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

The repost didn't pick up the url properly

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08..._phorm_letter/

This is all very very heartening. These sorts of things don't go away. More delays to the trials I fear Mr ("soon") Liversage. More legal advice er... opinions will have to be obtaine.. er sought, Ms Sanderson. More humble pie will need to be eaten, Mr Patterson.

The questions being asked by Fabio Colasanti seem to echo some of those asked by Congress in their letter to various advertisers.

Now then UK parliament, in particular, House of Commons, smell the coffee? When the recess is over, we'd like a bit of action please. Relevant questions to HO and DBERR to ask why they can't comply with the EU request on time.

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

Try this working link http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08..._phorm_letter/

And despite what the sensationalist headline says, no "deadline" has been missed. The EU said they would "appreciate" a response within a month, they did not demand it.

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

Whoops! Now corrected.

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

Now that EU letter could have been written by someone here and just given to the EU to sign and send. :)

Massive news. ;)

Missing the deadline to respond means the EU will only get it's teeth in deeper. It also demonstrates the UK authorities complete confusion regarding the issue.

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

The headline is perhaps a little sensationalist. The real news is the actual contents of the letter. Makes very interesting reading, and the answers will be even more interesting. :)

Well Done Chris Williams!

---------- Post added at 15:24 ---------- Previous post was at 15:20 ----------

A deadline isn't necessarily mandatory. From the OED:

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

Ha ha! Yeah, and when a policeman 'asks' for you to come down to the station, he's not making any demands either. :D

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

Hammy after reading the letter from Google to Congress and what Congress has said over Phorm if a BT customer visits an american website or even a website that is owned by Congress would this person be breaking the law in America as they have ruled this illegal?

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

Hammy's getting way too much attention these past couple of days.

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

When your boss says "Would you mind..." she means "Get it done"

This is quite a story and leaves the UK government's inaction open to question - incompetence or cover-up?

They should get Adam Liversage to reply. He could just cut and paste Phorm's FAQ's and then refuse to talk to them ever again. It was good enough for BT's paying customers so I'm sure that the Commissioner won't mind.

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

I wasn't aware that Congress have ruled anything illegal, they are just looking at things.
So don't worry, MI5 aren't going to visit you in the dead of night and rendition you to Guantanomo.

---------- Post added at 15:38 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ----------

jealous :p:

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

I was thinking of sending those questions up to them all at BT.

Would you agree Hammy that if the servers for webwise had a slight alteration of script the program could be programmed to retain more personal details without the customer knowing?

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

They have ruled lots of things illegal - that's what happens when you make laws and have a judicial system.

What you mean is that no-one has yet said that these systems are definitely illegal. If that was all that was required then we wouldn't need courts and if it transpires that using Phorm is breaking existing US law then it doesn't require a decision from Congress to prosecute those responsible.

Congress are involved because the USA doesn't have an equivalent of the ICO. It takes a court to decide if the law has been broken but Congress can issue guidelines or look to creating or ammending laws if required.

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

I've observed such problems while testing my Firefox extension's (Firephorm) option to fake phorm's phorged cookies (intended to avoid redirects) - it caused a few webpages to fail to work with non-helpful error messages.

This would be the same effect a phormed user would observe if they use their laptop to browse on a non-phormed connection (or for 3 days after changing to a non-phormed ISP) Most users probably wouldn't have a clue why they could access such a webpage and probably blame the site or their ISP. ISPs taking on Phormed customers probably should be warning them to delete all cookies after migrating to avoid any phorm caused browsing issues and continued phorm targetting based on the profile compiled while with their previous ISP.

I added the default sub option to my extension to only send a forged cookie after a request has been redirected 3 or more times, in case someone enables forging phorm's tracking cookies on a non-phormed connection as it minimises the chances of it causing a problem.

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

Of course they could, but they have promised not too, and if they did and got caught they would be in all sorts of bother. They would not jeopardise their business by doing such silliness.

