficult to frame any advice for customers about the operation of cookies, and obtain any relevant consents for the processing of traffic data, with a wording that they would have any resonance at all for their customers.

The leaked BT report states that the 2006 trials of Webwise/Phorm involved a userbase of approximately 18,000 customers with a maximum of 10,000 online concurrently. The document states that the planned userbase for their phase 2 testing (presumably the 2007 trials) was 350,000.

Question 7: How big does the level of interception have to be before the ICO will act?

ICO: Our view is that, whether or not there was a technical breach of the Regulation, there is no evidence that the trials generally involved significant detriment to individuals involved (although we acknowledge – as have BT – the problem you flagged) or privacy risks to individuals.

The trials involved interception, reading, recording and in some cases alteration of messages sent between internet users and the websites they accessed. Data in the BT trials was processed outside the EU, by a third party few technically aware users would have trusted had they known they were involved.

Privacy laws exist precisely because the detriment of intrusion is not always measurable in purely economic terms.

Question 8: Will the ICO explain whether they are now only interested in cases where economic loss can be demonstrated?

ICO: On this basis, and taking into account the difficulties involved in providing meaningful and clear information to customers (the vast majority of whom were likely to be completed unrelated to the anonymous technical trial) in this case, this is not an issue we intend to pursue further with BT.

In other words because it was difficult for their Webwise/Phorm trials to obey the law, the ICO says it will allow BT to break it in this case.

Question 9: Does that mean that the ICO will allow any ISP, telecoms provider or postal service to carry out a similar scheme if its operation is sufficiently opaque?

ICO: However, as we discussed when we spoke I understand you were considering the options available to you in terms of pursuing this matter further yourself. As I mentioned briefly on the telephone, Regulation 30 specifies that a person who suffers damage by reason of a contravention of any of the requirements of the Regulations by any other person can make a claim for compensation for that damage.

If you believe you have suffered quantifiable damage as a result of a breach of the Regulations and are considering pursuing this matter you should seek your own legal advice.

Question 10: What purpose does the ICO serve if it is unable or unwilling to uphold the criminal law?

SelfProtection

10-06-2008 21:45

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

Anyone still using the Windows Safari Browser please look at this link:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06..._bombing_demo/

Rchivist

10-06-2008 21:51

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler (Post 34572496)

I like the bit about the WPAA trying to sue laser printers. Alex - could you disguise yourself as a laser printer this way next time you put something on noDPI that BT don't like? :D

Dephormation

10-06-2008 22:02

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Portly_Giraffe (Post 34572498)

Some other thoughts;

BT made no attempt to measure the economic impact on customers (how could they? it was done secretly and anonymously). The ICO simply accepted their assurance that there was no economic impact. The value of privacy/security is intangible; it is priceless. I don't recall reading an economic threshold in the DPA.
BT didn't do an adequate risk assessment, they didn't even warn customers, or the Home Office. In the process BT would have profiled people who for personal reasons, or career reasons, might have been placed in jeopardy. ICO have ignored this, claiming it would have been too difficult to communicate to customers.
ICO have not consulted with independent IT experts, or conducted an independent investigation. They even go as far as saying; "We've worked with BT and Phorm and we are not going to take any punitive action at this stage" which is hardly independent regulation at its finest.

So many things. So many many things.

Richard Thomas :nutter: must resign, before he allows this outrage to happen again.

And BT must be prosecuted. :knock:

:grind:

JohnHorb

10-06-2008 22:03

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Portly_Giraffe (Post 34572498)

Re the point above Q7 '...and no adverts were served'. Isn't this a downright lie, according to the leaked report?

Rchivist

10-06-2008 22:40

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Portly_Giraffe (Post 34572498)

Done via PM

---------- Post added at 21:40 ---------- Previous post was at 21:07 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnHorb (Post 34572523)

Re the point above Q7 '...and no adverts were served'. Isn't this a downright lie, according to the leaked report?

The leaked report is about the 2006 trials. We haven't located the leakable report on the 2007 ones yet. But there's still time....

Florence

10-06-2008 22:45

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

BT not even made the shareholders aware of the DPI or nature of this according to my email today. since BT products run into the thousands..

Would it be good if more send the questions to ICO to give them more to consider.

Dephormation

10-06-2008 22:55

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

Been looking back over some of the blog posts, recapping material for a very detailed complaint to Ms Reding. To melancholic Amy Winehouse music*.

Its like looking back over a verbal battlefield, strewn with casualties, foul acts of treachery, famous victories, and heroism.

I'm proud to have been a small part of it (whatever the outcome).

Sorry, back to the letter writing.

*Update, got a grip now, THE CLASH: I FOUGHT THE LAW now ringing in my ears, BT Directors would like it ;)

Rchivist

10-06-2008 22:57

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florence (Post 34572572)

BT not even made the shareholders aware of the DPI or nature of this according to my email today. since BT products run into the thousands..

