[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by lucevans

From reading the bbc article, it seems that Simon Davies' preferred way forward is going to be more complexity and opportunity to obfuscate what this system is actually collecting on us all, by way of a system of blacklists of topics that the system won't collect info on (e.g. sexual orientation, medical conditions, etc.)
That just won't work: it'll result in a system that nobody will be able to keep track of, no accountability for security breaches, ample opportunity for Phorm to extract data that they shouldn't without anyone noticing, and no transparency whatsoever. ISP customers will have no idea of what information is likely to be collected or not, and will have no confidence in the "privacy" being claimed. Who will decide what goes on a blacklist? Who will monitor that those topics are not being collected? Who will maintain the lists and keep them up-to-date? (the content of the web changes minute-to-minute). And none of this alters the fact that it is the routing and mirroring of users' webclicks that is unacceptable on privacy grounds, even before there is any potential use of that information. Whatever hope I held out for the publication of the 80/20 report is fast evaporating - it sounds to me like this so-called "privacy advocate" doesn't have the same definition of my privacy as me.
The only acceptable result for me is the absolute assurance that none of my ISP traffic goes anywhere near any hardware or software related to Phorm. Better still, don't install any hardware full stop.

It is similar to the way http://www.websense.com/global/en/ blocks access to the internet. Only as good as the blacklists and whitelists created and they need to update those all the time as sites change the way they are set out and new sites appear.