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

This is where my trust goes we have to rely on the words of people we do not know, you never heard of employees gathering information to gain more money. This is where we as individuals wish to keep control over our own privacy.

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

:dozey: dont forget phorm is the silly company there past just goes to prove this does it not :confused:.

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

Like 2006 and 2007? Do you think they are not in a lot of 'bother' already?

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

IMHO, if there are no legal reasons not to, the full text of that letter from the EU needs to be posted on the BT Beta forum.

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

You have to rely on BT not to tap your phone, your neighbours not to peek through your bedroom window and Thames Water not to add poison to your water. They all COULD do this, but realise it is not a sensible thing to do.

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

You rely on the law to prevent them and the authorities to take appropriate action if they break it.

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

The topic has already been raised and the url posted. But quoting the whole letter may need permission? If it could be established that there was permission to quote the whole text then I am sure it would appear there promptly.

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

Let's take your Thames Water example for now.

Thames water would gain nothing from adding poison to the water, so have no motive. Phorm could make lots more money by increasing the amount of data they harvest.

Thames Water would easily be found out as it is a simple matter to test a water sample for contamination and this is done hourly for some chemicals. Auditing an IT system to check it only does what it claims is notoriously difficult. If you solve that problem you can make a fortune in e-voting.

Thames Water have a history of supplying safe drinking water. Phorm have a history of covertly gathering personal data without proper consent.

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

..Don't forget the reshuffle - no minister is going to pick up this hot potato if (s)he doesn't have to.

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

Wow, this is breathtakingly naive. BT and Phorm have already lied, spun, concealed, misled, abused trust, and generally shown contempt for internet users and their privacy. And you think we should simply forgive all that and trust them blindly? Evidently financial considerations are outweighing rational thought at this point.

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

No, back in the real world all they've done is test a bit of new software.

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

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...tter/comments/


@ El Reg
By Anonymous Coward
Posted Tuesday 12th August 2008 15:24 GMT

May the text of the EU letter be posted in full elsewhere?

With the appropriate attributions of course.

Re: @ El Reg
By Chris Williams
Posted Tuesday 12th August 2008 15:29

No problem.

- Chris

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

Without Proper Permission, if you apply that criteria how about testing New Software on an active Nuclear Plant!
(We all know what happens when things go wrong then!)

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

Please go back to page one of this thread and start reading ensuring that you take in all the information it contains...

:)

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

Sure they might have had a few tiny teething problems, but nothing of any substance at all. No-one has died, only one chap seems to have had PC problems. All pretty irrelevant stuff in the grand scheme of things. No data retained anywhere.

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

:rofl:

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

So the Dossier only had One name on it then?
What about all the others waiting for a test case who haven't been able to get PC Plod to take a Crime No .....!

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

"BT is obliged by the terms of its Oftel licence to provide phone taps for the secret services or police if a warrant has been obtained from the Home Secretary or Foreign Secretary." - Capenhurst Tower

"A rapist who admitted spying on his neighbours by using a camera hidden in their bedroom has been sent to prison for an indefinite period." - BBC News

"Since 2003 Thames Water has notched up more fines than any other water company - £489,000 for 31 offences." - Times Online

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

Ah right, now we know your ethical stance - someone has to die before any of this matters to you. Sticking your head in the sand may work for you, but I guess other people find engaging with the issues and employing one or two brain cells more satisfying. Fortunately for the future of ISP users in the UK.

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

No, what I'm saying is that no harm has been done in the tests.
Tests necessary to make sure that what is ACTUALLY rolled out is robust and complies with whatever is thought necessary. I think it will be.

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

hamster wheel ... round in circles ?

dont rise to the bait.

phil

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

Sometimes you need to keep someone occupied so they don't see what's happening elsewhere....

