Cable Forum
Page 52 of 143 « First 24248495051 52 5354555662102 Last »
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)

Rchivist 29-04-2008 19:29
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHorb (Post 34541198)
It seems pretty clear that BT, VM and 'tother lot have agreed between them that BT will carry out (and, as we know, has already carried out) testing on behalf of all three.
If VM and TalkTalk agreed that BT would do the trials, and if the trials were illegal, then it would seem as if VM and TalkTalk would be in legal difficulty too. I imagine if BT were being prosecuted all on their lonesome, someone might just manage to find the minutes of the meetings involving VM orTalkTalk, that could give them some company in the dock. (That's company in both meanings of the word!)

CaptJamieHunter 29-04-2008 19:34
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34541142)
Jamie,

I hope you don't mind but I just asked the badphorm admins to suspend the thread temporarily so you can sort this out without people being at risk.

Alexander Hanff
Thanks.

Time to kick the support desk again...

JohnHorb 29-04-2008 19:38
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Technical question. If Phorm works by setting cookies with the Webwise UID, is there anything to stop 'Anti-Phorm' web sites (including, hopefully, CF) reading this cookie with client-side script and generating a pop-up warning:-

Warning - you are being Phormed and your 'anonymous' WebWise ID is 123456789ABCDEF

If this works, it should throw some doubt in even non-technical users' minds on the assertion that the ID is anonymous and cannot be tied back to the user.

Pasanonic 29-04-2008 19:40
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34541215)
If VM and TalkTalk agreed that BT would do the trials, and if the trials were illegal, then it would seem as if VM and TalkTalk would be in legal difficulty too. I imagine if BT were being prosecuted all on their lonesome, someone might just manage to find the minutes of the meetings involving VM orTalkTalk, that could give them some company in the dock. (That's company in both meanings of the word!)

I doubt very much that VM or TT are doing anything other than a 'wait and see'. There would be no way that there would be some collusion as they are all vying for a piece of the same pie with limited ingredients.

For BT to undertake costly trials and then hand this information out to business rivals makes no sense.

I expect it's nothing more than VM saying at board level "hey, let's do nothing until we see if BT get away with their plans, if they do then we can go ahead, if they don't then we can walk away scott free and claim the moral high ground by telling our wonderful customers we won't have that nasty Phorm"

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:39 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHorb (Post 34541221)
Technical question. If Phorm works by setting cookies with the Webwise UID, is there anything to stop 'Anti-Phorm' web sites (including, hopefully, CF) reading this cookie with client-side script and generating a pop-up warning:-

Warning - you are being Phormed and your 'anonymous' WebWise ID is 123456789ABCDEF

If this works, it should throw some doubt in even non-technical users' minds on the assertion that the ID is anonymous and cannot be tied back to the user.
As I understand it the website can never see the webwise UID

AlexanderHanff 29-04-2008 19:43
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pasanonic (Post 34541222)
As I understand it the website can never see the webwise UID
Oh but it can...the cookie is only stripped out on http communications. Using SSL you could access the cookie as the Phorm kit won't be able to strip it out.

Alexander Hanff

Pasanonic 29-04-2008 19:44
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34541227)
Oh but it can...the cookie is only stripped out on http communications. Using SSL you could access the cookie as the Phorm kit won't be able to strip it out.

Alexander Hanff
Ah, yes. I can see that now.

JohnHorb 29-04-2008 19:47
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pasanonic (Post 34541222)
As I understand it the website can never see the webwise UID
My understanding (but I'm open to correction) is that the webwise UID is stripped off the cookie by the Phorm kit before the page gets back to the web site.

However, if you visit a web site via a Phormed ISP, thus acquiring the Webwise cookie, then subsequently visit that same website via a non-Phormed ISP, thus bypassing the cookie-stripper, the web site will get the UID. However, what I was suggesting is that the web site uses client-side script to read the UID AT THE CLIENT END. It can then be used to generate a warning, or, if the web site is malicious, to simply copy the UID to a non-Phorm cookie for harvesting by the web server.

Rchivist 29-04-2008 19:56
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pasanonic (Post 34541222)
I doubt very much that VM or TT are doing anything other than a 'wait and see'. There would be no way that there would be some collusion as they are all vying for a piece of the same pie with limited ingredients.

For BT to undertake costly trials and then hand this information out to business rivals makes no sense.

I expect it's nothing more than VM saying at board level "hey, let's do nothing until we see if BT get away with their plans, if they do then we can go ahead, if they don't then we can walk away scott free and claim the moral high ground by telling our wonderful customers we won't have that nasty Phorm"
That's why I used the "if" word. And so much of what BT have done so far doesn't make sense that I have totally given up using "sense" as a criteria for judging their actions. Kent Ertugrul has been dragging them round the PR field by their ankles and they are STILL going along with it. He releases information when he wants to and lands them in a PR mess, he makes bold and dubious claims which they have to justify to their customers, he jerks them up and down on his string, and they just take it.

jelv 29-04-2008 19:58
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHorb (Post 34541221)
Technical question. If Phorm works by setting cookies with the Webwise UID, is there anything to stop 'Anti-Phorm' web sites (including, hopefully, CF) reading this cookie with client-side script and generating a pop-up warning:-

Warning - you are being Phormed and your 'anonymous' WebWise ID is 123456789ABCDEF

If this works, it should throw some doubt in even non-technical users' minds on the assertion that the ID is anonymous and cannot be tied back to the user.
Yes you can - have a look at http://www.dephormation.org.uk/web_m...ipt%20Tripwire

lucevans 29-04-2008 20:12
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by popper (Post 34541140)
Its a trojan disguised as a codec and drops quietly and happily into
your system through Media Player (unless you are one of the few
cautious types who set it to choose "Don't download codecs without
bloody asking me first!"). For the OP this means a couple of things.

1. Your PC is now infected and has been recruited into a botnet.
2. Your website is infecting other PCs every time one visits it.
3. Your PC is now being used by a - probably criminal - gang.
4. The hard one - you know about it, so you are responsible.

In essence, this means fix the website, or you could be sued. Clean
your PC, or you could be sued. Report the hacking to your hosting
provider, or you could be sued. Report it to your local or national
police, or - worst of all - you could be charged as an accessory to
the criminal activity probably now going on with your PC and with all
your website visitors. Yes, this is serious. You need to deal with it."
What's the story with Captain's video links? Can anyone confirm that it has been hacked and what's it downloading? Does it affect only Windows users, or are Linux and Mac people vulnerable as well? Sod's law...I had just clicked the link and started to listen to the videos whilst cathing-up with reading threads here :(

CaptJamieHunter 29-04-2008 20:25
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucevans (Post 34541246)
What's the story with Captain's video links? Can anyone confirm that it has been hacked and what's it downloading? Does it affect only Windows users, or are Linux and Mac people vulnerable as well? Sod's law...I had just clicked the link and started to listen to the videos whilst cathing-up with reading threads here :(
The site has been hacked and a script added to the end of the page. I'm a Linux user here so I haven't seen this at all. As soon as the hosting company's support desk confirm that access has been restored then the hacked page will be deleted and the original one restored.

