Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[mark777]

Originally Posted by fidbod

Just got back from the meeting

{...}

Quote of the evening

Kent: "contrary to popular rumour the guardian has not dropped Phorm..."

Charles Arthur: " Hi, Charles Arthur from the Guardian. Our senior commercial chappies have told everyone we are not having anything to do with Phorm. Are they misleading us?"

Kent: cue furious backpedalling similar to that seen by a politician who has been caught out.

Rob - don't know if you caught the above, it's a few pages back now. Kent does tend to leave a few good quotes behind him!

Originally Posted by mark777

Earlier on, someone made the point either on this forum or on Badphorm or BT forum, (I can't find it again now!) that we are raising the issue of "Phorm" in the public eye, but it's going to be sold to them as "webwise", especially when they are offered an opt-in.

Should we not get into a habit of always talking about phorm/webwise?

Both words together, all the time?

That's why its included in the title of the thread.

I've seen suggestions from some members regarding a fund and that could the CF team manage it. Well there needs to be some sort of clarification as to what this is for - is this a short term solution to compensate, as a true gesture of good will for Alexander for attending the meeting tonight or is this something for more longer term?

If its for a longer term then clear guidelines need to be drawn up as to what the fund is for and its aims. The fund would need at least 2 - 3 trustees. These don't have to be team members.

If its for a short term solution - the best thing would be for Alexender to set up a paypal account to receive donations online. That way Alexander gets the donations direct (Through a safe means of transfer without giving out bank account information etc etc) rather than through third person to pass on to Alexander.

Of course its up Alexander if he wishes to accept donations in this manner. But I am sure he can see there are some who want to show their appreciation.

[MovedGoalPosts]

Originally Posted by popper

No.35 The jackal
-----------------------------------
Mick,paul etc have you seen this, perhaps as i asked before, you might consider it?..
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/...comment-163549


"

1. Message Says:
   April 14th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
   Message to cableforum.co.uk
   Since your Sign On Page is http & not https & I am a BT Customer, it would not be in keeping with my Security to Enter either a Sign in Name, PASSWORD or E-mail Address on your Site!
   I am sure other potential posters, who may have useful information have also declined to join in your discussions for this very reason!"

I've put up a response to that. Rather off topic I think for that site though.

However as far a Phorm / webwise and any similar points go there are concerns. Most message boards are indeed not https, yet by choice many users choose to give some private details. It is for the use during their signup and subsequent use, to determine their trust of the site. They have the belief the site will endeavour to abide by it's terms of use. More importantly though, they have the belief that their data transmissions are not being intercepted.

Message boards are perhaps the most vulnerable thing to the privacy of users compared to phorm. Many users disclose stuff they shouldn't often to non public parts of the board. Where there is no https, are we saying that phorm can scan the message boards of private areas restricted to member only users?

[popper]

Originally Posted by Rob

I've put up a response to that. Rather off topic I think for that site though.

However as far a Phorm / webwise and any similar points go there are concerns. Most message boards are indeed not https, yet by choice many users choose to give some private details. It is for the use during their signup and subsequent use, to determine their trust of the site. They have the belief the site will endeavour to abide by it's terms of use. More importantly though, they have the belief that their data transmissions are not being intercepted.

Message boards are perhaps the most vulnerable thing to the privacy of users compared to phorm. Many users disclose stuff they shouldn't often to non public parts of the board. Where there is no https, are we saying that phorm can scan the message boards of private areas restricted to member only users?

given the abilitys of the layer7 DPI kit , can it , for sure, they dont call it 'a man in the middle attack' for nothing and usually that refers to the far slower software impimentations not this commercial grade Deep Packet Inspection Hardware. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_packet_inspection

will it, scan the private password protected areas in just http sites ?,given the current data we have all looked over these last few weeks, it can and it will, infact it appears it cant stop itself, unless its manually got your site details in some Phorm of blacklist they maintain, the total oposite of everyone else, they will unless they know not too...


BUT regarding https see this BT question put just today...
the implication is they already did perhaps read https at some point in one of the old trials......

http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/me...ID=17784#17784
"L deAblow [img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

Posts: 59
Registered: 3/13/08 Re: BT Webwise Discussion Thread
Posted: Apr 15, 2008 7:46 PM [img]Download Failed (1)[/img] in response to: Mark W [img]Download Failed (1)[/img] Reply
Mark W can I confirm that those people who had problems accessing services like Rapidshare at the time of the profiling were being distrupted by the PHORM profiler.

