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

[ceedee]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I get more and more worried everyday that VirginMedia HAVE been doing things behind the scenes with this Phorm spyware and are now at the point were they know they will be up to the necks in it if they are found out.

You never know, maybe Alex has been offered a redundancy package too?

[mark777]

Originally Posted by Hank

I see that the question posed by David Carnegie (Earl of Northesk) to the DfBERR has dropped off the unanswered questions list.

{snip}


Monday 21 April 2008
Advertising: Internet
The Earl of Northesk asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they are taking any action on the targeted advertising service offered by Phorm in the light of the questions about its legality under the Data Protection and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Acts. [HL2635]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (Baroness Vadera): The Office of the Information Commissioner made a statement on 3 March 2008 that it was in discussion with one company about the nature of its service and the way it uses information about ISP customers. My department will consider the continued relevance of the current safeguards and legislation in the light of the outcome of those discussions.

Hank

Well DfBERR seems to be where many MP's are raising our concerns. I know mine (Labour) has written to them, so I think I know what sort of answer will eventually come back. The ICO has issued quite a few statements since 3/3.

[AlexanderHanff]

Can I suggest that everyone who has evidence (or stories of dodgy connections) regarding VM trials contact Chris Williams at The Register. If anything did happen (which it is becoming clearer that it did) he might be in a strong position to get a confirmation from VM and then of course publicise the issue with an article on The Register.

It is of course a very serious issue not just because they didn't obtain consent but because they have lied repeatedly with regards to customer enquiries on the matter.

Alexander Hanff

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Hank

I see that the question posed by David Carnegie (Earl of Northesk) to the DfBERR has dropped off the unanswered questions list.....snip......
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (Baroness Vadera): The Office of the Information Commissioner made a statement on 3 March 2008 that it was in discussion with one company about the nature of its service and the way it uses information about ISP customers. My department will consider the continued relevance of the current safeguards and legislation in the light of the outcome of those discussions.

And should we need to know more about those discussions, there's always the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

[AlexanderHanff]

OK I received an email back from Nicholas Bohm regarding my legal analysis of the 2006/2007 covert trials. I am deeply appreciative that he took the time and effort to read it and provide some very constructive and positive feedback which should improve the paper. I won't post the entire email but I will now quote a couple of points he made which are relevant to the debate:

I thought your discussions on trespass to goods and copyright
infringement were most interesting, not least because neither had
occurred to me as topics to address.

I found this particularly useful because they are points he never addressed in his own analysis so it clears up some of the differences between the two documents.

Lastly, in your email you raised the question of the user's complicity.
This can only refer to future uses of Phorm, of course, rather than to
secret trials.

A user who knows what is involved in the use of the technology, and who
opts in with the knowledge that he uses (for example) webmail which will
not be excluded from analysis, can be argued to incite interception, and
perhaps conspire to have it done. This is no defence for an ISP, or for
Phorm as a fellow inciter. And it seems to me that even if a prosecutor
could be persuaded to prosecute BT, which seems an uphill task, there
really is not the remotest chance that a user would be prosecuted.

You may say that users should nevertheless not be put at risk of
prosecution, even a little theoretically, and I would not disagree. But
I would not place this aspect too far up the list of concerns.

This is an important point although not directly related to the 2006/2007 covert trials, because it qualifies my concerns regarding putting users at risk of being complicit, despite it being unlikely that a user would be prosecuted.

Alexander Hanff

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by Hank

Monday 21 April 2008
Advertising: Internet
The Earl of Northesk asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they are taking any action on the targeted advertising service offered by Phorm in the light of the questions about its legality under the Data Protection and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Acts. [HL2635]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (Baroness Vadera): The Office of the Information Commissioner made a statement on 3 March 2008 that it was in discussion with one company about the nature of its service and the way it uses information about ISP customers. My department will consider the continued relevance of the current safeguards and legislation in the light of the outcome of those discussions.

Hank

Don Foster got the same reply in the commons.

"Malcolm Wicks: The Office of the Information Commissioner made a statement on 3 March 2008 that it was in discussion with one company about the nature of its service and the way it uses information about ISP customers. My Department will consider the continued relevance of the current safeguards and legislation in the light of the outcome of those discussions. I have had no discussions with BT on this matter."

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by Ravenheart

With the last few days news I'm now almost certain Virgin have done a trial, I do seem to remember a friend kept getting a reference to sysip, which if I remember right is a phorm domain. I was digging on the net to see if I could find any references to it on the VM network, I've had no luck so far but this forum has someone reporting a sysip problem on BT on June 28, which I think must be last year rather than 2006

http://hubbub.labs.bt.com/?pagename=viewpost&id=24712

also found something here relating to 2006/ 2007

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=25456

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=152409

There are a number of BT customers with clear records and evidence relating to 2007 trials, and they were seeing dns.sysip.net in their browser status bars. Stephen Mainwaring is the one who has hit the national media. We have some info in our internal support ng archives so let me know if you want it.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

Don Foster got the same reply in the commons.