The Divshare videos are still there for now:

Simon's introduction to the meeting
Divshare 1: http://www.divshare.com/download/4272837-af5
Divshare 2: http://www.divshare.com/download/4277045-b75

Kent's presentation
Divshare 1: http://www.divshare.com/download/4273355-a42
Divshare 2: http://www.divshare.com/download/4277485-cad

Dr Richard's presentation
Divshare 1: http://www.divshare.com/download/4272983-3b5
Divshare 2: http://www.divshare.com/download/4277138-305

Dr Richard's QA
Divshare 1: http://www.divshare.com/download/4273114-0ee
Divshare 2: http://www.divshare.com/download/4277168-e83

Alexander's speech
Divshare 1: http://www.divshare.com/download/4273200-ecb
Divshare 2: http://www.divshare.com/download/4276949-782

Kursk 29-04-2008 21:09
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Any sign of the PIA anyone please? The undertaking was that it would be prepared by the end of the month which is nearly upon us.

popper 29-04-2008 21:11
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
well there is still 26 hours and 50 minutes left so far do's ;)

Kursk 29-04-2008 21:15
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by popper (Post 34541279)
well there is still 26 hours and 50 minutes left so far do's ;)
Hrhrhrhr true. I'd expected to see it sooner; it could easily be constructed from the free advice provided on this forum ;)

Rchivist 29-04-2008 21:38
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 34541277)
Any sign of the PIA anyone please? The undertaking was that it would be prepared by the end of the month which is nearly upon us.
And there are 2 and a half hours for BT to give us 24 hours notice of their forthcoming trials which are due to start by the end of April (having been previously postponed from mid-March)

ceedee 29-04-2008 22:18
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
/ceedee fetches the popcorn...
:angel:

SimonHickling 29-04-2008 22:19
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Following #4630 and having received no response in the week(ish) since it was sent I have sent a follow-up

Quote:
It's been almost a week since I first inquired about the Phorm system, is there any news of a response?

I note from the webwise.bt.com website that "BT plans technical trials of BT Webwise in April 2008."

Given we are now at the end of April 2008 and your website still reads as above, I can only assume you have gone ahead with the trials. If that is the case BT should have no problems in providing answers to the questions I have posed. It also leads me to assume that it is possible that traffic from my web sites may have been intercepted without my consent. With this in mind, in case the inference from my original mail was not clear, I specifically DO NOT consent to traffic to and from my web sites being intercepted by, or, on behalf of any person or organization and would like to know how you plan to exclude my sites?

Further I wish to make sure you understand that I do not want BT or Phorm to use robots to scan my web-sites and would like to know what agent you use so I can specifically block said agent within my robots.txt files.

I also understand that the Phorm system will be placing cookies purporting to be from my site on the computers of participating users. I am sure this would be in breach of the Computer Misuse Act as that is claiming to be someone you are not (interestingly, something you claim webwise will guard against!).

If I do not hear from you by the end of the week, I shall take this matter further.

popper 29-04-2008 22:20
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
was this mentioned earlyer in the thread, i cant find a link....

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...ata_amendment/
"
Lords defy Government by proposing criminalisation of data rogues

Disclose our info and you'll pay

By OUT-LAW.COM → More by this author
Rate this story https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/05/4.pnghttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2008/05/13.png9 Ratings
Published Tuesday 29th April 2008 09:34 GMT

The House of Lords has proposed making it a criminal offence to disclose personal information intentionally or recklessly. The Lords passed an amendment to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, defeating the Government.

If it is to become law the amendment will need to be approved by MPs in the House of Commons. The Government opposed the amendment but was defeated by 134 votes to 130.

The amendment would make it a criminal offence to "intentionally or recklessly disclose information contained in personal data to another person, repeatedly and negligently allow information to be contained in personal data to be disclosed, or intentionally or recklessly fail to comply with [their] duties".

"Data controllers currently do not face anything like adequate sanctions if they intentionally or recklessly disclose information, or indeed are repeatedly negligent," said Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer, introducing the amendment.
"
..
"Until recently the bill contained a clause that would introduce jail sentences of up to two years for people who steal or sell personal data, but the Government has decided not to activate that clause of the law."
...
"
Miller said that the public could not afford a wait. "Basically the public will have to continue with this lack of protection for at least another year or two, during which time, at the rate of the past 12 months, millions more pieces of data will have gone missing," she said.

The Conservative Party proposed a weaker amendment which would only apply to public bodies or workers on contract to the public sector, but Miller said that it was a false distinction. "Citizens do not mind who lost the data; it is irrelevant to them. What is important is that it is their data that have been sold, lost or left on rubbish heaps and it is they who are affected by it," she said.

The Information Commissioner Richard Thomas has previously called for a law that would punish people or organisations that put other people's personal data at risk. In January the Parliamentary Justice Committee backed Thomas's calls for such a law."

Rchivist 29-04-2008 22:35
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonHickling (Post 34541330)
Following #4630 and having received no response in the week(ish) since it was sent I have sent a follow-up

Which bit of the webwise site are you looking at? I can't find the bit that says April - it now says "shortly" - here
http://webwise.bt.com/webwise/help.php in answer to "when will you be trialling Webwise?"

However - over at the "safe" non webwise.bt.com mirror that I asked BT to create so that webwise averse users could block webwise.bt.com and still find out about the system (it seems to be a bit of a cracked mirror actually) at
http://www.productsandservices.bt.co...icId=24333#WW8
that question has the answer
"BT plans technical trials of BT Webwise in April 2008."

Usual BT competence! Having those two sites running in parallel should be interesting. BT have never been good at synching their information across different portals and platforms.

As I posted above - if they want to give us 24 hours notice of the "April" trials as they promised, then it's going to mean someone burning some midnight oil, because it's nearly time-up.

I smell more retro-fitting and hear the murmur of anxious lawyers saying, wait, wait, wait!

SimonHickling 29-04-2008 22:38
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
http://webwise.bt.com/webwise/help.html

In the same bit "When will you ... ?"

Seems they can't even keep the html and php the same.

vicz 29-04-2008 22:38
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Lords defy Government by proposing criminalisation of data rogues...
I doubt this is going anywhere, the Govt believes it is just an excuse to beat them up over the infamous 'missing CDs'. Which of course it is.

CaptJamieHunter 29-04-2008 22:39
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Access has been granted and the offending malicious content removed. The hosting company says that it has banned a range of IP addresses responsible for the hack.

If people would like to check and let me know privately if they get any malware reports I'd be grateful. And thanks to the people who flagged it up too.

Bedtime calls.

JackSon 29-04-2008 22:41
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter (Post 34541341)
Access has been granted and the offending malicious content removed. The hosting company says that it has banned a range of IP addresses responsible for the hack.

If people would like to check and let me know privately if they get any malware reports I'd be grateful. And thanks to the people who flagged it up too.

Bedtime calls.
AVG seems lot happier now m8. site's accessible again. Were those IP addresses russian per chance? ;)

NTLVictim 29-04-2008 22:41
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter (Post 34541251)
The site has been hacked and a script added to the end of the page.
PLEASE tell me there's a trace..

mark777 29-04-2008 22:51
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicz (Post 34541340)
Lords defy Government by proposing criminalisation of data rogues...
I doubt this is going anywhere, the Govt believes it is just an excuse to beat them up over the infamous 'missing CDs'. Which of course it is.
"Government uses Parliament Act to aid spy-ad company".

