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

[TehTech]

Originally Posted by Barkotron

Really? Where is it? What's it called? Is it being deployed without a warrant by a private or public body and does it monitor nearly everything every user on a particular ISP network does on the internet without the informed consent of both parties involved in the communication?

If you know about this and have any actual evidence that this is happening, why haven't you gone to the police? You're clearly in possession of evidence of criminal acts which no-one else is aware of. Why don't you share?

Either that or you don't know what you're talking about. You can have one guess which I'd put money on...

[3x2]

RE : (#3440) Simon Watkin e-mails posted by Portly_Giraffe

RIPA is primarily about how state
bodies; such as the police, local councils the security
and intelligence agencies, conduct some of their
investigatory functions.

RIPA exists to provide a statutory basis and operating
framework for the Police and other law enforcement bodies
to interfere with an individual’s right to privacy, for
instance during the course of an criminal investigation.
An independent body exists to deal with complaints about
breaches of RIPA in relation to the police or other State
investigatory bodies.

I thought that I remembered a high profile case not so long ago ..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6301243.stm

They were both charged with RIPA offences.

(from the Reg story at the time - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08...e_tap_charges/ )

Goodman and Mulcaire are jointly charged with eight counts of unlawfully intercepting voicemail messages between 3 January and 30 May 2006, contrary to Section One of Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Both also face a separate conspiracy to intercept communications charge.

So It would seem that RIPA can and has been used other than "in relation to the police or other State investigatory bodies." I'm sure that if I were found to be intercepting the communications of an ex-girlfriend for example RIPA offences would be the first option for the Police.

[dav]

Originally Posted by OF1975

The Jackal may I politely suggest to you that you shut up. I HAVE done something about it. I have spent hours writing to MPs, MEPs, Liberty, commenting on news stories and blogs about this, telling friends and acquaintances about all this.

So have many, many people. However, in the interest of balance, it does no good to shout down anyone who disagrees or offers criticism. Risking the decline of this thread into a shouting match via rabid, reactionary replies and insults is not the way. It's counterproductive and a distraction. If anyone doesn't like an opposing view, comment on it, but offer a considered rebuttal. Let the other side sling the mud. It is they who look stupid later.

Note: although I've quoted OF1975 above, this isn't aimed at that person. It's just a general comment as I can sense where this is heading.

[OF1975]

Dav, generally speaking I would agree with you but I don't like the tone that the jackal took. That "crying wolf" comment was very inflammatory and objectionable in my opinion.

---------- Post added at 11:52 ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 ----------

Originally Posted by The Jackal

What's publically known is that the NSA can quite easily break 128bit encryption keys(which is the vast majority of so called secure web traffic) and worse still it's rumoured that 256bit keys are down the pan too.

The jackal. There is a very big difference between a body like the NSA doing something like this and a private company doing this just to push advertising on us.

[TehTech]

Has anyone noticed any new stories about last night's meeting?

I really cannot wait to see the UNEDITED version!

As I have said before, ALEXANDER for PM!!!

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by OF1975

The jackal. There is a very big difference between a body like the NSA doing something like this and a private company doing this just to push advertising on us.

So are you saying that you'd prefer to have an agency sniff your packets in detail whereas you'd be outraged by Phorm merely harvesting a few cookies here and there ?

[thebarron]

Just a thought and I think it has been mentioned before. As we are quite likely to have many more new visitors to this forum due to more coverage, would it not be better to have the the Downing street link http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ispphorm/ showing instead of the PetitionOnLine one. New people will get the impression that only 250 people have signed as apposed to over 11,000 !!

[Barkotron]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

What's publically known is that the NSA can quite easily break 128bit encryption keys(which is the vast majority of so called secure web traffic) and worse still it's rumoured that 256bit keys are down the pan too.

Any actual evidence to back that up? Where is it publicly known? Which encryption algorithms are you talking about?

---------- Post added at 12:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 ----------

Originally Posted by The Jackal

So are you saying that you'd prefer to have an agency sniff your packets in detail whereas you'd be outraged by Phorm merely harvesting a few cookies here and there ?

Ah - I was right. You really don't understand what the technology does. Can I suggest you go have a read of Richard Clayton's analysis of the Phorm system here: http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/, then come back when you've got a better understanding?

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by Barkotron

Any actual evidence to back that up? Where is it publicly known? Which encryption algorhythms are you talking about?

You know how to use google right ?

[Barkotron]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

You know how to use google right ?

I know how to use Google to find a bunch of paranoid lunatics raving about the NSA being able to read their thoughts with lasers: I thought you might actually have something concrete to back up what you were saying. Apparently not.

[roadrunner69]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

What's publically known is that the NSA can quite easily break 128bit encryption keys(which is the vast majority of so called secure web traffic) and worse still it's rumoured that 256bit keys are down the pan too.

Do you have any real references for this.... or have you been reading too much Dan Brown?

While the keys CAN be broken the amount of computing power and time is still
WAY beyond what would be required to read ALL encryped web traffic.

This debate is about OUR data being unconditionally intercepted and read for pure greed - not national security


Jesus EVERYBODY types faster than me

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by Barkotron

Ah - I was right. You really don't understand what the technology does. Can I suggest you go have a read of Richard Clayton's analysis of the Phorm system here: http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/, then come back when you've got a better understanding?

I've had a very quick flick through that document and it outlines layer-7 sniffing and replacement of http traffic. So errrmm how does that differ from my understanding of it ?

It is still imho harmless.

[ceedee]

Any NSA spying on our browsing data would be illegal in this country (BTW, do you have any documentary evidence of that?)
But Phorm claim that their system will be completely legal.

If you (really) want further information about the arguments against Phorm, I'd suggest you have a read of BadPhorm.
However, if you're simply a troll aiming to stir up a fight here, I'll expect you to carry on baiting...

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by roadrunner69

While the keys CAN be broken the amount of computing power and time is still
WAY beyond what would be required to read ALL encryped web traffic.

True

Originally Posted by roadrunner69

This debate is about OUR data being unconditionally intercepted and read for pure greed - not national security

I agree with you about harvesting visitor metrics for greed but there are those on this thread seem to not be clear about why exactly they are opposing phorm.

Again you point to 'DATA' being intercepted. Is it really data or just session/vistor information which could take the form of web metrics or even logon cookies.

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

So are you saying that you'd prefer to have an agency sniff your packets in detail whereas you'd be outraged by Phorm merely harvesting a few cookies here and there ?

I didn't say that. I would have an issue with this whoever did it if it was done carte blanche without an appropriate court order. That said, I do think there is at least an arguable case for doing this kind of thing more widely for National Security/counter-terrorism purposes or for the purposes of combatting child pornography etc. I would still be deeply uncomfortable about it but on the balance probably wouldn't object too strongly.

Thats a whole different kettle of fish to what Phorm are planning to do. They are doing this purely to target adverts at us and again I think you are being deliberatively provocative stating that Phorm are "merely harvesting a few cookies here and there".