Rapidshare limit the number of downloads per IP and also check for the same account accessing the rapidshare service simulateously.

With the Profiler also getting a copy of the web page after I have used my account to log in would suggest they were profiling HTTPs as well as HTTP during the trial.

This would obviously show that banking account details were also profiled as part of the trial.

Please comment soonest as Rapidshare keep a log of all IP that a account holder uses
For support free of commercial sleaze try the other forum at http://www.filesaveas.co.uk/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.pl?catselect=general"

[tdadyslexia]

Originally Posted by Rob

[big snip] are we saying that phorm can scan the message boards of private areas restricted to member only users?

To me it looks like that Phorm can snoop on all forums PM's.

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by Mick

That's why its included in the title of the thread.

I've seen suggestions from some members regarding a fund and that could the CF team manage it. Well there needs to be some sort of clarification as to what this is for - is this a short term solution to compensate, as a true gesture of good will for Alexander for attending the meeting tonight or is this something for more longer term?

If its for a longer term then clear guidelines need to be drawn up as to what the fund is for and its aims. The fund would need at least 2 - 3 trustees. These don't have to be team members.

If its for a short term solution - the best thing would be for Alexender to set up a paypal account to receive donations online. That way Alexander gets the donations direct (Through a safe means of transfer without giving out bank account information etc etc) rather than through third person to pass on to Alexander.

Of course its up Alexander if he wishes to accept donations in this manner. But I am sure he can see there are some who want to show their appreciation.

My personal thoughts on the matter of donations were initially for a short term solution to cover the costs of Alexander's trip and a little extra as a thank you. He'd have to decide of course that he was happy with this and can make his own thoughts known later.

As for a longer term fund I have also given this some thought. i feel if we were to set up an official action group with clear and defined objectives, open to forum members and non members alike, and driven by some core people best placed to head such a group then a fighting fund would need to be implemented.
I think we should wait for a transcript of the meeting and then poll the members as to if they thought such a group would be in the best interests of driving the opposition message forward.

We have, many of us, sent letters to various bodies and had varied success. If we could organise a central group, backed by some of the more respected and knowledgeable names who seem to be in opposition then this might serve to have the people we are lobbying recognise us as a more legitimate action group.

Just some random thoughts, it is late and I have imbibed a few cold ones.


Craig


P.S. nearly forgot, thanks Fidbod for the reply re: q&a session.

[AlexanderHanff]

OK folks I am back. Been up for about 40 hours straight now so bare with me. We hit heavy fog on the M1/M6 on the way back (most of the way) so the drive home was painfully slow.

With regards filming of the meeting.

Channel 4 were there and filming, they approached me after the meeting as unfortunately they had not been there for my "speech" (I think they were interviewing someone in the hallway outside), so it is unlikely I will be in the C4 coverage.

However, there was a 2 camera professional setup with separate audio which will be appearing online unedited (the sound will be unedited, the video will be edited with regards to the 2 camera's having different angles, the final piece will be seamless with the audio). Obviously this might take a couple of days to get online given the work involved.

Before I go any further, I want to give a very special mention to one gentleman, a regular member of the public, who took the time and effort to attend. I don't know who he was, or where he was from, but if he was someone from this forum please do make yourself known. His words and reaction, I think were the most important of the entire meeting. He spoke after I finished supporting me as a member of the public and started out strong and bold but as he spoke it was clear that he was genuinely upset, I was incredibly moved by this and tried to find him after the meeting but unfortunately couldn't.

I missed a few points I wanted to raise and for that I apologise, I arrived late so didn't have a chance to get a glass of water, my throat was dry and I won't deny that the experience was a little overwhelming. In my defence though, I had very little time to prepare my speech as I wasn't asked to give it until 4:30am yesterday morning but I do think I made some important points.

I hope people are not disappointed that I didn't raise the legal issues of the 2006/2007 trials; it was obvious that it would have just been a waste of time (and there wasn't enough time as it was we ended up almost being kicked out of the lecture hall for over-running) as BT carried out the trials so it was never expected that Phorm would answer any question directly related to this. So I tried to go back to basics and talked about ECHR and why it came into existence in the first place. I talked about turning people into products and the global warehouse pieces of us are planned to be sold in. I also mentioned how people feel insulted that Phorm feel they have the right to profile them. I emphasised that fundamental human rights cannot be overturned by implied consent and that the general public (in my eyes) don't care that the data is anonymous they simply do not want this technology invading their privacy in any way. I also expressed my concern over Phorm refusing to provide a user-agent for content owners to include in robot.txt and in my conclusion stated that Phorm -must- provide a user agent. I also discussed trust and how there simply wasn't any for Phorm or BT as result of the actions and revelations of the past 2 months.