Others can do the same though. ;)

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

Good entertainment value as well :D

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

Spoken personally to another 4 firms today and left the flyers
seemingly good response from them no one threw me out and they all listened

Phil

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

History will record that Phorm is the only company to have had hundreds of very intelligent people reviewing and testing its 'system' to breaking point without taking any financial reward for themselves.
All parties who have benefited from this testing should be very grateful for the financial savings it has offered and that it has helped to preserve their personal freedom.

Despite all this assistance, the system has not yet begun to work on a method whereby websites can give permission for interception under RIPA nor have they provided any budget nor agreement for the licence fees due on the copies made of the web content which are used to create the profile.

After 2 years no one has yet seen the opt-in method for the ISP customers. How many years will it take to write the opt-in method for websites?

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

As a Phorm shareholder, I am very grateful for all your unpaid work :D

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

Ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha haha ha ha ha :D

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

Why are we spinning the wheel? I'm bored. Every time bad news needs burying the Phorm PR dilutes the content with same old same old. If we respond we dilute also IMHO.

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

At the end of the day its still intercepting private data no-one is allowed to do that and shouldnt ever unless that person is a danger to other people or is likeley to commit crime then such interceptions in anyones eyes are valid and relevant steps are taken to monitor those individuals.

Phorm's ideas from the outset have always been illegal it is wiretapping plain and simple, which phorm/nebuad e.t.c know full well what it is but are trying to polish the illegal activity up and tie a few £££ to it to make it attractive to isp's, if phorm ever ever get the goahead to roll this illegal activity out how many people do the isp's expect to have left?.

very very soon the uk media will have to take this whole thing very seriously then we'll see how good of an idea setting wiretaps up in the isp in the sake of advertising is ;).

And as for mr wheel's comments that only 1 person was harmed i belive i was harmed and the dodgy phorm kit caused problems with my hardware and im on virgin media so explain that one then because virgin media sure as hell havent to me yet.

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

This should nopt have been tested on customers without informing them that BT would be doing tests.

The fact T told a customer who noticed he had spyware on takes the trust out for BT. The fact BT have stopped talking to customers doesn't help.

You test new software not at the expense of customers, when a customer ends up buying new equipment then BT has place a finacial loss on a customer due to their covert, stealth, economy of the truth.

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

Except for a big dent in BT's reputation, Phorm losing millions off their share value, the ICO and the UK government being forced to explain their actions to the EU Commissioner and the shareholders who have lost a fortune, BT staff being forced to lie to customers...

...wait a minute - none of that would have happened if we hadn't discovered the secret trials.

That means it's all our fault. Oops.

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

CALL FOR A TEST CASE

I have received a lukewarm response even from anti-phorm campaigners when I suggested we should make a call on the govt, BT and Phorm to have a test case on the legality of Phorm (to examine all aspects including but not limited to RIPA, DPA, CMA, PECR, CD&P etc).

I wonder if El Reg will make this call on our behalf? Why is it such a bad idea to make this call? Lord West of Spithead already made mention of a possible test case in the house of lords, and I hear from a good friend of mine that FIPR would be willing to work on the anti-Phorm case, although they don't want to pay for it (anyone from FIPR confirm this?).

It would be hard for BT to argue against a test case. If Phorm is illegal, then surely better to find out now? If it's legal as they belive, then what's the worry?

A test case, simple. El Reg - call on UK.gov for a test case - who could argue against this?

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

Rather premature when they haven't finished testing it yet. Would you crashtest a car before adding the airbags ?

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

I think they may have installed a teensy weensy bit of hardware as well. Like several thousand pounds worth of DPI hardware on BT Retail's side of the line. And all my data has to go through it,

It wasn't there three years ago (I think). It's there now. It'll be gone soon. I use the word "soon" advisedly. It's a BT word.

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

What is the most disturbing is none are willing to be truely transparant, they all are hiding something in the closet.

1, BT are not 100% sure or Emma wouldn't have been so uncomfortable answering the questions. She did put on a good show but anyone can see certain questions made her feel uncomfortable. Leads people to belive there is some economy with truth possibly.

