[Phormic Acid]

Originally Posted by pseudonym

I've been following the reports about Nebuad, there were reports early on about user's acquiring cookies when visiting google so it was clear early on that it wasn't entirely passive.

I read things like,

Charter Will Monitor Customers’ Web Surfing to Target Ads

Mr. Dykes said that the company also examines other information about users’ computers in order to identify when an I.P. address is changed. But he declined to explain what that information is and how it is used.

And, I thought the best explanation was that an ISP’s DHCP servers would pass on changes of IP address, the other information being the MAC of the modem or similar. If the whole process is bootstrapped using a tracking cookie, then, fundamentally, it’s a cookie tracking system. NebuAd and Mr Dykes are far more opaque than Phorm. I agree that NebuAd are Phorm’s evil twin. Phorm may be wrong, but at least they’re trying. Richard Clayton found them very trying.

Originally Posted by pseudonym

Unlike PageSense, as Nebuad are less sensitive than Phorm about looking at IP addresses, it would only need to occasionally inject script tags into some requests for pages from certain sites, so that it could link the user's current IP address (and the profile built since the last injection) to their unique ID from their faireagle cookie and possibly also to transfer the profile ID to its partner ad-network's cookies.

Phorm managed to get a test of PageSense up and running without injecting cookies, by seeding the cookies through an advert delivery system. If, once NebuAd have tied an IP address to a particular cookie, the system is passive, I have to wonder at the need to inject packets at all. Could they not seed cookies through their advert delivery system, as Phorm did? NebuAd’s system will notice any IP address change as soon as one of their adverts is requested.