Quote:
|
Definitely, Rather than second hand info, awful Pr spin and our guesswork, lets have a proper genuine investigation from someone who knows what they are talking about.
|
Thar ye go ..
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02...orm_documents/
(But put simply - how can Phorm guess what might interest you unless they have intercepted your communications?)
It's not that I want anyone kept in the dark it's just that the more people concentrate on cookies, psuedorandom numbers and other minutiae the easier it is for Phorm and the ISP's to pass this off as something other than a wire-tap. At it's heart, that is the proposal - to intercept your web activities and analyse them.
Phorm are quite happy for us all to be lost in the detail - it's a distraction, a sleight of hand. Worse, anyone coming to this debate without a technical background just sees technical talk and tunes out.
RE : (
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/...et-with-phorm/)
The story annoyed me a little simply because the FIPR had already made a statement on Phorm but now seem to be allowing Phorm to add another "this well respected organisation has examined our systems and ... " to it's PR machine. Effectively neutralising the previous FIPR statement.
I agree with AH on this one - we need to concentrate on the legal/moral aspects.