Great headline one day.:D

-----

I understand the selection process for the recently advertised job at Phorm started today, focusing on practical tests. :monkey: But I may be wrong.

Rchivist 29-04-2008 23:00
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter (Post 34541341)
Access has been granted and the offending malicious content removed. The hosting company says that it has banned a range of IP addresses responsible for the hack.

If people would like to check and let me know privately if they get any malware reports I'd be grateful. And thanks to the people who flagged it up too.

Bedtime calls.
It would be good to know what IP ranges they are banning. (Website access logs?) I'll add them to my own .htaccess file if they haven't already fallen into my bot traps.
And of course a little lookup could be done...

manxminx 29-04-2008 23:02
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
When will the BT trials start? Why has the start date been postponed more than once?

Well, the trials have been on hold while BT investigates alternative opt-out methods that do not require cookies to be placed on users' computers.

See BT to Test Phorm, Search for Cookie Alternatives for more info.

Ali.

CaptJamieHunter 29-04-2008 23:12
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I'm on autopilot right now folks so trying to do anything that involves engaging certain parts of my brain is a complete non starter. I'm just happy to get the site back up. Annoyed that Barcelona lost but we can't have it all, can we?

When things in the hangar are more sorted I'll have a root through what logs I can find.

Again, thanks to the folk who flagged this up.

Rchivist 29-04-2008 23:20
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter (Post 34541365)
I'm on autopilot right now folks so trying to do anything that involves engaging certain parts of my brain is a complete non starter. I'm just happy to get the site back up. Annoyed that Barcelona lost but we can't have it all, can we?

When things in the hangar are more sorted I'll have a root through what logs I can find.

Again, thanks to the folk who flagged this up.
Okay - happy landings, and hope there are no wizard prangs! (son of wartime Spitfire pilot)

serial 30-04-2008 00:34
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Just wondering why the long delay with the videos from the meeting. I was chatting with a video editor friend at the weekend and asked how long it would take to turn around a couple of cameras and a seperate audio source. He told me he would be expected to do it in 2 days.

After the hack on the unofficial release it looks very odd.

mark777 30-04-2008 01:49
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by serial (Post 34541414)
Just wondering why the long delay with the videos from the meeting. I was chatting with a video editor friend at the weekend and asked how long it would take to turn around a couple of cameras and a seperate audio source. He told me he would be expected to do it in 2 days.

After the hack on the unofficial release it looks very odd.
It's clearly being delayed for non-technical reasons. There are presumably no editorial decisions to be made either. So it's being held back for other reasons.

It may be that it will be published with the PIA tomorrow?

:angel: :angel:

---------- Post added at 01:06 ---------- Previous post was at 00:54 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34541370)
Okay - happy landings, and hope there are no wizard prangs! (son of wartime Spitfire pilot)
Blimey - there was me thinking the good Captain commuted to work in a Frigate!

;)

---------- Post added at 01:49 ---------- Previous post was at 01:06 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by popper (Post 34541189)
Any graphics bods able to put popper's find lovingly in the hand of the bearded laughing boy?

And a bottle of snake oil in the other.

Hank 30-04-2008 07:02
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
That tin of polish is a crackingly good graphic LOL

Remember though folks, we need to keep "Webwise" synonymous with "Phorm"

"Phorm" is the name we know it by, being close to what it is. But "Webwise" is what the ISPs are branding this as, and it is the general customers who need to know what "Webwise" is.

If the general public gets a marketingly well spun opt in story from their ISP they need to find that it quickly follows this path in anything they see or read...

Webwise = Phorm = Bad

Hank

---------- Post added at 07:01 ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 ----------

Oh, does the PIA come out today? Can't wait!!

---------- Post added at 07:02 ---------- Previous post was at 07:01 ----------

Wonder if K*nt will pay the good fellow who wrote it? And wonder if the video will be published in full today too...?

Dai 30-04-2008 07:32
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicz (Post 34541340)
Lords defy Government by proposing criminalisation of data rogues...
I doubt this is going anywhere, the Govt believes it is just an excuse to beat them up over the infamous 'missing CDs'. Which of course it is.
I can't help thinking that asking the Government to protect citizens from surveillance is a bit like asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
Our officials have always spied on us and recorded data as much as current technology would allow. I suspect much of the development of surveillance technology has been driven by government spending.

We may achieve better results from the media, who love a good scandal. Even then, people have such short memories that I suppose that would be quickly forgotten.

I'd like to add my thanks to the people dedicating so much time and effort to this.

Anonymouse 30-04-2008 08:26
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Given that Phorm/Webwise is ostensibly about advertising, I was interested to find this on Everything2 - it's interesting because it's posted by a former ad agency employee and claims that the entire advertising industry is dying on its feet. We can but hope.

I'm still trying to work out what the hell Everything2 is...or why I keep going back to it and clicking on various nodes that sound even vaguely interesting. :erm: I can't even remember what I was Googling for, but the search hit this site and I went there. Two weeks later, I'm still going there. Weird.

NTLVictim 30-04-2008 09:18
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34541370)
Okay - happy landings, and hope there are no wizard prangs! (son of wartime Spitfire pilot)
Jolly good show! (nephew of wartime Lancaster wireless operator)

:notopic:

Deko 30-04-2008 10:09
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Great Grandson of a WW1 Farrrier.

Florence 30-04-2008 10:29
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Hello PhormUKPRteam had a nice holiday we haven't seen you for a while.. Hope all is well with you?

You can tell we are still busy fighting webwise since we don't want it, feel our ISP is selling us out to spyware/adware company. After reading that PC's in the UK are worth £100 to websites that can infect them with Trojans this makes me wonder (MPO) if this is the underline idea for webwise to get the ISPs customers onto their pimping machine then reap the money for the ability to get our PC's to do what these hackers want.

3x2 30-04-2008 11:07
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxminx (Post 34541358)
Well, the trials have been on hold while BT investigates alternative opt-out methods that do not require cookies to be placed on users' computers.
The simplest option would be to point opted in clients at a separate proxy server (phorm kit). This would be opt in because the client would have to actively change their browser settings in order to receive the 'benefits'.

Of course any active opt-in scheme is a non starter because the whole scam is based on an everyone being in.

Whatever BT decide they will still have no way of obtaining content provider consent.

The delays are more likely BT figuring out how to make the whole scheme less easy to detect for both client and server. If it does turn out to be difficult to detect then I, as a content provider, will simply ban BT address ranges.

Cogster 30-04-2008 11:22
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
The delays are more likely BT figuring out how to make the whole scheme less easy to detect for both client and server. If it does turn out to be difficult to detect then I, as a content provider, will simply ban BT address ranges.

or they are trying to figure a way to opt in consent for 185,000,000 webmasters?

Florence 30-04-2008 11:28
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
There are many that are already gathering IP blocks for ISPs that are planning to go the webwise/phorm route and as last resort do intend to block those IP numbers from accessing the servers. The WWW is about to shrink with thanks to Webwise/phorm and ISPs greed.

