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

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-snooping.html

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:26 ----------

Still no update from Alex!

What's going on, Alex? Share some news!...

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

www2= 217.32.165.135
217.32.164.0-217.32.167.255 BT-IGNITE Content Hosting

So it seems there is a copy of the webwise materials on an internal BT controlled server (Sandridge North London).

Then there is the whole range of domains hosted at Gyron in London... bt.webwise.com, webwise.bt.com (plus all the other Phorm domains). As you say, probably one copy, on two machines (round robin DNS 31/32).

Then there is that lingering server in PSInet in the USA which also holds a copy of the webwise materials.

?

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

Alex is probably giving them more time to reply but did you spot this in one of his latest posts.

I have to go to work now but I will update the NoDPI web site tomorrow with the details of the call.

Alexander Hanff

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

Yes, and it is tomorrow. :)

OK, I'll settle down...

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

well thankfully, the courts and the bench are the people that are best qualifyed to Judge on the question of suffering and harm, not you as a private person.

the judges have reams of documents and ruleings going back centurys to help them come to a reasonable and ballanced view based on justice, not how much money you the victim have.

as for the "they could not allocate" that again seems to be taken out of context as it seems clear they chose not to allocate personel in your case, but given enough words in the righ ears they surely would have allocated personel to any case that serves the public interest and justice on the wide scale.

you chose not to accept that this case has effected a large section of the public and private firms world wide and that is your right.

as for your stance that only the rich people and faceless companys in a position to be able to have 1million riped off in the first place, get access to justice, while others that will never even see anything like that 1million+ written down in their books cant, stinks, but again you are entitaled to have that minority view if you so wish.

OC you also make the obvious wrong assumption that these faceless compays when they break our laws cant also be held accountable, and more to the point, the real people inside them can and ARE able to be held accountable for their unlawful actions, as can be seen in the likes of the top Uk executive stansford case.

being a high ranking executive inside a company that can afford to keep 1million+ in the bank doesnt help you
when your stood infront of the judge that got his BT BB line wiretapped (and there are sure to be a lot of them given the No.s and areas covered in the trials), and the court ordered findings of facts point to you directly as the person in charge that authorised these unlawful RIPA etc wiretaps and related offences does it.

OC it doesnt, that just makes the effected sitting judge and his peers look that much harder at the existing case law and rules/guidence to make sure you serve the right longest term and recompense for your crimes as any other rich or poor person might expect in a court of law.

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

Back in the old days when BT cookies leaked like a sieve, and Phorm handled BT webwise enquiries on the sly (collecting PII from the leaky cookies on the way, my DPA statutory request pending)... and theplanet.com and fasthosts and godaddy.com were the hosts of choice (not listed in Safe Harbor agreement) for handling BT customer PII (sigh) - I asked BT if perhaps they could mirror the BT Webwise pages on something approximating to a UK/EU controlled location within their domain. They then produced a UK mirror and changed the enquiry handling to custhelp.com.

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

Just stay out of trouble in future and you'll be okay.

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

Well I tried to give the officer in charge another opportunity today to change his position but he has failed to do so and has given his permission for me to publish the audio fom the calls. It is quite shocking and I really don't want to ruin his career but since he is refusing to change his stance I have little choice.

I have forwarded the info to Chris Williams to see if he wants to do an article on it and I won't publish the details until i get a response from Chris (he is in a much better position to get the news out via an article).

I worked until 4am this morning so I was sleeping til shortly after lunch and have been battling my internet issues again since I got up. Which is why I haven't responded until now.

I will say one thing though, once the information is released the proverbial is going to hit the proverbial and I think it is likely to guarantee BT will be charged once the storm eases.

Alexander Hanff

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

http://www.out-law.com/page-9348

ryanair is cancelling all flights booked by screen scrapers, says quicker remedy than courts

peter

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

I see the article specifically mentions website copyright issues in connection with the successful court case so it may have relevance to the website copyright issues being discussed in connection with Webwise/Phorm.

"***** believes these ..... are nothing more than video or software pirates and we will continue to campaign across Europe for legislation to prohibit this unlawful ****** and this breach of copyright laws, which will prevent these profiteering middlemen from engaging in the mis-selling of *****’s *** and information," said *****'s Michael Cawley after the Vtours ruling.

and

*****'s Irish case against ***** says that that company breaks laws on trade marks and copyright and that its use of *****'s content to sell its services amounts to 'passing off'.

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

Anyone got a direct link to the Home Office report on Phorm please, I appear to have misplaced it.

[Edit] Its ok I got it.

Alexander Hanff

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

I'm back..............

Come on Alex - give us a clue !

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

This one?

http://cryptome.org/ho-phorm.htm

edit: doh!

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

I have given the police until 5pm to reconsider their statement.

Alexander Hanff

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

I see, does awfully remind me of the start of a Neville Chamberlain speech !