Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackbeak
You and I are talking about different things. The closest they (that is Phorm and BT) get to personal information is a UID cookie assigned to an IP address according to what I've read. It's not your personal information according to Dr Claytons document on the subject.
|
You think?
OK so when Phorm intercept your non blacklisted web mail which may have your real name appear in any text in an email or email header, that is not access to personal information?
When Phorm intercept your shopping carts which are not https encrypted (most are only encrypted for the Login not for further pages) that is not access to your personal information?
When Phorm intercept your forum posts on a political forum where you share your political views, that is not access to your personal information?
Just three off the bat examples, I could name hundreds of others if you like.
Interception at the network level IS NOT the best way to gather this data (nor is it legal). There are no safeguards in place whatsoever in real terms and all Phorm's spouting on about blacklists and whitelists is just a bunch of whitewash. Given the nature of changes on the net on a minute by minute basis whitelists and blacklists are not suitable solutions because they can never feasibly keep up or cover even a modest percentage of possible breaches of privacy.
It is ILLEGAL period. BT broke CRIMINAL LAW and COMMON LAW with their trials, Phorm were complicit and should be charged with conspiracy under the same laws.
The current model of Phorm's technology is also in violation of CRIMINAL and COMMON LAW for many of the same reasons but with Fraud thrown in for free.
How many times does that need saying to drill it into your head?
Alexander Hanff