3x2 30-04-2008 11:59
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Yes - blocking wouldn't be my first option but if Phorm/ISP's leave us no other option ...

The fact is that while much of the backlash has focused on the customer there is another side to the scheme - ISP's abusing their unique position to steal content and use it to enhance their product. I don't think so.

It is clear from the Stanley document that they (advertisers investors etc) view the 70% 'long tail' as a free and untapped (pardon the pun) resource, prime for exploitation in the new grand scheme. I think content providers may, rightly, have a different view.

Rchivist 30-04-2008 12:48
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3x2 (Post 34541565)

Whatever BT decide they will still have no way of obtaining content provider consent.

The delays are more likely BT figuring out how to make the whole scheme less easy to detect for both client and server. If it does turn out to be difficult to detect then I, as a content provider, will simply ban BT address ranges.
This is what worries me too. The one thing I have heard nothing from BT about, is the question of giving webmasters information about how to selectively block Webwise access with a robots.txt user-agent string. They have absolutely ignored that question, and insisted that the only thing they will respect is a total robots.txt ban on robots.It's not good enough, both legally and morally. Even looking at it on a purely PR basis,their stance can be made to look really grubby if we focus on how poorly they compare with search engines.

If they can read robots.txt to see a general ban on robots then they can read it to find a Webwise user-agent ban. But they won't declare a user-agent description. It makes Kent Ertugrul's rants about the evils of Google, sound really pathetic.

I think this is worth focussing on intensively - we've got some movement on the issue of opt-in.
We've got them thinking about cookies.
We are getting nowhere on the issue of webmaster informed consent. So I'd like to see some focussed attention on comparing the lack of choice offered to webmasters with the Webwise model, as compared with the ability webmasters have to selectively restrict the search engines Google/Yahoo et. al.

Kent's words about the evils of Google at the Town Hall have given us our starting point. Let's accept that as a battle ground and start applying the pressure.

vicz 30-04-2008 12:51
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
The Strowger Automatic Telephone Switch Invented 1891. The story has it that Strowger was motivated to invent an automatic telephone exchange after having difficulties with the local telephone operators. He was said to be convinced that the local manual telephone exchange operators were sending calls to his competitor rather than his business. He also suspected that the telephone operators were influencing the choice of undertaker when his business was requested. Other stories claim that the wife or, possibly, the cousin of a rival was a telephone operator and was telling callers that his line was busy or connecting his callers to the competition.

Sound Familiar? :dunce:

Florence 30-04-2008 13:19
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Yes it is be in our business model or we will stitch up all the ISPs customers and kill the competition.. MPO

This should perhaps also be looked at as a phorm of stepping back into the days of where if you paid protection to the gang you had a chance to servive in the business world.

We do have a body to deal with this maybe we should now bring in the monopolies commission since if all ISPs are forced to take this webwise coz our labour government want to become the new russia and know where what and who we speak to 24/7. Then Phorm/webwise will hold the monopoly which is bad for trading in the free world.

---------- Post added at 13:19 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

Welcome back phormukteam

CaptJamieHunter 30-04-2008 13:29
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florence (Post 34541642)
Welcome back phormukteam
Just passing through and I echo Florence - it had been about a week since PhormUKPRteam had logged in. I was wondering where you were, there had been a marked silence from you here and elsewhere.

Florence 30-04-2008 13:31
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter (Post 34541649)
Just passing through and I echo Florence - it had been about a week since PhormUKPRteam had logged in. I was wondering where you were, there had been a marked silence from you here and elsewhere.
Seems they have been gaged or just become spies only.. Shame...

OF1975 30-04-2008 13:54
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florence (Post 34541650)
Seems they have been gaged or just become spies only.. Shame...
Either that or they were given an ASBO for their appalling spinning and obfuscating :LOL:

jelv 30-04-2008 14:19
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florence (Post 34541642)
We do have a body to deal with this maybe we should now bring in the monopolies commission since if all ISPs are forced to take this webwise coz our labour government want to become the new russia and know where what and who we speak to 24/7. Then Phorm/webwise will hold the monopoly which is bad for trading in the free world.
Is a referral to the monopolies commission a runner? If they go ahead with BT, should they be allowed to do the same with the other major ISPs? Consumers should have a reasonable choice of ISPs who do or do not use Webwise.

vicz 30-04-2008 14:22
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Yes you have 'New Labour Choice', ie take it or leave it.

Dephormation 30-04-2008 14:34
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34541631)
This is what worries me too. The one thing I have heard nothing from BT about, is the question of giving webmasters information about how to selectively block Webwise access with a robots.txt user-agent string. They have absolutely ignored that question, and insisted that the only thing they will respect is a total robots.txt ban on robots.It's not good enough, both legally and morally. Even looking at it on a purely PR basis,their stance can be made to look really grubby if we focus on how poorly they compare with search engines.
Be very careful here. You risk complying with a business model K*nt wants to impose on us.
A content providers explicit consent, as a party to a communication, is required in advance for interception to be legal. Its not up to you to take technical measures to prevent them breaking the law (but of course if you can I'd recommend you do anyway). Complying with the law is their problem.
Its up to Phorm/BT to make their business operations legal. Not you.
In particular, if you explicitly deny them consent for interception, the law is clear. All you have to do in that instance is put the appropriate words on your pages (even as an html comment). Any interception of your transmissions is a crime if you can show they did not have your consent.
I'm working on a script that will allow content owners to capture detailed evidence for a RIPA complaint if content provider consent for interception is ignored.
Pete. (IANAL)

CaptJamieHunter 30-04-2008 14:39
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OF1975 (Post 34541665)
Either that or they were given an ASBO for their appalling spinning and obfuscating :LOL:
Perhaps some poor hassled county cricketer got tired of being told his spin was worse than Phorm's so he took them to court under the Trades Descriptions Act...

But there is a serious point here - Phorm's PR and spin machine has been unsusually quiet recently. Come on guys, what's eating you?

Rchivist 30-04-2008 14:48
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Just posted over on beta forums - compare and contrast these two reports about the SAME news article featuring Ben Camm-Jones, news editor of Web-User magazine

http://www.broadband-finder.co.uk/ne..._18573918.html with its strap-line "Phorm could be a good thing" and

http://www.equimedia.co.uk/Cookies-n...2008-04-29.htm
with its strap-line "Cookies not a great source of concern".

They are well worth a visit just to see how different the spin is from the two reporters. The first suggests that Camm-Jones is in favour of Phorm, the second suggests he is comparing Phorm's model UNfavourably with Google's cookie system from a privacy point of view.

Thanks to Peter N over on BT Beta forums. I can't locate the original comments from Ben Camm-Jones in the online version of Web-User magazine but it seems to be focussing on the Phorm cf Google element of Mr Kent Ertugrul's recent spin, mentioned in my post above.

AlexanderHanff 30-04-2008 16:09
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I am going to be fairly quiet for the next couple of days as I need to finish up some work here. Only 4 weeks left until the end of my degree and I have 8 pieces of work to finish up. Dissertation is due in (bound) on the 9th so it will be finished tonight.

I will still be keeping an eye on things and answering questions, engaging the relevant bodies etc.

