[CaptJamieHunter]

This is a draft e-mail to David Davis. I'm assuming that although he's a "self confessed geek" he might not be completely up to speed on the Phorm issue. Sorry for the length but as you probably noticed, I'm not very good at concise. Suggestions, enhancements and corrections appreciated.

From: Me
To: davisd@parliament.uk

Dear Mr Davis,

I should like to bring to your attention a number of worrying recent developments in the field of internet privacy and of the failure of the Office of the Information Commissioner to investigate what appear to be breaches of the Data Protection Act and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

You may already be aware that three major internet service providers (ISPs) have signed agreements with a company known as Phorm to sell the internet browsing data of their users as part of a "targeted advertising" scheme.

Computer news site The Register has uncovered a number of disturbing facts about Phorm including its previous involvement in spyware under a different name. Phorm prefer to spin this fact saying they were involved in adware. A cursory look at http://blogs.zdnet.com/Spyware/index.php?p=820, http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/peopleonpage.shtml and http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/apropos.shtml suggests differently.

Phorm make a number of claims about their "product" being "a gold standard in user privacy" but despite being present on The Register, CableForum and a number of weblogs they have failed to openly and honestly answer detailed technical questions and concerns put in the public domain. You can find an example of such questions on http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03...ster/comments/

Particularly I refer to the growing belief that Phorm is illegal under RIPA. The Foundation for Information Policy Research has published an open letter to Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, stating this belief.

This letter is at http://www.fipr.org/080317icoletter.html

The Guardian newspaper recently rejected Phorm, saying that their "decision was in no small part down to the conversations we had internally about how this product sits with the values of our company." As polite a devastating put down as I have ever seen.

More recently The Register obtained proof that BT not only secretly tested this "product" in June 2007 but lied to cover up this fact. Customers were given various excuses for their concerns, but no customer was told the truth. The report is at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/17/bt_phorm_lies/

This issue took an even more serious turn when The Register revealed that it had seen documentary evidence confirming that "BT secretly intercepted and profiled the web browsing of 18,000 of its broadband customers in 2006 using advertising technology provided by 121Media, the alleged spyware company that changed its name to Phorm last year. BT Retail ran the "stealth" pilot without customer consent between 23 September and 6 October 2006."

This in addition to the secret 2007 tests. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 makes intercepting internet traffic without a warrant or consent an offence. It seems to me that illegally intercepting 18,000 customers' internet traffic is in breach of that legislation. As was the first secret test. I contend that BT must also be in breach of the Data Protection Act as the data was collected without customers' consent.

Please read the full report at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...rm_2006_trial/

BT claimed that there was nothing illegal about the trials but refused to answer a number of direct questions asked by The Register about Stratis Scleparis, the BT Retail CTO who became Phorm CTO after the first successful secret trial. BT preferred to hide behind a bland statement and refused to apologise to customers.

The report is at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...orm_interview/

I am also led to understand that the Metropolitan Police declined to record the first of BT's secret tests as a crime when a colleague tried to report it as such. Please read the report at http://denyphorm.blogspot.com/2008/0...ort-crime.html

A number of people have already complained to the ICO but had little back in response.

Today we became aware that despite these facts coming to light, the ICO have said that there is definitely no official investigation by ICO with regards to Phorm. Neither is there any investigation with regards the BT secret trials of 2006 and 2007.

I am led to believe the ICO are claiming that RIPA falls under the remit of the Home Office. The ICO seem unwilling to accept there should be an investigation into the activities of BT and Phorm. I should also add that the ICO were also extremely reluctant to divulge this information to a colleague and refused permission to quote them.

This cannot be acceptable from a public servant organisation.

This cannot be acceptable from the organisation created to "protect personal information" "provide information to individuals and organisations" and "take appropriate action when the law is broken."

A major telcommunications company in the UK has betrayed the trust placed in it by its users. It and its accomplice, Phorm, should surely be brought to book for this flagrant violation of privacy legislation.

One cannot help but wonder if the lack of action by the government and ICO is influenced in any way by the presence of former Labour minister Patricia Hewitt. I am not suggesting any impropriety but I am sure you appreciate that I and many others cannot understand why BT and Phorm are being allowed to breach internet users' privacy with complete disregard for their customers or the law.

I urge you to take up this issue with your colleagues in both Houses, the House Of Commons Science and Technology and Culture, Media and Sport Committees and the House Of Lords Science and Technology Committee.

Thank you for your time. If I may be of any further assistance to you please do not hesitate to get in touch.

Yours sincerely

The Parliamentary committees may be worth contacting: the House Of Lords committee at http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ct_details.cfm and the House Of Commons Select Committee at http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta..._committee.cfm
and the Commons Culture, Media and Sport committee at http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...rt_members.cfm

Each one has a number of members. More people to enlighten and educate.

Sorry for the length. I need a cup of tea now!