Maybe it is because it would be too difficult to explain? So they don't need to?

Tharrick

10-06-2008 23:14

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

Quote:

Update, got a grip now, THE CLASH: I FOUGHT THE LAW now ringing in my ears, BT Directors would like it

Try Judas Priest: Breaking the Law :P

Hank	10-06-2008 23:43

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34572277)

Send your letters directly to her office at the EU Commission:

Viviane Reding
Member of the European Commission
BE-1049 Brussels
Belgium

Alexander Hanff

Letter done, in an envelope, to post tomorrow. Agree with you Alexander and the other posters here... snail mail is best for these things... Hank :)

davidb24v

10-06-2008 23:47

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34572191)

Noted Alex. I will write a letter (or letters) now. Thank you for all your efforts on this - with a following wind I would have done more but work and life (what? there's a difference?) intervene as ever. I do need to write something up to get a system that will connect to "a government network", er, "accredited". First entry in the "risk register"? Step forward BT and any ISP stupid enough to do this Phorm crap :p:

I've asked a few people I trust about this and they sort of say "BT? Jolly good chaps, we use them. Totally trustworthy. What what what". And then, as I go further... "everything is vulnerable to a man in the middle attack". Errr.... Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee I think.

Softly, softly, catchee monkee;)

Dave

Florence

10-06-2008 23:55

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572582)

Maybe it is because it would be too difficult to explain? So they don't need to?

Wonder how many shareholders are slao BT total customers and if they want to be stalked over the internet

SimonHickling

11-06-2008 01:40

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

Just out of interest has anyone got any more info on the Talk Talk switch on in June? I may have missed something on the thread when I slept (or blinked :))

Or contact details, so I can ask them the same questions I've asked BT? Seems a shame to not involve them.

Dephormation

11-06-2008 01:56

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

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...php?p=23967088

I can confirm that as of June 2008 we will begin to offer our customers Phorm and Webwise services. This new service will help protect our customers from fraudulent websites and provides them with targeting advertising based on their web activity.

For further information please go to www.webwise.com.

Yours sincerely,

Heather Lunt
TalkTalk Customer Relations

SimonHickling

11-06-2008 02:02

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

Thanks for that. I went to webwise for a laugh. Was the VM logo on there at any point? It's not there now and the logos look a bit unbalanced.

Dephormation

11-06-2008 02:05

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

Google;

Your search - site:talktalk.co.uk webwise - did not match any documents.

Which is a bit surprising for a service they are so keen to deploy, transparently.

---------- Post added at 01:05 ---------- Previous post was at 01:02 ----------

Talk Talk? Phorm? June?

I've got friends in porcine aerodynamics who see a bright future for their products too.

They call it a "Revolution in aviation bacon". The pigs can opt out by eating cookies.

SimonHickling

11-06-2008 02:05

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

If you look around their site there's no mention of it either. I just don't want them to feel left out, what with all the attention BT are getting.

BadPhormula

11-06-2008 02:16

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

The poll for this thread has reached the magical 1,000 voters

958 yes voters = 95.80%
42 no idiots = 4.20%

prior to the 1,000 vote mark everytime we saw a new voter adding their mark to the yes (the ethical vote) the % scale didn't seem to shift to much (obviously). Whenever an idiot voted 'no' we would see the % indicator fluctuate on the right side of the decimal point and this was disappointing to see.

In order to see a really good result that will please the yes voters (the sensible vote) we would like to see the percentage tend towards 100% i.e. 99.XX% BUT did you know that even if no more idiots or Phormscumettes voted 'no' we would still need ten times as many 'yes' votes (the correct vote)..

9,958 'Yes' voters (give yourself a pat on the back for making the right choice) and 42 'No' (*******s) would still only give a 99.58% to the stamp out Phorm poll.

With 100,000 voters

99,958 'Yes' (heros)
42 'No' (villains)

Still only gives us 99.96% (Good Guys) vs 0.04% (Tw~ts)

etc etc You get the idea ;)

Keep up the good votes!

icsys

11-06-2008 02:28

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

Phorm shares closed at 1,087.50 yesterday -37.50
Does that make you feel a little better?

P.S. I hope you don't incite people to vote 'no' out of sheer spite! :erm:

---------- Post added at 01:28 ---------- Previous post was at 01:24 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by SimonHickling (Post 34572715)

Most likely they are holding off to see what happens with BT? But there are still three weeks of June left yet.
Any developments may appear on the talktalk forums

BadPhormula

11-06-2008 03:02

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by icsys (Post 34572735)

Phorm shares closed at 1,087.50 yesterday -37.50
Does that make you feel a little better?