Alexander Hanff

Rchivist 30-04-2008 16:38
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34541682)
Be very careful here. You risk complying with a business model K*nt wants to impose on us.
snip

Pete. (IANAL)
Point taken, but I'm not sure there's much harm in pointing out the fallacies in Kent's comparison of Phorm with Google. And it IS strange that they won't give us a user-agent string. I would have thought if they were trying to use that as an leverage argument for Phorm/Webwise's legality on the basis of presumed Webmaster consent if we didn't use the user-agent string, they would have done that a long time ago. It would seem there are two things they are worried about - one being the whole legality issue in the first place, and the second, being forced into an opt-IN model thus messing up all the bean-counter arithmetic of the advertising revenue model.

Dephormation 30-04-2008 17:18
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Jones (Post 34541791)
I'm not sure there's much harm in pointing out the fallacies in Kent's comparison of Phorm with Google. And it IS strange that they won't give us a user-agent string.
I think this tells you a little about the ethics of their organisation, but probably a lot more about the insanity in their methods.

They can't present a different user-agent string; its your requests and your user-agent they are meddling with. They are pretending to be you, to obtain keywords from web sites by deception (Alex H, I guess you might be thinking what I'm thinking? ).

As for the robots.txt. Lets suppose that when Phorm request your robots.txt they could look for a Phorm specific instruction. There's no reason why they couldn't. They simply don't want to. Their business model is already in peril due to user opt in. Giving web sites a way to stop Phorm isn't in their plan.

I'm sure, their whole business is on the brink of an abyss.

Either that or we're all about to get sold as spyware fodder by HMG and Regulators.

AlexanderHanff 30-04-2008 17:50
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34541810)
I think this tells you a little about the ethics of their organisation, but probably a lot more about the insanity in their methods.

They can't present a different user-agent string; its your requests and your user-agent they are meddling with. They are pretending to be you, to obtain keywords from web sites by deception (Alex H, I guess you might be thinking what I'm thinking? ).

As for the robots.txt. Lets suppose that when Phorm request your robots.txt they could look for a Phorm specific instruction. There's no reason why they couldn't. They simply don't want to. Their business model is already in peril due to user opt in. Giving web sites a way to stop Phorm isn't in their plan.

I'm sure, their whole business is on the brink of an abyss.

Either that or we're all about to get sold as spyware fodder by HMG and Regulators.
Even if they do give us a user-agent string, it doesn't mean they will obey robots.txt they could choose to completely ignore it.

Alexander Hanff

SMHarman 30-04-2008 18:54
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34541832)
Even if they do give us a user-agent string, it doesn't mean they will obey robots.txt they could choose to completely ignore it.

Alexander Hanff
Well the user agent is the browser you are using to view the site.
This links back to if you are using a non phorm compliant browser such as safari it cannot profile.
What other user agent can they send?

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34...-post4626.html

Hank 30-04-2008 19:09
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Anyone going to the official launch of 80/20 Thinking next month?

Anyone know what the two important and exciting global initiatives that the company will manage over coming months are? I guess unlikely as they have not been announced.

Wonder if one of the two global inititiatives has anything to do with spying on internet users by ISPs using Phorm and/or Webwise. What are the chances of that do you think?

I see Ray Stanton, global head of business continuity, security & governance at BT will speak...

http://www.8020thinking.com/events.html

Hey, wonder if the the entire event will be recorded and placed unedited on the Web shortly afterwards? Will that take the same amount of time, less or more? (Sorry Simon)

Anyone seen the PIA yet? Can't find any trace of it, but I did see that someone said it was out today... Where?!

Hank

Rchivist 30-04-2008 19:22
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34541810)
I think this tells you a little about the ethics of their organisation, but probably a lot more about the insanity in their methods.

They can't present a different user-agent string; its your requests and your user-agent they are meddling with. They are pretending to be you, to obtain keywords from web sites by deception (Alex H, I guess you might be thinking what I'm thinking? ).

As for the robots.txt. Lets suppose that when Phorm request your robots.txt they could look for a Phorm specific instruction. There's no reason why they couldn't. They simply don't want to. Their business model is already in peril due to user opt in. Giving web sites a way to stop Phorm isn't in their plan.

I'm sure, their whole business is on the brink of an abyss.

Either that or we're all about to get sold as spyware fodder by HMG and Regulators.
I understand the first point, and the problems it presents. But the second point - does that mean it is a good idea or a BAD idea to press them about their attitude to robots.txt and an anti-Phorm statement in it? Bearing in mind your earlier caution, which I understand, doesn't this suggest they are a bit vulnerable on this issue?

AlexanderHanff 30-04-2008 19:27
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMHarman (Post 34541889)
Well the user agent is the browser you are using to view the site.
This links back to if you are using a non phorm compliant browser such as safari it cannot profile.
What other user agent can they send?

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34...-post4626.html
One of the issues raised by Dr Clayton in his analysis on FIPR's web site was that if Phorm were to provide a unique user-agent content owners could add them to robots.txt specifying which (if any) areas of the web site they are permitted to access.

Of course Phorm don't want to release a unique user-agent because it just devalues their product even more if they give content owners a way to block them.

This of course follows the Opt-Out route instead of the Opt-In route (which is required under law) so there is a question of whether it is a necessary step but it does offer a limited compromise as Phorm have stated they will adhere to robots.txt

My argument is that any Opt-Out solution people agree to only helps to create an attitude that Opt-Out is ok when in fact the Law requires Opt-In.

The point I made above is that robots.txt is not a control mechanism in and of itself, it is an honour based rule set which can simply be ignored if Phorm so choose. It will not enforce access restrictions, we only have Phorm's word that they will adhere to it; which frankly is not good enough for me.

Alexander Hanff

Hank 30-04-2008 19:39
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34541916)
robots.txt is not a control mechanism in and of itself, it is an honour based rule set which can simply be ignored if Phorm so choose. It will not enforce access restrictions, we only have Phorm's word that they will adhere to it
And that's the whole point isn't it? We should not have to use it and if we do, as a consequence, we lend some support to their argument.

Phorm can use it as part of their defence; justificaion that if you don't like what they do you can stop it with robots.txt; if you don't like what they do and you don't use robots.txt... well, you don't dislike what they do enough. That's what they can say.

I dislike. But I will not be doing anything using robots.txt. The law says they can't do what they want to do. I don't have to take any further action to stop them.

Hank

OF1975 30-04-2008 20:22
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I am correct in thinking that the only way to stop phorm profiling a website (assuming they stick to their word) will also stop google and other search engines from using spiders to crawl the site too?

AlexanderHanff 30-04-2008 20:26
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OF1975 (Post 34541963)
I am correct in thinking that the only way to stop phorm profiling a website (assuming they stick to their word) will also stop google and other search engines from using spiders to crawl the site too?
Yes. At the moment they are claiming if Google have permission to access their content then they have implied consent to do the same. Which as we all know is utter tripe, but then that isn't really a surprise to any of us I don't think.

Alexander Hanff

OF1975 30-04-2008 20:30
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34541965)
Yes. At the moment they are claiming if Google have permission to access their content then they have implied consent to do the same. Which as we all know is utter tripe, but then that isn't really a surprise to any of us I don't think.

Alexander Hanff
I thought that was the case but figured I would double check. This seems just as bad as the whole hosts file issue to me. Utter madness.