2. Actions since the trials hit the news leads most to think there is something not totally legal going on since at the start, all kept passing the book on this. Government, BT, Phorm, Police and the abscence of Privacy International would make most think there was large payments going around to make some look the other way.

3. Refusal by some to give all information on a FOI almost seals this method of thinking, that someone has something to hide. The excuse of PRIVACY doesn't cut when it includes that our Privacy is placed at risk.

4.Phorm's past history doesn't improve the situation since the links to illegal activity is very strong.

5. BT failed even after this was in the public eye to address the situation, with customers or shareholders.

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

Still, good news about European Commission eh?

UK.gov misses deadline on EU Phorm probe

What on earth might that mean?

Is it the same reason why the Home Office won't respond? Here too?
Or the same reason why West Mercia Police won't respond?

So what's going on?

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

Either you're incredibly naive or this is indeed a rather subtle and highly intelligent point. I will credit you with the latter and say that indeed it could be hard to try a technology in court when the technology itself is subject to change.

HOWEVER - it should still be possible to test the principle without finalising the technology, so I disagree with your point. The principle - that a piece of equipment sits in the ISP and monitors web browsing habits is illegal plain and simple - is not dependent on the final implementation or even on the method for opting in or out (it will be, in this instance at least, to quote Kent, a red herring).

I firmly believe that even with consent, Phorm will be illegal under RIPA, and CD&P, because it doesn't get the consent of the "other" party in the transmission. This is my view, IANAL, and it is in line with FIPRs view.

---------- Post added at 17:51 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

Sorry Florence I diagree - I don't think she put on a good show. On live TV she said, in relation to the two secret trials BT have admitted to, "We absolutely were not spying on our customers..."

Now, considerind that the participants to the trials didn't know about the trials, and that the trials covertly watched their web browsing habits, anyone with a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary could have something to say about Ms Sanderson's assertion here.

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

Ah, but the principal is surely long established that monitoring anyone is legal as long as they are happy to be monitored.
Think you'll have to find a bit more specific complaint to hang a legal case on.

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

The principle of RIPA is that both parties must consent to interception before interception (without a warrant) is legal.

Another principle is that it is technically not possible to pre-filter anyone's IP stream to remove all personal communications, with a multitude of web-based messaging services, therefore if Phorm captures communications it requires the consent of both parties. Not just one person. Not even just the remote website, but BOTH parties to EACH AND EVERY MESSAGE.

In my opinion, IANAL, Phorm can never be legal under RIPA, although a clever lawyer may put an opposing case and only a court can decide, hence my call for a test case.

Hammy - if you think it's legal, then let's have a test case and prove it. END.

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

If you want to sue, off you go and have a bash. Nothing stopping you except Webwise hasn't been introduced yet, so you'd be wasting your time and money as the Court would not be able to find even the semblance of an infringement for you to sue about.

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

Interesting that everytime there is an important news story or other piece of info certain people do their best to divert our attention.

This is the story that they are trying to bury.

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

You know full well I can't sue as a private individual until the service is launched and a private prosecution under RIPA is hampered by 1(8)(a).

That is why I'm calling on BT, uk.gov to have a TEST CASE BEFORE the tech is rolled out. Perfectly possible. That way, BT will find out BEFORE they launch the service if FIPRs argument is valid.

They perhaps could also agree with gov before the test case that the slate would be wiped clean about previous trials. I'd be happy with that, although I know many out there are baying for blood.

Anyway, I've got you down as an intelligent type, so I'm sure you get where I'm coming from.

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

Guys -

Stop wasting time with hammy.

Why has the mainstreams press been so disgraceful? Is it time we write up a formal letter to send to newspapers? Time to protest? Start a petition?

Any ideas for doing something?

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

Yes - lets stick to the issues, and not go round and round and round again.