"Malcolm Wicks: The Office of the Information Commissioner made a statement on 3 March 2008 that it was in discussion with one company about the nature of its service and the way it uses information about ISP customers. My Department will consider the continued relevance of the current safeguards and legislation in the light of the outcome of those discussions. I have had no discussions with BT on this matter."

Well we all know the one company that will be I wonder if they will be going round in the same circles we are. They never give out more than they want and never answer questions with coprrect replies. More like a stuck recording of a special sales promotion.

[buckleb]

Re possible Virgin (or TW/NTL) trials.

I recall reading recently that some forum users were seeing weird code appearing in replies, when quoting in replies to posts circa 2006/2007. This was suspected to be some kind of javascript injection (I'm not sure of the exact wording) and Phorm, or their earlier incarnation, were in the frame for this.

I'm not sure how true the above is, but I certainly saw weird code appearing in quoted forum replies by myself and others.

Ex Telewest area.

[Bobcat]

I know this is terribly off-topic but I don't know where else to ask. Since all this began I've become more aware of cookies and blocked nearly everything. However, there is one persistent one that is simply the number "3". No .com, .net, or anything. Each time I go to exceptions in FF2 it tells me it's "allowed". If I "block" it, close the exceptions page and then instantly re-open it again it's reset itself to "allow". I've just been watching "Dr Who" so I don't need this. Any explanations gratefully accepted.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by cadire

Re possible Virgin (or TW/NTL) trials.

I recall reading recently that some forum users were seeing weird code appearing in replies, when quoting in replies to posts circa 2006/2007. This was suspected to be some kind of javascript injection (I'm not sure of the exact wording) and Phorm, or their earlier incarnation, were in the frame for this.

I'm not sure how true the above is, but I certainly saw weird code appearing in quoted forum replies by myself and others.

Ex Telewest area.

Sammy over on badphorm.co.uk has been trying to link those corrupted posts to VM... if you've got evidence that a post you've made over a telewest connection has been corrupted, I'm sure Sammy would be keen to know about it.
I'd be keen too, can you send me a personal message... let me know where I can see your posts, where you are, what you did to report it to virgin etc?

---------- Post added at 19:37 ---------- Previous post was at 19:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Hank

As a BT customer for my internet connection, should I not be able to request my local Police force carry out an investigation into whether or not I was the subject of a crime by BT in 2006 or 2007?
I don't have any evidence, save for the fact that BT said they did do it, so although I do not have any evidence myself, surely the fact that they admit they did it is enough to suggest the police should interview someone from BT about it?
Comments anyone?
Hank

Yes, I think you should.
Will the Police investigate? If my experience is anything to go by, they won't.
But the more people who walk into Police stations and report this, the more it will increase the pressure on the Police to act.
So DO report it, but don't be suprised by their reluctance either. Someone senior seems to be trying to prevent this being investigated by the Police.
Pete

[buckleb]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

Sammy over on badphorm.co.uk has been trying to link those corrupted posts to VM... if you've got evidence that a post you've made over a telewest connection has been corrupted, I'm sure Sammy would be keen to know about it.
I'd be keen too, can you send me a personal message... let me know where I can see your posts, where you are, what you did to report it to virgin etc?

Sadly I didn't really think anything of it at the time, and just edited my posts to remove the strangeness. I will still do a search for my posts though, as others may not have edited their's (and I do recall some comments about the weird code which might still be available to read.

[jelv]

Has anyone looked at http://vancouver.cs.washington.edu/ ?

Originally Posted by Dephormation

Don Foster got the same reply in the commons.

Unusual... BT could learn from them! (Say the same thing each time asked... instead of changing the story)

(But might be nice if they did change it and let us know what is really going on...)

Hank

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by cadire

Re possible Virgin (or TW/NTL) trials.

I recall reading recently that some forum users were seeing weird code appearing in replies, when quoting in replies to posts circa 2006/2007. This was suspected to be some kind of javascript injection (I'm not sure of the exact wording) and Phorm, or their earlier incarnation, were in the frame for this.

I'm not sure how true the above is, but I certainly saw weird code appearing in quoted forum replies by myself and others.

Ex Telewest area.

You can see an example of this here http://www.bikegirl.co.uk/forum/foru...?TID=2418&PN=1
scroll down to the post by dayglo jim, and this bit of text
< =text/>var PSpc="I.287303.1",PSsize="none"; I'll maybe give it a go. Can't find the footpegs/hangers and service manual but got seals, bearings, bushes (saves a back order from Japan) < src="http://ntp.sysip.net/tag/2.js" =text/>

But remember that Phorm/Webwise "do not inject javascript" (although their technology has patented how to do it.)

When I asked BT about injected javascript in forum posts, their reply was

"Javascript tags will not be inserted as part of the forthcoming Webwise trial." which neatly avoids the issue of whether they did it in the past.