P.S. I hope you don't incite people to vote 'no' out of sheer spite! :erm:

First point: I'm always pleased to see Phorm get a good kicking in the shares :p:

Second: Regarding inciting idiots to vote 'no' out of spite, no I don't really care much about that, after all it is they who will have to live with their own stupidity. If anything I would feel a little bit sorry for such a retch, they must be living in a constant torment for being such an absolute turd :)

Getting back to the first point about Phorm shares (something we couldn't discuss on BadPhorm) another poster mentioned an interesting point about a certain level from which Phorm would probably not recover. Like the voting poll 'here' certain numbers have a special value (1/10/100/1,000/10,000 etc)

The special value for Phorm is 1000 pence per share (Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£10) this is a negative critical mass for Phorm, once the share price drops below the magical '1000' value we will see a definative milestone. It is unlikely Phorm will ever get back over the magical '1000' mark unless something catastrophic happens... Kent is crowned King on England, Phorm is voted the most ethical legal spying system ever '.' period. Emma Sanderson is voted Britains most beautiful wo(man) warts and all! etc etc. I follow several financial sites and I'll continue to project extra negative juju hex vibes onto their shares. With a bit of luck we will see Phorm implode once we get below the '1000' mark :D

tdadyslexia

11-06-2008 05:13

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

How do I Block www.webwise.com I have added to my Hosts File:

Code:

 

89.145.112.31  www.webwise.com

89.145.112.32  www.webwise.com

38.105.138.53  ns1.webwise.com

38.105.138.54  ns2.webwise.com

89.145.112.31  webwise.com

89.145.112.32  webwise.com

38.105.138.53  ns1.webwise.com

38.105.138.54  ns2.webwise.com

64.72.118.11  mx01.webwise.com

64.72.118.13  mx02.webwise.com

38.105.138.53  ns1.webwise.com

38.105.138.54  ns2.webwise.com

83.223.127.226  ns01.uk.gyron.net

77.75.107.85  ns02.uk.gyron.net

89.145.112.31  as29017.net

89.145.106.198  as29017.net

83.223.127.134  as29017.net

89.145.125.17  as29017.net

84.233.153.30  as29017.net

83.223.127.134  gyron.net

83.223.127.134  www.gyron.net

83.223.127.226  ns01.uk.gyron.net

77.75.107.85  ns02.uk.gyron.net

Watt am I doing wrong?

Geeeeeeeee kant this site be killed. :mad:

Sirius

11-06-2008 07:43

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572507)

I like the bit about the WPAA trying to sue laser printers. Alex - could you disguise yourself as a laser printer this way next time you put something on node that BT don't like? :D

If they try the letter job with me i will claim my modem has been cloned. It will be there job to prove it was not. There are lots of cloned modems in my area due to the local cloners selling to the university and college flats and houses.

what worries me is that the phorm system could so easily be used to DPI everyone for copyright reasons and to issue letters to those using the protocol they wish to target. Phorms kit would be capable of doing that there is no doubt in my mind and if and when VM sell themselves to the devil the floodgates will open.

Rchivist

11-06-2008 08:33

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34572726)

Now be realistic. Time in Phormland runs differently. The BT trials are due in March 2008, end March 2008, April 2008, by May 26th, this summer, "soon". So TalkTalk are well on target.

jelv	11-06-2008 09:16

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdadyslexia (Post 34572753)

How do I Block www.webwise.com I have added to my Hosts File:

Code:

 

89.145.112.31  www.webwise.com

<snip>

Watt am I doing wrong?

Geeeeeeeee kant this site be killed. :mad:

Replace all the IP addresses by 127.0.0.1

BetBlowWhistler

11-06-2008 09:29

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by jelv (Post 34572784)

Replace all the IP addresses by 127.0.0.1

You could have mentioned what the hosts file does :rolleyes:

tdadyslexia, the hosts file acts as a local dns and entries in it take priority over any you might look up from external dns. I hate saying dns servers, it's just plain wrong :)

Just in case anyone reading doesn't know where 127.0.01 is, it's home :)
As in the old techie joke 'there's no place like 127.0.0.1' or even
'there are 10 kinds of people in the world - those that understand binary and those that don't'

jelv	11-06-2008 09:44

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler (Post 34572791)

I hate saying dns servers, it's just plain wrong :)

I guess No. 2 on your pet hates list is MAC code!

Dephormation

11-06-2008 10:12

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34572768)

Now be realistic. Time in Phormland runs differently. The BT trials are due in March 2008, end March 2008, April 2008, by May 26th, this summer, "soon". So TalkTalk are well on target.

Joke Alert: K*nt Ergrutlu is pioneering the flying pigs business... did you know?

The name of the company is

Spoiler:

campaignerssuck

11-06-2008 10:34

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler (Post 34572791)

Why dns servers wrong? DNS is protocol - Domain Name System.

Nothing wrong with Domain Name System servers.

This campaign is a joke. How many of you actually understand the technology and see how Phorm is actually taking good steps to stop a copy of everything you do being stored.

Added my voice to the survey.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:09.

Page 86 of 143

« First

136

Last »

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page