Florence 30-04-2008 21:09
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff (Post 34541965)
Yes. At the moment they are claiming if Google have permission to access their content then they have implied consent to do the same. Which as we all know is utter tripe, but then that isn't really a surprise to any of us I don't think.

Alexander Hanff

Then the only road open to those who don't want phorm on the websites will be to use the IP ban for all ISPs that use Phorm.

dav 30-04-2008 21:16
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Article on ZDNet...

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communicatio...9408146,00.htm

jelv 30-04-2008 21:17
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Does anyone know if they are using the specific user agent for Google or is it the any agent setting they use? So would
Code:
User-agent: Google
Disallow:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /
work as it should - Google allowed in but Phorm/Webwise kept out?

vicz 30-04-2008 21:24
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dav (Post 34542007)
ZDNET! That's like Gordon Brown going on GMTV because he'd rather face Fiona Phillips than Jeremy Paxman! Come on Phorm PR, talk to the big boys on Cable Forum (if you think you're hard enough....) :p:

dav 30-04-2008 21:37
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicz (Post 34542020)
ZDNET! That's like Gordon Brown going on GMTV because he'd rather face Fiona Phillips than Jeremy Paxman! Come on Phorm PR, talk to the big boys on Cable Forum (if you think you're hard enough....) :p:
:) Dey ain't got da stonez ;)

Chroma 30-04-2008 21:53
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Am i right in understanding that if a user manualy edits his HOSTS file then his BT connection would cease to work if Phorm was rolled out?

Am i also correct in assuming that if a politicaly minded individual was inclined to create a small program that would replicate itself and effectively "infect" users on the internet with the express purpose of delivering a payload that would merely edit the HOSTS file to block certain IP ranges or resolve them to the loopback present users with its own brand of "PR Spin" to the effect that it states:

"Hello user i am a virus, i have just altered your HOSTS file to exclude a range of adresses originating from PHORM. Dont be alarmed, im not in any way malicious i was merely operating to protect your privacy whilst online and feel that a third party being able to watch your every move online is wrong. I will of course delete myself from your system in 30days from this message.
I do this because i am aware that most UK residents dont understand what PHORM really is or does and that the majority of users are not technicly minded enough to put these measures in place themselves.
If you dissagree with my politics and feel happy to have an external 3rd party watching everything you do online without any regulation or restraint whatsoever then please feel free to remove the section commented as PHORM from your HOSTS file [found at C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\HOSTS] using any standard text editor (IE: notepad)
Have a nice day.

If hypotheticaly such a dastardly program was created that basicly edited peoples hosts files to protect their privacy then deleted itself causing aboloutly no other changes on a users system, wouldnt it make life a little more difficullt for ISP's from a purely technical standpoint, considering that some users would be completely without a usable connection to the internet and the only fixes would be:
ISP's rolling out a patch to edit the HOST's
Changing the IP's used by Phorm.
Disabling phorm altogether.
Or radicaly changing the way phorm behaves.

Again this is from a purely theoretical standpoint, but wouldnt it put a spanner in the works.

vicz 30-04-2008 21:57
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Sounds like the cure could be worse than the disease

Angry@VMedia 30-04-2008 22:07
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Hi & sorry to butt in, i have been a long time lurker (how much woodwork does this place have) and i have been meaning to join but tonight was finally the time!
I've been trying to keep up with this mamouth subject for the last few weeks and i am finally up to date!

As reguards to the zdnet article, i feel that they are not grasping the point that no matter how badly phorm try to sell itself it is still ILEGAL, no matter how much spin they put on it, so with this in mind, why hasnt more sites that report on this phorm subject stating that this is ilegal and any provider of internet that accepts this is breaking the law?
All i keep seeing is its a better service than google and this bullcrap about extra security webwise provides, why cant these 'reporters' report on the most important facts of all - it is illegal?

if i had an online 'newspaper' i would just simply state "This phorm malarky is illegal, weither optin or opt out period, why are these people not grasping the true facts?

vicz 30-04-2008 22:16
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
This is mostly how it works: Journalist (usually bored) turns up, watches a short presentation usually while doing emails or texting his/her gf/bf, picks up press kit which will include press release paper and usually on floppy or usb stick so the poor journo doesn't have to do too much typing. Attacks the buffet and booze, then maybe a quick 10mins 1-to-1 with K*nt, so long, thanks for all the fish, no thinking required. Anything controversial or potentially libelous then edited out by the sub 'so as not to worry legal' or p-off sponsors.

Dephormation 30-04-2008 22:20
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry@VMedia (Post 34542049)
if i had an online 'newspaper' i would just simply state "This phorm malarky is illegal, weither optin or opt out period, why are these people not grasping the true facts?
Its complicated. Allegedly Financial Times and others have a stake in this scandal. Even the Grauniad were involved until recently. Phorm have sold them a fairy story about advertising revenue, without considering 'frivolous' details like human rights, regulations, and the law.

The only daily paper that covered it in some real depth were the Daily Mail, but they've gone very quiet lately.

Contrast with Chris Williams amazing coverage on the Register. The guy has done a stunning job of exposing BT. See here; Net think thank: Phorm is illegal

Florence 30-04-2008 22:21
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry@VMedia (Post 34542049)
Hi & sorry to butt in, i have been a long time lurker (how much woodwork does this place have) and i have been meaning to join but tonight was finally the time!
I've been trying to keep up with this mamouth subject for the last few weeks and i am finally up to date!

As reguards to the zdnet article, i feel that they are not grasping the point that no matter how badly phorm try to sell itself it is still ILEGAL, no matter how much spin they put on it, so with this in mind, why hasnt more sites that report on this phorm subject stating that this is ilegal and any provider of internet that accepts this is breaking the law?
All i keep seeing is its a better service than google and this bullcrap about extra security webwise provides, why cant these 'reporters' report on the most important facts of all - it is illegal?

if i had an online 'newspaper' i would just simply state "This phorm malarky is illegal, weither optin or opt out period, why are these people not grasping the true facts?

Hi and :welcome: think one has to first look at what is happening then look at which people are being quiet, cagey, passing the book then you might get your answer.

The ISPs have seen £££ signs for our details ( OUR) clicks etc the government see this as a way to spy on what we see on the Internet so unless we boot Labour out of power and then kick our ISPs where it hurts them most ( by moving our internet to ISPs that will be phorm phree) this will be a hard fight.

Too many are doing selective reading and hoping that most internet uses will be good like sheep and herd along the paths these ppl want to drive us down.

We need to keep kicking and screaming to show we will not lie down and play ball .

vicz 30-04-2008 22:24
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34542057)
<snip>

Contrast with Chris Williams amazing coverage on the Register. The guy has done a stunning job of exposing BT. .
Couldn't agree more. I think the Reg proves you can be both entertaining and informative, something the printed press seem to have lost..:)

Angry@VMedia 30-04-2008 22:35
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dephormation (Post 34542057)
Its complicated. Allegedly Financial Times and others have a stake in this scandal. Even the Grauniad were involved until recently. Phorm have sold them a fairy story about advertising revenue, without considering 'frivolous' details like human rights, regulations, and the law.

