Quote:
Originally Posted by HamsterWheel
Consent to do what though ? That is the question.
I'd argue that what Phorm are doing does not need consent. Or else what Google already does in a much more invasive way would also be illegal, but it's not.
|
I think there is a delicate difference between needing consent for searches you yourself choose to enter into Google to be logged (which by its very nature is opt-in) and needing informed consent to have your entire port 80 data stream intercepted, analyzed (prior to being 'anonimyzed', and, more importantly, to determine if you give consent for said data to be collected, analyzed etc.).
Google's sytem is limited to people first choosing to use their site and is then only limited to what users do on that site. Once a search is run and results are returend that is the end of the data collection by Google. Furthermore, the data harvesting can be completely opted out from by blocking Google's tracking cookies. Once that is done, nothing is recorded, the opt-out is 100% In addition, if that is not enough for a user, they can
choose not to use Google at all. Conversely, Phorm is always present on a connection.
Phorm as you are aware is not limited by either of these, as they see and intercept the entire thing, before they can decided if you are opted in or not. That is by far more invasive. To increase the invasiveness, to determine an opt-out status Phorm has to intercept your data stream - by which time is is technically too late to ask for consent for something which has already been done. That is what makes Phorm 'appear' more illegal than Google.
It should also be noted that these interceptions are all prior to data being anonymized, therefore the issues of Phorm's legality are under question before that data has been cleanseed so the "phorm stores no personally identifiable data" data doesn't even come close to addressing this.
---------- Post added at 18:15 ---------- Previous post was at 18:08 ----------
To sumamrise, it is the method of data collection and the apparent inability to completely opt-out of having data intercepted which upsets most people, and also has the brighter bulb of being illegal than the techniques incorporated by Google and other search engines.
The anonymizing process on the other hand is, I agree, a good effort - it is a shame everything piror to that does not satisfy me (personally) one bit.