Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff
VPN and https are too exclusive and by that I mean they exclude far too many people. Processing everything over https is going to mean costs for non profits are going to rise and as a result communities like cableforum will struggle to emerge. There is a magnitude of difference in processing requirements for a busy web server between http and https and many non profit sites would simply never survive without resorting to advertising which many people do not want to do.
VPN is impractical because it excludes all but the technically tuned in, meaning the majority of people will be excluded.
But more importantly, we should not have to resort to subterfuge in order to obtain liberty and privacy, these are afforded to us as inalienable rights. In fact by evading these systems and going underground, we are in essence giving up our rights instead of enforcing them, which just means more and more rights get eroded until we have none left.
Alexander Hanff
---------- Post added at 07:54 ---------- Previous post was at 07:52 ----------
Add a comment if you like, I was more interested in getting the point about the contact page which was processing significantly personal data, across. It is my understanding that the contact page is no longer controlled by Phorm?
Alexander Hanff
|
The BT Webwise contact page data is now handled as part of the normal BT Help and Support operation which is outsourced to custhelp.com - who do all the other help stuff. That change occurred "covertly" just after the exposure of the fact that emails to help were coming back with ww3.phorm.com or 121media.com in a References: header and with FW in the Subject line. We got 'em there and wrecked someone's bank holidyay. As there was also a fire in Houston that day, it wasn't a good weekend for BT Webwise. I eventually got an email and there was a Beta post explaining the change over but claiming there had never been anything wrong with Phorm doing it anyway - but now they were changing the system and using custhelp.com
But:-
They (custhelp.com) are very very persistent on demanding extra personally identifiable information - I'm trying to get a question on webwise answered at the moment via their contact.php page and custhelp.com keep coming back and asking for the non-mandatory information that I didn't put on the contact form, my BT customer account number, and phone number "so they can handle my enquiry". I keep saying no, and they keep saying they need it. I'm letting the correspondence run on, as I like getting that sort of stuff. It looks good in letters of complaint to the ICO.
Currently, in order to answer the question I asked recently:-
> The site
www.webwise.bt.com seems to have disappeared off the
> internet. Has something broken?
> Was there a brownout in Houston?
> Is FASTHOSTS or GoDaddy or thePlantet.com broken?
> So many strange things happening with BT Webwise at the moment.
they are saying for the second time
"I am sorry for any problems this has caused you.
In addition to your question of why we need your account number and telephone number it is so that we can access your account to solve your query, and for security.
I am sorry for the way you feel however in order to solve this matter quickly I would need the information required.
Once again I am sorry for any confusion caused.
If you should have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me again via e-mail.
Thank you for contacting BT.
Yours sincerely,
********** *********
eContact Customer Service"
even though in response to their first request for that data I replied:
"Thank you for your reply.
I'd rather not disclose this personally identifiable information that you
ask for. I cannot see why my phone bill account number should be necessary
to answer the questions in my original submission form.
I asked these questions - you can answer them without my account number or telephone number. None of the questions relates directly to my individual
account details and the information requested below was not marked with an
asterisk on the enquiry/contact web page, and I choose not to supply it now.
Thank you."
Still sending out boiler plate rubbish. In my experience of BT help and support by email it can take about three or four more cycles of this before a human being intervenes so I'll keep going although my holiday may intervene!
In my next reply I'm going to demand the reason why they need this information and threaten them with yet another report to the ICO if they refuse.
---------- Post added at 08:29 ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark777
That's not the way I think, although I grant that many people do.
I don't want to turn this into a political thread, but with regard to the Phorm issue, I just think we need to kick a weak government when it is down, where it hurts.
10% tax band and fuel duty are mass issues, watch the twerps backpeddle on those. Phorm will never become a mass issue in a short timespan (but if it's implemented we will wear them down by blaming every fault on it).
We need to gather a vocal 'critical mass', use the UK & EU law where we can, the media where it's willing and just grind away. Take advantage of a weak government.
|
I agree. One thing that all of us should do at present, is to use writetothem.com to send our MP and our MEPs follow up letters about the leaked document. Feel free to use my post over on BT Beta
http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/th...t=754&tstart=0
as a catalogue of complaints. The MP's got sold a pup in the briefing document they were given by BT, and so they think there is nothing wrong. Their "trust" in BT needs shaking and that leaked document shakes it severely and just might get them moving.
Likewise the ICO