The only problem is that at the moment there are so MANY things happening at the same time, all of which are incredibly bad news for this new technology and those who are trying to introduce it and have probably illegally trialled it.

interception
interference
copyright
privacy of data
consent issues
misleading trading terms and misleading advertising
congressional questions
EU questions
delays to trials
AGM embarrassment
mainstream media coverage growing daily
BT getting desperately tetchy and trigger happy
BT Group plc beginning to spring little leaks and creak at the inter-group seams, mostly at the expense of BT Retail
VM being gradually brought into the spotlight
Businesses being informed of how it will affect them
Parliament getting a head of steam up for the new session.

No - I wouldn't want to be employed defending Webwise/Phorm by BT Retail or Phorm at the moment, not for all the bonuses in the City OR the tea in China.

Lots of issues to work on, none of them involving revolving wheels.

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

Yes, only about 4-5 hours of prime forum time wasted on arguments we have all heard and seen before on this forum by the same poster. EU releases something we have been waiting to read and what are we debating? Not that letter, its unimportant :(
I despair at our gullibility at times.

I prefer page 2
showing the actual EC correspondence

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

At least the EC seems to be standing up for human rights more than can be said about any tory or labour gov ever have or will do, this whole story shows how incompetent most government departments are now and how they try to cover it over :(.

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

I posted that she made a good show of trying to say BT were not breaking the law but her body language gave a different impression..

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

You know what struck me on the way home?

Perhaps the reason BERR can't respond, the Police, the Home Office, the Cabinet Office, and all the other agencies involved aren't responding...

Is the Government is already facing legal action by the European Commission?

If it were true, perhaps it might also explain the 'emergency cabinet' called for September in the midlands?

Just guesswork of course.

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

I don'ty think it can be swept uinder the carpet now but the actions of most newspapers are somewhat strange unles they are dubious of being prosicuted for making this news....

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

I think it could be argued that BT were not spying on their customers, they invited in a rather dubious third party company that speciallises in that sort of activity to spy on their customers.:erm:

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

A few things that strike me in the light of the letter.

Wasn't it only a few days ago that BT confirmed that the trials would go ahead soon? With that letter in the background?

Surely BT must have known about the letter at the AGM when it was stated that the trials would begin in a couple of weeks.

It's very unlikely that they didn't know about the letter, but if they didn't, the bunker will be in a tizz tonight. :D

I wonder who leaked it. I doubt it was HMG. Maybe a miffed EU commission, fed up with being ignored? Just like we have been fobbed off.

Can you imagine the buck passing in Whitehall that must have been going on?

In all of this, involving HMG, BT and Phorm, it's the latter who is the tiddler, the one likely to be lined up by the other two to carry the can somehow. But then Kent has a big gob. Maybe he knows things that would be acutely embarrassing to HMG and BT.

I think that mainstream media coverage is not far off. Bags of it. :)

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

What gate they going to call it?

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

The Downing St website has changed and the new URL to the petition is :-

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ispphorm/

The old URL redirects to the new one.

Apologies if this has been posted before.

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

By testing your "bit of new software" without their customers' permission, BT have betrayed their customers' trust, and if the tests were illegal, their shareholders too - and I'd be amazed if the tests weren't illegal, the news about the governments failure to respond to the EU letter before the deadline does nothing to convince me otherwise http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08..._phorm_letter/

As a BT shareholder, I'm outraged that BT would be willing to do so much damage to their reputation for such a small amount of income.



If BT are that desperate for extra cash, they should cut their wage bill by sacking the looney tunes who want to go ahead with this system.

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

btphormedgate

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

I agree, the EU letter is what is important and not endless circular arguments. Don't get lured into that wheel.

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

want some shares?

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...PHRM.L&it%3Dle

-12.50

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

:clap: :clap: but hammy thinks it is none of my business the wages for Managers at BT then once inphormed I was a shareholder he came back I was in the minority...
Anyway back to phorm I feel the implications of having Phorm on the network is too high a risk. We have to rely on trust they will not function creep and personally I don't think with the present responses from all parties invovled and this includes the government it shouldn't be deployed.