At the end of the speeches/presentations and the Q&A with the panel, we were all given the opportunity to sum up our thoughts in 30 seconds; what I said for my summary is a bit of a blur now but I think you will appreciate it once the video is released, I believe I closed by stating something along the lines of this being the most intrusive activity to privacy ever.

After the meeting it was very busy, I was approached by several academics, experts and members of the press. I spent considerable time talking to a prestige crowd at the after event "gathering" including Dr Richard Clayton, Gus and Simon from 80/20T, a senior legal representative from Orange (who's name currently escapes me due to my fatigue but I have it in my notes and will rectify this issue later today), people from Cambridge Uni, ORG, British Computer Society and many others.

The chap from Orange was very interesting and confirmed that Orange were not interested in deploying Phorm's technology until they could devise a true opt in solution (with real consent not some buried terms) at the authentication level. His thoughts were it might be possible to put Phorm opt-ins onto a separate IP block so that only that block of IPs went anywhere near Phorm's kit. He basically got the point and his views echoed many of the issues and concerns expressed over the past few months. I have to say it was an absolute pleasure to have the opportunity to talk to him.

Now, let me just get one thing clear before I go any further with regards the attacks on 80/20T and in particular Simon Davies. I was very proud and honoured to be invited to speak at the meeting (by Simon without even consulting Phorm in advance). Simon and I were in discussions via PM on this forum and email until approx 6am yesterday morning and not only was he very honest and sincere, he was even kind enough to offer me some advice and moral support which I will now quote as I am sure he won't mind:

"I would say that you're strength is your passion. You are carrying the
rights perspective. That's powerful. We need to hear that case put clearly
and unequivocally. Be measured, empirical and assertive - but I'm sure you
are all those things!"

This was in a personal email so I normally wouldn't disclose such information but I think it is important to end this unjustified attack some people have made on Simon.

When I arrived at the meeting and introduced myself to him, the man hugged me and I am far from ashamed to disclose that (he also hugged me at the gathering later in the evening.) He is an incredible man and when you meet him face to face, his passion for his work as a privacy advocate is very clear and very humbling and some of the things people have said have actually been very hurtful to him and upsetting.

Tonight I met some of the most inspiring and decent people I am ever likely to meet in my lifetime, Simon and Richard in particular and words can't describe that experience. I was treated with the utmost respect by everyone who spoke to me (well almost, there was one gentleman who approached me immediately after the meeting who clearly wasn't happy with me being the "voice of the public" claiming that the people I represent were a small group of complainers, he even suggested only 250 people had signed the petition on the PM website. I never saw him again after this but needless to say I refuted all his arguments) and I am very thankful of that.

I left the gathering around 11:30 and got home shortly before 5am.

Final thoughts? The meeting didn't really discuss anything new but it was important given that is enabled and initiate dialogue in an open forum. It was not a PR event (however much Kent might have wanted it to be) I only saw one supporter of Phorm in the audience who attempted to heckle Richard on a couple of occasions and was well despatched by the same. In reality, the questions coming from the audience were more a reflection of the issues raised from our side of the fence and the audience made it clear that they were not even remotely happy with Kent's answers or opinions on law and the wider issue as a whole; so I respectfully suggest some people have some humble pie to eat and some apologies to issue to Simon Davies.

The PIA will be ready at the end of the month, but in a discussion with Simon later it was made clear that a solution with regards to opting in was a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

It was a great night, one I will never forget, I am only sorry that I never managed to meet more of the forum members who turned up, I wish they had made themselves known to me.

With regards all this talk of donations, there really is no need. However, if people really do want to make donations, I will use them to buy some books I need for my Masters and the offers are very much appreciated.

Now I need some sleep, but I will be back later to answer any questions and of course continue where we left off yesterday; in our fight against this technology, my dissertation and the fight to hold BT accountable for the illegal trials in 2006/2007.

Good night, thanks to everyone for their kind words and keep up the good fight, it really does seem to be making a difference.