The only daily paper that covered it in some real depth were the Daily Mail, but they've gone very quiet lately.

Contrast with Chris Williams amazing coverage on the Register. The guy has done a stunning job of exposing BT. See here; Net think thank: Phorm is illegal
Reguarding the news link; this is what i am saying, if 1 online newspaper can see this nonsence is illegal then why on earth are people entertaining this idea, are they chosing to ignore the main fact, this system isillegal?

I have already rattled off a leter to virgin denying them the permission to view /use/sell anything that comes from my home, and if they chose to ignore this then i will take them to court as i listed all the laws that they would be breeching/breaking [thanks to my fellow forum members for the information!]

I really cannot see why people are not waking up and showing kent & phorm the contempt they deserve, as if I was to go and steal peoples mail from their letterboxes, this would also be illegal, and you can bet all the beans in the world the police would not think twice about arresting me and sending me to court with the appropriate sentence, which i would deserve if I did this, so what is any different?

Boot the whole govenment out, this is what I say,they're all as bent as a corkscrewand the biggest drug dealers around [but that is another matter]
sorry for the mega rant, it is just that i cannot understand how & why this is going aheadand why this has not beed stopped dead in its tracks

mark777 30-04-2008 23:06
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Not Phorm, but a very familiar story.


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

warescouse 30-04-2008 23:15
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).

If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?

They must be disregarding our legal request!

Any comments?

vicz 30-04-2008 23:16
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
A Summary of Where My Thoughts Are Now - feel free to ignore!

Remember there is a LOT of money involved. If Webwise is worth £85m pa to VM that equates to about 150,000 customers, so they probably won't mind losing a few. Phorm still has a market cap of £200m despite the recent stock tanking. And unfortunately most people are like sheep and will probably remain oblivious or soon forget about the whole thing.

I think the only thing that will keep VM from implementing is the fear that directors will go to jail. And believe me, even if there is only a very slim chance of that happening it does concentrate the mind wonderfully. But the chances are very very slim indeed - just look at recent rail crashes, or the Demendes shooting. So the VM board are faced with the usual risk versus wonga decision which is how they earn(!) their big bucks. Maybe someone like Branson (a minority shareholder) might try to intervene if it looks like the Virgin brand name will be tarnished by too blatant a shafting of their customers, but I doubt it.

So if we manage to 'win' the need for an explicit and informed opt-in by the end-user we will have done really well, and personally as long as I can keep my own browsing away from phorm and still have my 20Mb broadband from VM I will be happy.

I just don't believe the consent requirement from website owners will ever fly. We talk about 'publishing' stuff on the web because that is mostly what it is. Putting a no-phorm statement on a web page is like printing 'no estate agents are allowed to read this' inside the cover of Daltons Weekly. Technically it may be legally valid but in practice it is totally impractical. Of course the website host is entitled to refuse to serve his pages to whoever he likes, but once the HTML is served he cannot expect to dictate what happens to it. Of course tracking and profiling is a pretty scummy thing to do, but then the web is full of scummy people trying to scam a buck. Maybe somehow we can force a RIPA test case in court but I can't see this happening anytime soon and in any case it only applies in the UK.

I do really like the idea of 'dephormation' , both in terms of subverting phorm's inelegant and arrogant mangling of cookies; and the way it undermines the whole concept of targeted advertising. With a fair wind this could well take off and become a significant web presence. Somehow it seems a very 'Internet purist' solution if that makes sense.

Of course the real answer is the encrypted web, which should restore our privacy for a while anyway, at least until brute force decrypting in realtime becomes viable.

And lets not underestimate the opposition. in the words of Gerry Adams "they have not gone away". :sleep:

Rchivist 30-04-2008 23:21
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dav (Post 34542007)
So that gives the latest predicted trial start date as no later than 26th May then?
And by then BT will have done the following?

Written to the entire World Wide Web of webmasters and got their inphormed consent?
Worked out a way of issuing a trial invitation without making an illegal interception? (ie doing it via BT/BTYahoo's own web pages only while their customers are logged in, and not by illegally, and without consent, intercepting an ordinary http request to a 3rd party site?
Worked out a legal way of planting phorged cookies phraudulently purporting to be from a 3rd party website, on our computers, without the domain owner's inphormed consent?
Worked out a legal way of intercepting web traffic at a Layer 7 level without the inphormed consent of webmasters?

Worked out detailed answers to all the questions posed by FIPR in their most recent paper by Nicholas Bohm? Their customers will not be able to make an inphormed choice without knowing the answers to the legal questions. BT customers cannot simply rely on the bland reassurances of their ISP. We NEVER trusted Kent Ertugrul and his Phorm/Webwise/121Media/PeopleonPage outfit. And we no longer trust BT, after they forfeited our trust by their underhand actions and denials.

So only by giving us those detailed answers can we make an inphormed choice about your trials.

So will the next 28 days involve giving us those answers - or just more evasive silence?

vicz 30-04-2008 23:26
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by warescouse (Post 34542088)
...
If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. ..
......
Any comments?
I think you are referring to some potential issues with the forthcoming BT Webwise trial. Virgin have not said yet when they will implement Phorm, and if they do, how we would opt-in or opt-out.

VM seem to be lying low while seeing how the BT trial goes.

Pasanonic 30-04-2008 23:37
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by warescouse (Post 34542088)
Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).

If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?

They must be disregarding our legal request!

Any comments?
Although you should already have sent a notice under DPA to Virgin I don't think it will matter much in this case.
DPA deals only with personally identifiable data and it is quite possible that this is probably on area that webwise will actually be able to get around however immoral. The problem with the DPA is currently the law and what is recognised as PID in this country. We should send those letters just so they know we are discontent but the area we need to keep up the pressure in is the interception of communications and computer misuse and fraud because there is not a hope in hell that webwise can get around that in it's current proposed rollout.

Regarding the Znet article. I was annoyed reading that Phorm now say that an opt in method was always in their plans and how they plan to inform people with a webpage ( just that would **** me off in the same manner that popups do ) giving the user freedom of choice. This is not informed opt in. This is opt-out by cookie. at the point of service. This interrupts my service and causes my internet experience to change for the worse.

They plan to offer you an informed choice, but for the average user the information will not be along the lines of the truth behind the service, a truth we all know and understand here but an obfuscation of the information along the lines of.
"dear user, we are about to invite you to use our free service that will protect you from identity theft and reduce all those annoying adverts which currently you have no interest in".

This will seem quite attractive, especially to the less tech savvy who might say yes to the option.

However true information along the lines of
"from this point on we will be monitoring all of your browsing habits and profiling the places you visit so that we can use this information to serve you adverts from out partners in OIX. We also are adding a phishing filter to this service but as a user of Firefox, IE7, Opera, Norton and many other products you are already protected up to and beyond the measures we are tagging on to our targeted advertising service".

They will be relying on clever wording and manipulation of fact to mislead Joe public into thinking they are getting better protection and less adverts for nothing other than a click in the 'yes' box.

This is where we need to educate people so that if it ever does get off the ground ( this is the fastest growing business sector in the world, we can't avoid it, on;y see to it that we have the choice to be apart from it by use of legislation ) that the general public is fully aware of the true nature of the business and the actual lack of benefit to the user if not the likely detriment.

edit: sorry moderators for the stars, I was in full flow. It was however a rather innocuous swear word and nothing foul and or abusive.