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

Guilty as charged. I was over at El Reg, catching up on comments there. Seemed a bit excessive to be duplicating everything here as well.

However, if the various government departments have not been able to prepare a defence, considering how many questions have been put to them and how much FoI documentation they must have been re-reading through then it does say something about their efficiency.

During the same period, the ICO has managed to answer an email from me - nothing new since the statement made in April even though there must be changes being made to the DPI software. Time for another FoI request?
So far, the HO have failed to acknowledge or respond to an email I sent 27th June.

I think that Florence is correct in showing an inability by those who should be responsible to cope with the whole process. The load from the EU is now putting everything under breaking strain.
Maybe they are waiting for the trial results to show that they have done a 'good job'.

... and Jumbo was his name.

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

OK - so any ideas about getting the issue into the mainstream press?

I've emailed Charles Arthur with the Reg article re: the EU letter...

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

Perhaps this explains why they stopped taking new petitions, and used the PM being away as an excuse.
At least the redirect keeps links 'live' for a while. Can someone let us know when the Webwise leaflet is updated for the new address?

Can't say I like the new site. They try to be all accessible and then default to a font size of 0.8em - just as well I have a browser with a good font set (and set to a minimum font size)

---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 20:50 ----------

Washington Post update re Congress responses

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...70.html?sub=AR

"The revelations came in response to a bipartisan inquiry of how more than 30 Internet companies might have gathered data to target customers....

Markey said he and his colleagues plan to introduce legislation next year, a sort of online-privacy Bill of Rights, that would require that consumers must opt in to the tracking of their online behavior and the collection and sharing of their personal data.

But some committee leaders cautioned that such legislation could damage the economy by preventing small companies from reaching customers."

They got that last part right

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

Exactly. And I've just wasted a long jounrney scrolling through pointless diatribe, I was tempted to spin that wheel for a moment myself. We should all learn from this - ALL of us. We should be focussed on what is actually going to make a difference. Spinning that wheel does nothing whatsoever except kill time.

Why are they not answering the FOI requests quickly, why the withholding or nil answers, why the refusal to investigate fully? If Sir Paul Kennedy is so keen on encouraging the legal use of RIPA 2000 (see today's Metro newspaper front page which was on display several times over in train carriages today) - to snoop on citizens to detect and convict criminals, where is the flip side of that approach to stop the illegal interception without warrant and not for anti-criminal efforts?

Should we put in an FOI request to ask who is being consulted to complete the response to the EU letter? They don't say who is involved yet do they?

Anyone got any idea if the Interception of Communications Commissioner is bound by the FOI Act? Should we ask him what he knows? Not sure if it is a valid approach in his role - anyone know?

Hank

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

I've just emailed BBC News.

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

Ertugrul says that Opt-in v opt-out is a "complete red herring and not important" ergo that is probably the killer issue we should focus on. It is succinct, easy to understand, and for phorm, deadly :)

---------- Post added at 21:27 ---------- Previous post was at 21:25 ----------

It would be nice to think so, but Brown probably has other things on his mind right now .. like avoiding adding to the unemployment figures in October. :dunce:

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

Nice one.

We need to stay focused, chaps.

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

What I found heartening was the similarity in feel of the questions to the ones that Congress have been asking ISP's over there. At last, somone with a bit of political clout is pressurising the powers that be in the same way that the Congress has been doing with US ISP's. The questions are intelligent, relevant and based on proper research - all those EU letters and MEP letters were not wasted.

It felt really good reading that letter from Fabio Colasanti

When we stick to the task in hand its amazing what we can achieve.
Add the EU to the list of organisations being REphormed by having been INphormed.

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

Be careful with the Political Angle, don't forget this pre-dates Brown taking Office; a possible "Poison Chalice" that situation is best left to run it's own course!