Alexander Hanff

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Alexander Hanff

Snip

Alexander

Your constant hard work on this subject is very much appreciated.

The BBC have added more info HERE

Online advert system Phorm could make the net less secure and breaches human rights, the service's creators have been told.

[ceedee]

Nice one, Alexander. Very pleased the meeting went well and thank you for presenting the users' perspective.
I'm particularly happy that you too have met Simon and realise that he's not been rephormulated...

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

[Simon Davies] is an incredible man and when you meet him face to face, his passion for his work as a privacy advocate is very clear and very humbling and some of the things people have said have actually been very hurtful to him and upsetting.

The chap from Orange was very interesting and confirmed that Orange were not interested in deploying Phorm's technology until they could devise a true opt in solution (with real consent not some buried terms) at the authentication level. His thoughts were it might be possible to put Phorm opt-ins onto a separate IP block so that only that block of IPs went anywhere near Phorm's kit.

I know virtually nothing about how the ISPs' network gear works but was wondering if Phorm-related kit could not be positioned on an http proxy server that could be configured within each user's browser, eg on port 8080?

It certainly sounds like a simple solution that would involve no unauthorised DPI to check opt-in status and would allow anyone to completely avoid Phorm-infected kit.

Any technical comments would be appreciated, if only to get the idea out of my head?

[Sirius]

Just wish i could have attended.

[flashpaul]

Well done Alexander ,

When you get up I think you should look at this reply (copied from VM newsgroups)

Reply from EU Information, Society & Media Commissioner Viviane Reding

The Commission is aware of the activities of the company Phorm in the UK,
concerning the analysis of internet traffic for advertising purposes, the
agreement between Phorm and major internet service providers in the UK and
the concerns that have beep raised about the effects on privacy of these
activities. Privacy and the protection of personal data are fundamental
rights of the citizens of the EU. They are enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of
the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and also protected by the European
Convention on Human Rights and the related instruments of the Council of
Europe, to which all EU Member States are signatories.

The general principles for the protection of personal data are defined in
Directive 95/46/EC and complemented and particularized for electronic
communications by Directive 2002/58EC on privacy and electronic
communications (ePrivacy Directive).

The ePrivacy Directive obliges Member States to ensue the confidentiality of
communications and related traffic data through national legislation. In
particular, they shall prohibit listening, tapping, storage or other kinds
of interception or surveillance of communication and the related traffic
data by persons other than the users without their consent, which must be
freely given, specific and informed indication of the user's wishes. The
data concerned in this particular matter i.e. the content of search queries,
constitute communication within the meaning of this Directive and the URLs
used in the packets constitute traffic data. This data should therefore be
protected appropriately.'

[manxminx]

Alexander, my sincere thanks.

Yesterday was a very important milestone, not just for us, but also I feel, for you personally as well. And yes, I would love to donate something towards your Masters book fund.

Ali (((huggsss)))

[Ravenheart]

Firstly many thanks to Alexander, it sounds like the meeting was very productive.

The Phorm issue featured on Radio 4 this morning at around 7.30 It's onto the listen again section now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/li...2_20080416.ram

Phorm bit starts 22.39 minutes in

Originally Posted by OF1975

Oh lord. They still hiring personnel:

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/s...o,353155.shtml

Sometimes I hate googling for news about Phorm.

Have to love the "double-speak" in that article -
"Phorm, the global digital technology company that is revolutionizing online data privacy for users"

Much like Pol Pot revolutionised health care for Cambodians

Makes you wonder what Phorm's "mission statement" is - "Liars, Liars, pants on fire!" perhaps?

[TehTech]

Originally Posted by manxminx

Alexander, my sincere thanks.

Yesterday was a very important milestone, not just for us, but also I feel, for you personally as well. And yes, I would love to donate something towards your Masters book fund.

Ali (((huggsss)))

I totally agree with all centements of thanks to Alexander, I really wish I could have been there to shake that mans hand, as I am really proud of him for what looks like "dedicating his life" to beating Phorm, and IMO, that man deserves a medal!


WAKE UP VM, this Phorm rubbish IS ILLEGAL!!!!!!

YOU even THINK of allowing these spyware peddling criminals into your buildings to install this crud and YOU WILL BE TAKEN TO COURT AND SUED SO DAMN HARD, no amount of over-subscribed areas will get you lot out of this massive hole you are digging for yourselves!!!