Kursk 30-04-2008 23:43
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Invariably this thread shows more guests are viewing than members participating.

An appeal to all those watching: please join up and join in. Opposing privacy intrusion needs as much support and ideas that it can get and, well, the timing is just right with the much awaited Privacy Impact Assessment due for imminent release.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men (and women) do nothing". (Edmund Burke)

mark777 30-04-2008 23:46
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 34542098)
Invariably this thread shows more guests are viewing than members.

An appeal to all those watching: please join up and join in. Opposing privacy intrusion needs as much support and ideas that it can get and, well, the timing is just right with the much awaited Privacy Impact Assessment due for imminent release.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men (and women) do nothing". (Edmund Burke)
It's due in the next 15 minutes I think ... :rolleyes:

Kursk 30-04-2008 23:49
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34542100)
It's due in the next 15 minutes I think ... :rolleyes:
I'm sure it'll be delivered to schedule. 12 minutes and counting...:D

mark777 01-05-2008 00:01
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I've had a look. No PIA. No videos. Can't find them anywhere.

The server must have been hacked, that's the only possible explanation I can think of.

Kursk 01-05-2008 00:06
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34542108)
I've had a look. No PIA. No videos. Can't find them anywhere.

The server must have been hacked, that's the only possible explanation I can think of.
Hmmm. The site will need updating from "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April 2008" to, say, "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April-ish 2008". :D

Pasanonic 01-05-2008 00:10
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 34542112)
Hmmm. The site will need updating from "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April 2008" to, say, "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April-ish 2008". :D
for a new company, seemingly very proud of acquiring such a prestigious client base in a short space of time they appear to be a little short in delivering their promises.

Not a good sign for prospective customers.

Angry@VMedia 01-05-2008 00:11
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34542084)
Not Phorm, but a very familiar story.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...nst_kaspersky/
OMFG where is this going to stop?
going by that link, does this mean that if i am arrested for a crime then i can sue the police for handcuffing me or for using what can be described as forceful behaviour? this is getting pathetic! malware/spyware/virus programmers deserve to be prosicuted as mostly the user does not consent to such rubbish to be installed on their machinesand in some cases dont even know that it is there!
I remember Zango & hotbar VERY well, and it was a pain to remove, Kaspersky and others that try to prevent & remove such parasites should be commended, NOT condemned!
I really do not know what sort of a world we are living in now but i know there is no logic to all this at all

Quote:
Originally Posted by warescouse (Post 34542088)
Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).

If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?

They must be disregarding our legal request!

Any comments?
This is a good starting place, but i feel that it will do no good as the govenment dont give a fig about US, the very same people that are padding their already overpaid bank accounts, and this is wrong, we the people are the ones that got them where they are today, where is the respect gone?
If this phorm does actually go live and nothing is done, then there is only 1 thing to do, tell the isp where to stick their internet, as i would rather go without the internet than be spied on by god knows who and their armies of infectious computer programs.

warescouse 01-05-2008 00:13
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I personally think the robots.txt issue with Phorm/webwise has still a long time to run. Yes I consent to my website being visited by the Google bots. After all they can make my website money. But no I don't consent to Phorm/webwise/OIX pinching my potential customers by tempting them elsewhere.

Hopefully some big players in this market may step into the fray and put their legally earned cash into some anti Phorm/Webwise lawyers pocket and worry a few ISP executives. Perhaps we should start a donation hat fund for the incidental expenses involved ;).

Websites should have a proper Opt-In arrangement. I consent to Phorm/Webwise intercepting my site traffic - NOT!

Kursk 01-05-2008 00:15
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pasanonic (Post 34542114)
for a new company, seemingly very proud of acquiring such a prestigious client base in a short space of time they appear to be a little short in delivering their promises.

Not a good sign for prospective customers.
Oooh, that one hurts ;). I'm sure the PIA will be out soon :angel:

Angry@VMedia 01-05-2008 00:24
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I have just had a phort, has google made any sort of statment about this phorm/webwise/oix polava?
I would really like to hear from them to see what their views are and what,if any response to kent saying what they are doing is just what google are doing?
If it was a choice of just phorm or google, google wins hands down every time!

mark777 01-05-2008 00:24
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pasanonic (Post 34542114)
for a new company, seemingly very proud of acquiring such a prestigious client base in a short space of time they appear to be a little short in delivering their promises.

Not a good sign for prospective customers.
I suspect it might be the client delaying the delivery!

I've a nagging suspicion that Phorm, it's ISPy stooges and 80/20 might be tearing each other apart behind the scenes, a big blame shifting exercise and lots of (not very nice people) quoting contract small print to each other.

Let's hope so anyway.

warescouse 01-05-2008 00:28
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34542126)
I suspect it might be the client delaying the delivery!

I've a nagging suspicion that Phorm, it's ISPy stooges and 80/20 might be tearing each other apart behind the scenes, a big blame shifting exercise and lots of (not very nice people) quoting contract small print to each other.

Let's hope so anyway.
Now that's a nice thought to go to sleep on.

Pasanonic 01-05-2008 00:36
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark777 (Post 34542126)
I suspect it might be the client delaying the delivery!

I've a nagging suspicion that Phorm, it's ISPy stooges and 80/20 might be tearing each other apart behind the scenes, a big blame shifting exercise and lots of (not very nice people) quoting contract small print to each other.

Let's hope so anyway.
Oh I absolutely agree that the results of any independently produced and unbiased PIA will no longer contain information and results that are conducive to Phorm's business model given the pressure and public outcry from groups such as ourselves. However it would be very crass of me to make these thoughts known and I would be a much better person if I just assumed that 80/20 went on holiday again ;)

I think that Kent's bold statement of "publish and be damned" might have been rescinded or at least be under careful consideration ;)

AlexanderHanff 01-05-2008 07:02
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
OK I have just written an article for CF (published later today when Mick logs on) with regards to my legal analysis. I have now finished the paper so anyone who can't wait for the article to go live, feel free to download it here.

I have proof read it about 20 times so I am hoping I didn't miss any errors, but if I did, I apologise in advance :)

Alexander Hanff

OF1975 01-05-2008 08:08
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
Ok still no news on the professionally filmed footage. There is no justifiable excuse for this footage not to be released by now. If there IS wrangling behind the scenes delaying its release then we deserve to be told.

AlexanderHanff 01-05-2008 08:19
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
I will phone Simon again later and see if I can get an update, but I need to get some sleep first.

Alexander Hanff

BetBlowWhistler 01-05-2008 08:32
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
 
From the ZDNEt article..

""We're optimistic," said the spokesperson. "We're hoping to have [the technology] in place by the time we do the trial." "

Didn't they say that they were going ahead with this trial in it's 'current' cookie -opt-out phormat? I wonder why they've changed their tune. Couldn't have anything to do with them trying to avoid adding another 10000 RIPA offences to their list could it?
Yeah yeah, I know - it still breaks RIPA because of the web site consent not being obtained - but it does show that they are *very* worried.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:46.
Page 52 of 143 « First 24248495051 52 5354555662102 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.