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

Ok All good luck in your fight I have decided to leave this thread hope you all succeed but I disagree with what has happened after posts today. One person decides to act as god on what we can discuss in the thread.

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

What? Who has decided what can be discussed?

Flo, please don't leave.

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

What I mean is that in the unlikely event that phorm is on Brown's radar at all it will be way down his priority list. The political angle is that the incompetence, bureaucracy, buck-passing, waste, spin and sleaze that has failed to deal with BT and phorm is typical of the decline in standards in public administration since 1997.

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

I think it is best to leave party politics out of any public statements, but to be aware of party sensibilities, and make sure you approach the right person to do the right job. Be savvy and remember who you are dealing with, whether a party politician, a business or a regulator. What are THEY most interested in? What rocks THEIR boat? Do they need a bit of "persuasion"? In which case, how can you give them an incentive?
If they are an opponent - what are they most scared of?
If an ally - what would be most helpful to them?

Try and leave your own party politics at the door. I've found politicians of parties I don't care much for, can be surprisingly decent people and very helpful if you don't slag them off unthinkingly.

For example, pursuing the EU angles, may work better with LD politicians than Conservative ones - maybe the latter will respond more sympathetically to what the US Congress are up to.

Be aware of internal issues re: Labour leadership politics at the moment. To know what a Labour MP will do requires a fair bit of research! Are they lobby fodder or do they think for themselves, or are they born rebels who just like making trouble for a minister they don't like?

Think carefully about balance of power within Tory circles vis a vis David Davies etc.

Remember that the bigger the department the less the Minister/Sec of State will know about any particular issue. Their first priority is usually what is on the front page of the Sun and the Times (Mr Murdoch's papers). We aint there yet.

But if they can be taken to the window and shown clear simple embarrassing evidence of skullduggery, and the fact that it is already in the public realm or soon will be, and that THEY will be held responsible for dealing with it, then they will act, or at least want to LOOK as if they are doing something (what in Yes Minister was usually called a "full leak enquiry" whose aim was to keep everyone happy and NOT find out the source of the leak).

Often you AREN'T going to actually find the smoking gun, but that doesn't matter. The very fact of worrying about the smoking gun, and having to work hard to bury it, can result in a project being ditched, just to keep everyone happy and encourage the hunting dogs to go after something else. Suits me if the project they ditch is DPI.

Remember that the problems inherent in some government departments are way bigger than party politics or any one government, Home Office being a case in point, and DBERR being another. These departments have cultures, and long standing problems, vulnerabilities and weaknesses. Both have a very strong aversion to daylight. So pull the curtains wide and let the sun in.

I would recommend anyone to read the full set of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister, and remember that Mrs Thatcher never missed an episode if she could help it - most politicians say it was far more accurate than anything else ever written about politics. I think I should get mine down and read them again and see if I can find an episode or two about Phorm and BT.

There are people who want to help us, if we respect the political realities they all work under.

I have a feeling the media side of things is working well. The damning news is out there and the right people are seeing it and now what it could mean.

Now we are into politics and that is a much more crafty business and it will require discipline and some subtlety and sophistication. Politics will be getting something DONE about this wretched technology. Politicians need to see what it is going to cost them. They thought DPI was all gain for government, and no loss. We need to convince them it isn't worth the security gains they thought it might bring them, in fact it could make things worse, proabably already has.

We need important people to be angry about what BT have done, and what certain culpable wrong headed officials have done in Home Office and DBERR to create this embarrassing mess.

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

Hi, I e-mailed most of the Daily Newspapers recently with the latest EU news ref. Phorm etc. and added the link to the Good ZDNet article covering the Barbican, the case file handed in to the police and Baroness Miller etc. I did not get an acknowledgement from any of them! Keep the good work up all of you.... and please stay Flo.

Dave.

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

I've been in touch with a few journalists too.

