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

[vicz]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

<snip>

Contrast with Chris Williams amazing coverage on the Register. The guy has done a stunning job of exposing BT. .

Couldn't agree more. I think the Reg proves you can be both entertaining and informative, something the printed press seem to have lost..

[Angry@VMedia]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

Its complicated. Allegedly Financial Times and others have a stake in this scandal. Even the Grauniad were involved until recently. Phorm have sold them a fairy story about advertising revenue, without considering 'frivolous' details like human rights, regulations, and the law.

The only daily paper that covered it in some real depth were the Daily Mail, but they've gone very quiet lately.

Contrast with Chris Williams amazing coverage on the Register. The guy has done a stunning job of exposing BT. See here; Net think thank: Phorm is illegal

Reguarding the news link; this is what i am saying, if 1 online newspaper can see this nonsence is illegal then why on earth are people entertaining this idea, are they chosing to ignore the main fact, this system isillegal?

I have already rattled off a leter to virgin denying them the permission to view /use/sell anything that comes from my home, and if they chose to ignore this then i will take them to court as i listed all the laws that they would be breeching/breaking [thanks to my fellow forum members for the information!]

I really cannot see why people are not waking up and showing kent & phorm the contempt they deserve, as if I was to go and steal peoples mail from their letterboxes, this would also be illegal, and you can bet all the beans in the world the police would not think twice about arresting me and sending me to court with the appropriate sentence, which i would deserve if I did this, so what is any different?

Boot the whole govenment out, this is what I say,they're all as bent as a corkscrewand the biggest drug dealers around [but that is another matter]
sorry for the mega rant, it is just that i cannot understand how & why this is going aheadand why this has not beed stopped dead in its tracks

[mark777]

Not Phorm, but a very familiar story.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...nst_kaspersky/

[warescouse]

Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).

If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?

They must be disregarding our legal request!

Any comments?

[vicz]

A Summary of Where My Thoughts Are Now - feel free to ignore!

Remember there is a LOT of money involved. If Webwise is worth £85m pa to VM that equates to about 150,000 customers, so they probably won't mind losing a few. Phorm still has a market cap of £200m despite the recent stock tanking. And unfortunately most people are like sheep and will probably remain oblivious or soon forget about the whole thing.

I think the only thing that will keep VM from implementing is the fear that directors will go to jail. And believe me, even if there is only a very slim chance of that happening it does concentrate the mind wonderfully. But the chances are very very slim indeed - just look at recent rail crashes, or the Demendes shooting. So the VM board are faced with the usual risk versus wonga decision which is how they earn(!) their big bucks. Maybe someone like Branson (a minority shareholder) might try to intervene if it looks like the Virgin brand name will be tarnished by too blatant a shafting of their customers, but I doubt it.

So if we manage to 'win' the need for an explicit and informed opt-in by the end-user we will have done really well, and personally as long as I can keep my own browsing away from phorm and still have my 20Mb broadband from VM I will be happy.

I just don't believe the consent requirement from website owners will ever fly. We talk about 'publishing' stuff on the web because that is mostly what it is. Putting a no-phorm statement on a web page is like printing 'no estate agents are allowed to read this' inside the cover of Daltons Weekly. Technically it may be legally valid but in practice it is totally impractical. Of course the website host is entitled to refuse to serve his pages to whoever he likes, but once the HTML is served he cannot expect to dictate what happens to it. Of course tracking and profiling is a pretty scummy thing to do, but then the web is full of scummy people trying to scam a buck. Maybe somehow we can force a RIPA test case in court but I can't see this happening anytime soon and in any case it only applies in the UK.

I do really like the idea of 'dephormation' , both in terms of subverting phorm's inelegant and arrogant mangling of cookies; and the way it undermines the whole concept of targeted advertising. With a fair wind this could well take off and become a significant web presence. Somehow it seems a very 'Internet purist' solution if that makes sense.

Of course the real answer is the encrypted web, which should restore our privacy for a while anyway, at least until brute force decrypting in realtime becomes viable.

And lets not underestimate the opposition. in the words of Gerry Adams "they have not gone away".

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by dav

Article on ZDNet...

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communicatio...9408146,00.htm

So that gives the latest predicted trial start date as no later than 26th May then?
And by then BT will have done the following?

Written to the entire World Wide Web of webmasters and got their inphormed consent?
Worked out a way of issuing a trial invitation without making an illegal interception? (ie doing it via BT/BTYahoo's own web pages only while their customers are logged in, and not by illegally, and without consent, intercepting an ordinary http request to a 3rd party site?
Worked out a legal way of planting phorged cookies phraudulently purporting to be from a 3rd party website, on our computers, without the domain owner's inphormed consent?
Worked out a legal way of intercepting web traffic at a Layer 7 level without the inphormed consent of webmasters?

Worked out detailed answers to all the questions posed by FIPR in their most recent paper by Nicholas Bohm? Their customers will not be able to make an inphormed choice without knowing the answers to the legal questions. BT customers cannot simply rely on the bland reassurances of their ISP. We NEVER trusted Kent Ertugrul and his Phorm/Webwise/121Media/PeopleonPage outfit. And we no longer trust BT, after they forfeited our trust by their underhand actions and denials.

So only by giving us those detailed answers can we make an inphormed choice about your trials.

So will the next 28 days involve giving us those answers - or just more evasive silence?

[vicz]

Originally Posted by warescouse

...
If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. ..
......
Any comments?

I think you are referring to some potential issues with the forthcoming BT Webwise trial. Virgin have not said yet when they will implement Phorm, and if they do, how we would opt-in or opt-out.

VM seem to be lying low while seeing how the BT trial goes.

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by warescouse

Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).

If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?

They must be disregarding our legal request!

Any comments?

Although you should already have sent a notice under DPA to Virgin I don't think it will matter much in this case.
DPA deals only with personally identifiable data and it is quite possible that this is probably on area that webwise will actually be able to get around however immoral. The problem with the DPA is currently the law and what is recognised as PID in this country. We should send those letters just so they know we are discontent but the area we need to keep up the pressure in is the interception of communications and computer misuse and fraud because there is not a hope in hell that webwise can get around that in it's current proposed rollout.

Regarding the Znet article. I was annoyed reading that Phorm now say that an opt in method was always in their plans and how they plan to inform people with a webpage ( just that would **** me off in the same manner that popups do ) giving the user freedom of choice. This is not informed opt in. This is opt-out by cookie. at the point of service. This interrupts my service and causes my internet experience to change for the worse.

They plan to offer you an informed choice, but for the average user the information will not be along the lines of the truth behind the service, a truth we all know and understand here but an obfuscation of the information along the lines of.
"dear user, we are about to invite you to use our free service that will protect you from identity theft and reduce all those annoying adverts which currently you have no interest in".

This will seem quite attractive, especially to the less tech savvy who might say yes to the option.

However true information along the lines of
"from this point on we will be monitoring all of your browsing habits and profiling the places you visit so that we can use this information to serve you adverts from out partners in OIX. We also are adding a phishing filter to this service but as a user of Firefox, IE7, Opera, Norton and many other products you are already protected up to and beyond the measures we are tagging on to our targeted advertising service".

They will be relying on clever wording and manipulation of fact to mislead Joe public into thinking they are getting better protection and less adverts for nothing other than a click in the 'yes' box.

This is where we need to educate people so that if it ever does get off the ground ( this is the fastest growing business sector in the world, we can't avoid it, on;y see to it that we have the choice to be apart from it by use of legislation ) that the general public is fully aware of the true nature of the business and the actual lack of benefit to the user if not the likely detriment.

edit: sorry moderators for the stars, I was in full flow. It was however a rather innocuous swear word and nothing foul and or abusive.

[Kursk]

Invariably this thread shows more guests are viewing than members participating.

An appeal to all those watching: please join up and join in. Opposing privacy intrusion needs as much support and ideas that it can get and, well, the timing is just right with the much awaited Privacy Impact Assessment due for imminent release.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men (and women) do nothing". (Edmund Burke)

[mark777]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Invariably this thread shows more guests are viewing than members.

An appeal to all those watching: please join up and join in. Opposing privacy intrusion needs as much support and ideas that it can get and, well, the timing is just right with the much awaited Privacy Impact Assessment due for imminent release.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men (and women) do nothing". (Edmund Burke)

It's due in the next 15 minutes I think ...

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by mark777

It's due in the next 15 minutes I think ...

I'm sure it'll be delivered to schedule. 12 minutes and counting...

[mark777]

I've had a look. No PIA. No videos. Can't find them anywhere.

The server must have been hacked, that's the only possible explanation I can think of.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by mark777

I've had a look. No PIA. No videos. Can't find them anywhere.

The server must have been hacked, that's the only possible explanation I can think of.

Hmmm. The site will need updating from "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April 2008" to, say, "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April-ish 2008".

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Hmmm. The site will need updating from "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April 2008" to, say, "A final version of the PIA will be published by the end of April-ish 2008".

for a new company, seemingly very proud of acquiring such a prestigious client base in a short space of time they appear to be a little short in delivering their promises.

Not a good sign for prospective customers.

[Angry@VMedia]

Originally Posted by mark777

Not Phorm, but a very familiar story.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...nst_kaspersky/

OMFG where is this going to stop?
going by that link, does this mean that if i am arrested for a crime then i can sue the police for handcuffing me or for using what can be described as forceful behaviour? this is getting pathetic! malware/spyware/virus programmers deserve to be prosicuted as mostly the user does not consent to such rubbish to be installed on their machinesand in some cases dont even know that it is there!
I remember Zango & hotbar VERY well, and it was a pain to remove, Kaspersky and others that try to prevent & remove such parasites should be commended, NOT condemned!
I really do not know what sort of a world we are living in now but i know there is no logic to all this at all

Originally Posted by warescouse

Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).

If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?

They must be disregarding our legal request!

Any comments?

This is a good starting place, but i feel that it will do no good as the govenment dont give a fig about US, the very same people that are padding their already overpaid bank accounts, and this is wrong, we the people are the ones that got them where they are today, where is the respect gone?
If this phorm does actually go live and nothing is done, then there is only 1 thing to do, tell the isp where to stick their internet, as i would rather go without the internet than be spied on by god knows who and their armies of infectious computer programs.