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

Originally Posted by R Jones

I do agree - I am just wanting them both to benefit from a clear uncluttered opportunity to be highlighted and linked but by separate threads. I think we are at the stage now when the number of enquirers on these issues is going to grow, and the education process must be as painless as possible - whatever it is that they are picking up on - the wider privacy debate, or the Phorm/DPI/Webwise issue. Go full steam on both, but not in one thread otherwise all those enquirers will just wander away again confused

Agree with the proposal to split the bigger picture debate and greater scope of that demo from this thread. Absolutely valid issue that people will want to discuss and take part in but I would prefer that this thread stays on the primary topic which created it. Link to the bigger picture issue whenever valid by all means. And if I can attend and contribute at the demo to get our main concern over I will! Whatever happens re this thread subject, I'm ok with it.

[Wildie]

Originally Posted by lardycake

re: phorm/webwise vs. Europe wide protest

Please keep these two issues separate (ie: I agree with R Jones, SelfProtection et al) for all the reasons already stated.

read what the other is actually about if Directive 2006/24/EC if goes ahead then webwise will be just the start of a flood of dpi kit and the whole point of web will be one big nasty place where every isp will be using dpi kit and would be legal, and go from isp to content provider. may look bad after all they claim they are not responsible for the content we d/l legal or not, do you think that would change?

For new readers, a reminder of Phorm's past endevours

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/Sp...-Distribution/

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by Wildie

there is plenty of none English website that people visit who live here after all it`s a country of multi ethnics with ties back home. Yes the web is dominated with English sites but you cannot ignore the others.

This feeds into the whole anonymisation hoax. You cannot anonymise data if you don't know in advance the details you're supposed to be removing.

Phorm claim they don't know your details, so how can they possibly anonymise your data. They are simply lying if they tell you the profiles will be anonymous.

Now factor in multiple languages, multiple character sets, multiple cultural conventions... it simply cannot ever be done.

As an assurance, it is as worthless as an ice cream in a house fire.

But the ICO have had assurances. And Patricia Hewitt believes Phorm. So who do you trust? Them, or your own eyes.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by Wildie

Yes the web is dominated with English sites but you cannot ignore the others.

And as one of the majority of Welsh people who speak English, I wouldn't want to! Here's hoping that Phorm does, though.

[CWH]

I see our Security Minister - Lord West, seems to think all this sort of thing, reading what we are doing, is normal and happening already.
On the BBC Tech site, he's quoted as saying;

"People must realise - and I used to say this within the Navy - there will be more people look at your internet information than look at a postcard when you write it," he told the House of Lords.

"People tend to forget that - and [that] it is used for quite legal purposes, some of it."

They really do appear to want to monitor absolutely everything that passes for communications.

Colin

[icsys]

Originally Posted by Wild Oscar

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet ... apologies if so ..


http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communi...0.htm?feed=rss

I also wasn't sure whether this merited a new thread or not!? .. move it mods please if you think it does!

It's all related. We should have known this was coming.

Funding would be for three years. University of Cambridge security expert Richard Clayton told ZDNet.com.au sister site ZDNet.co.uk that putting state-of-the-art surveillance devices into all UK ISPs would be "likely to cost quite a lot". As a consequence, Clayton said the government plans to deploy the system at one ISP initially.

Now which ISP could that be? How could we generate some much needed revenue to help this poor ISP?

Thomas declined to comment as to whether the Home Office proposals were legal under current data-protection law, and refused to comment any further about his concerns.
The ICO had not been consulted by the Home Office over the communications-database plans, said an ICO insider.

Well, there's a surprise.

Not a problem! The gov't can just change the law to suit their own agenda.

Originally Posted by Dephormation

...And Patricia Hewitt believes Phorm. So who do you trust? Them, or your own eyes.

Patricia Hewitt was made a non-voting Director of BT in March 2008 shortly after the illegal trials were exposed. She is paid £60,000 a year for which she has to sit in on a handful of unimportant meetings each year - nine at most.

Prior to this, whilst she was Health Secretary, she was responsible for awarding a huge number of extremely lucrative contracts to BT.

She had previously been a strong advocate for privacy even writing the work entitled Computers, Records and the Right to Privacy.

She has a history of saying one thing and doing another. She was a vocal supporter and writer on the subject of equal rights especially as they relate to employment. In 2005 she was prosecuted in her official capacity under the Sex Discrimination Act for her illegal treatment of a male job applicant.

Awful woman.

[BadPhormula]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

The thing BT haven't yet grasped... there is an eternity of pain ahead when this launches. Endless, unending, utter misery ahead. Without even venturing into the realms of illegal hacking.

I'll spare the details. Pain agony endless suffering and more pain.

It's a pity you couldn't raise this point at the BT shareholders meeting... The nightmare vision of things to come for BT

I think Kent might have skipped over the side effects of his whiz bang money making scam was going to have on BT (typical marketing conman trick). The board of directors could only hear the sound cash register kerr-chinging £££, they have managed to fully block out the sound of the looming disaster that you elude to.

Do you have any advice to give BT customers that might help them through frustrating time ahead. Any hints on getting their MAC code when the complaint lines are fully engaged and their operators are not turning up for work due to stress related illnesses? (maybe drop in emergency centres with checkin lanes?)

[Tarquin L-Smythe]

postcards .Yes but telling auntie Nelly the weather is crap is hardly a trade secret but its when they want to use it for purposes other than intended thats when the line is crossed

[bluecar1]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

How do you monitor something without intercepting it?

it depends on how the DPI kit is connected to the network.

if you connect a dpi kit to a spare port on the network switch and setup port mirroring it will monitor without interception, a bit like you having a conversation in a shop and a person listening near by, they can listen but not alter the conversataion. (this setup can only listen and not change or inject data into the data stream)

if it sits in the data stream and the data has to go physically through it like playing chinese whispers, the message at the end of the change may have been altered on the way, this is interception, subtle difference (this setup can listen and change or inject data into the data stream)

peter

[phormwatch]

Just a heads up to everyone. In case anyone was unaware (as I was), dabs.com was bought by BT in 2006. It is now under BT ownership.

http://www.dabs.com/Article.aspx?articleid=565#linkhere

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4956100.stm

-----------------

Two opportunities arise: Complain to and boycott dabs.com

[Wildie]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

it depends on how the DPI kit is connected to the network.

if you connect a dpi kit to a spare port on the network switch and setup port mirroring it will monitor without interception, a bit like you having a conversation in a shop and a person listening near by, they can listen but not alter the conversataion. (this setup can only listen and not change or inject data into the data stream)

if it sits in the data stream and the data has to go physically through it like playing chinese whispers, the message at the end of the change may have been altered on the way, this is interception, subtle difference (this setup can listen and change or inject data into the data stream)

peter

but what is it listening for ?

[bluecar1]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Can anyone else confirm that Emma Sanderson has completely stopped answering emails regarding Phorm/Webwise?

not answered my last 3 emails, not even a read receipt

peter

[phormwatch]

Thanks Bluecar