(Don't want to publish names here, PhormPRCutPasteNinjaSockPuppet will obviously relish a 'must call' list helpfully provided by me).

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

In that case I've written to Farmer's Monthly, Plastics and Rubber Weekly and Playboy.

That should keep them busy for a bit.

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

Don't go Flo

Only two types of people dictate what I post on this forum and they are the ones who have the shiny badge under their names which says Moderator or Administrator.

I am not afraid to debate with those who disagree with me because if I give them enough rope they tend to hang themselves.

Someone on this forum would do well not to take themselves so seriously...

The one attribute which probably gives us an advantage over the money grabbing individuals we are fighting is that:


We're just people

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

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...ates/comments/

In the comments section of The Register Home Office/Phorm article of the 11th, David Pollard makes a very good point. (21:24 GMT).

If the Home Office didn't know about the trials, where many tens of thousands of UK citizens had their communications intercepted for extended periods, then they have fallen down very badly on their national security remit.

Even if BT hadn't told them, they should have known.

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

Just back from holiday. I'll update Inphormationdesk over the next few days and include a page giving links to the latest versions of the flyer and factsheet. In the mean time here are the links to the flyer mentioning the EU intervention and giving the new 10 Downing Street petition url.

Black for printing 2-up landscape 2-sided on A4 paper and then guillotining into two A5 flyers (probably the most useful format):
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_2A5.pdf

Black for printing 2-sided on A5 paper:
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_A5.pdf

Original navy A4 with optional House of Commons and BT addresses on the back:
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer.pdf

Special edition for MPs, navy A4 :
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_MP.pdf

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

So the breaking news that UK.gov misses deadline on EU Phorm probe makes it into the Netherlands Telecom Paper (subscription only).

The story is propagating around the net but no sign of it in our tabloid websites yet.

Note this extract from the EU letter: Amazing that Phorm (as at 7th August 2008) still insist that users will be allowed to opt-out rather than be asked to opt-in....
Above extract from this news article

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

This mirrors the USA NebuAd story - when the NebuAd guy was in front of the Congress committee he consistently dodged the questions about opt-in/opt-out and was recognised to be doing so. Their excuse was that customers had a robust transparent notification - although in fact that wasn't really true, and for many ISP's there was no real notification at all. (That was transparent in the BT/Phorm meaning of the word- the notification was so transparent, no one could see it)

Then ISP's commercially can't afford to let go on that one. And they won't unless they are clearly told they have to make the default sitatuation that customers are not opted-in unless they choose actively to do so.

Comparing our situation with the States - we have the laws that apparently make it mandatory to ASK customers to opt-in themselves, whereas they have a Congress that is vigorously flexing it's muscles, but don't yet have the laws to get what they want. We have a government that seems to wish we DIDN'T have the laws and is trying NOT to enforce them.

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

I think that's a cue for another FOI request. :)

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

Funniest post on the thread ! As if Gordon is more worried about Phorm than the collapsing economy !!!
Thanks for that - peed myself !

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

To any new viewers of this forum, check out the interesting developments mentioned on el reg yesterday.

EC interesting letter about Phorm and the Government (see page 2 also)

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

Right today can we leave the hamster alone please?
While that lot was going on yesterday i was out talking to local businesses. What's more important toying with the brain dead or getting the job done?
Flo get back here now!
If this offends some sorry but I'm narked

Phil

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

I need to get another bulk pack of stamps. Makro do them at £20 for 60 first class, 10% less than the Post Office counter. :)

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

Do you really want to drive respected posters away, the dialogue tells others just as much about the objections to Phorm/Webwise as the Technical details & processes.

If a question needs answering in respect to Phorm, I will answer it whilst attempting to keep the thread dilution down to a minimum!

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

i get the feeling it's like a game of pass the parcel and everyone hoping the music keeps playing while they hold the issue until they can pass it to someone else :juggle: :juggle: