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

[bluecar1]

Originally Posted by R Jones

I've posted the link over on the ii discussion for Phorm shares too - entitled Anorak's revenge
http://tinyurl.com/4yuaul (ii link to discussion pages)
(you have to read the earlier posts on ii to appreciate that - no offence intended to anyone here)

robert, just posted a correction to you post on iii.

as i said over there, it not the anoraks that have been up to anything, it was BT and phorm

peter

[tarka]

I just dropped you a pm alex

[thebarron]

A big thank you to Alexander for this and an observation from reading the report.
There is absolutely no consideration given to the Webmaster side of this in the trial.
Like where is the evaluation of its ability to avoid webmail sites or password restricted content on http. It seems they just assume it works and that we will believe them because they say so!

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

robert, just posted a correction to you post on iii.

as i said over there, it not the anoraks that have been up to anything, it was BT and phorm

peter

Yes - typo indeed - it should have said "nerds" not "anoraks", in reply to a post from Gibberish a few posts back on that list "there was a lot of noise from the anti-phormers a few weeks back but recently it has gone very quiet. I guess all the nerds have found something else to worry about."

Looks like we did ;-)

Originally Posted by R Jones

I've sent the url of the report and your site to my MP Annette Brooke LD

Same here to our Labour MP who works in the Home Office...

Alex: For you...

Digg it up all

Hank

[Tarquin L-Smythe]

Fan and Brown Stuff how far will it go and are there enough places to hide.

[Florence]

Looks like we just come back shouting louder though.. This needs to be sorted and if Emma has to answer questions on a lie detector so be it, after all it is only the same amount of invaision on her privacy as she plans on BT customers

Hope I'm not jumping too far ahead but a couple of the the stand-out points for me are the clearly stated intentions to prevent the customer from knowing that they were being monitored and the fact that BT were tracking customer service reports and complaints.

That last one suggests that they have been lying to the authorities with regards to the people who have proof of their data being intercepted. BT have claimed that the customer service call centres were not aware of the trials and used that to explain the incorrect information given to callers and yet we now find that those same call centres were collating data regarding calls relating to the trials.

This ought to make a difference in the attitude of the police and other authorities who have so far taken BT's word for everything that's happened.

[warescouse]

Dugg

[mark777]

I've always thought we were being harsh on BT and Phorm.

After all, they have often repeated the fact that they want to be transparent over these issues. I have no doubt that they told the ICO and HO all about their wish to be transparent.

Page 4 of the leaked document confirms this.

Trouble is, I think they have a unique understanding of the word 'transparency'.

"Only 15-20 trialists (0.1% of the trial userbase) identified the presence of the system and had a negative reaction. To ensure 100% transparency, the following work is planned : ... "

transparent = not noticed = under the radar = hidden

Time to review all those Kent/Emma statements in light of this new definition.

[vicz]

Originally Posted by warescouse

Probably the same call centres that caused BT to get a big fine recently when they were caught cheating. They were calling each other and answering quickly to get better response figures for a contract that needed their performance figures to improve. (I think it was with the MOD).

Yes MoD - here http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/a...tre-fraud.html

[AlexanderHanff]

One thing none of you have picked up on yet is the mention of the sample size for the Phase 2 trials (the 2007 trials). 350 000. Now BT have reportedly stated they scaled back on original plans for the 2007 trials but have refused to give a number. So how many do we really think were involved in the 2007 trial?

Alexander Hanff

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by Peter N

Hope I'm not jumping too far ahead but a couple of the the stand-out points for me are the clearly stated intentions to prevent the customer from knowing that they were being monitored and the fact that BT were tracking customer service reports and complaints.

That last one suggests that they have been lying to the authorities with regards to the people who have proof of their data being intercepted. BT have claimed that the customer service call centres were not aware of the trials and used that to explain the incorrect information given to callers and yet we now find that those same call centres were collating data regarding calls relating to the trials.

This ought to make a difference in the attitude of the police and other authorities who have so far taken BT's word for everything that's happened.

My take on that is that they didn't tell the call centres anything about what they were doing, but clearly gave them some sort of protocol with regard to the type of customer calls they were dealing with - probably just hidden in a statistics report sheet listing various types of customer problem - and for those two weeks the report sheet would list things like
"I'm seeing strange scripts in my forum posts"
"I'm getting funny things happening in my status bar"
"I'm finding odd cookies on my machine"

I doubt the support staff had a clue what it was about, but they would be required to tick boxes so the faults could be statistically logged (but of course the customers would get no help solving the problems).

Remember the BT corporate culture - staff generally aren't told anything. They are always making major changes and telling no one - it's the way they do things.
I'm a regular on the support groups - it's amazing the things they don't tell us about or tell support about.
BT standard policy
1 - plan a change
2 - implement the change
3 - tell the press
4 - watch the customers get problems
5 - don't tell support
6 - watch the customers complain and give them misleading uninformed replies
7 - occasionally discover peer users have diagnosed and provided work-rounds for the problem. Fudge some sort of excuse. Post a url on an obscure part of the help system, which has the wrong advice on it.
8 - eventually (far too late) notice what peer users are saying and alter your advice to fit with theirs.
9 - do it all again a few weeks later.
(this is the story of the latest security "enhancements" to BTYahoo mail by the way but it could be anything, Webwise included)

[Wildie]

hello phormbt team

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by R Jones

cut...
Remember the BT corporate culture - staff generally aren't told anything. They are always making major changes and telling no one - it's the way they do things.
cut...

As an ex BT Engineer I can vouch for that. You get the job done as per the specification.