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

[manxminx]

Phorm Tells FTC it Endorses 'No Retention' of Consumer Data for the Sake of Behavioral Advertising

The company [Phorm] also strongly supports a standard of transparent notice and informed choice that would permit users to make a meaningful decision whether to switch off Phorm’s service.

Ye Gods . . .

[amateria]

I think someone on this forum has already raised the question of Webwise as a search engine keyword - if so, I'm sorry for losing track - if not, it's mentioned on BadPhorm:

http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi....php?3822.last

Can a technical person advise whether Google would pick up the text in my signature - if so, may I suggest adopting this, or similar wording in peoples' signatures - this kills two birds with one stone:

1. It deprives the ISPs of their "implied consent" defence to criminal liability (this rationale will make sense to those who have been following the legal debate)
2. it is an effortless and legitimate way of repeating the term "Webwise" in a context that alerts the reader to its real nature to help get it picked up by search engines

I would also like to link, if it's OK Portly Giraffe, to InPhormationDesk.

I realise everyone likes to do their own thing, so please feel free to personalise it - but I'm just thinking that if I'm not the only one who uses this disclaimer, it might carry more weight

[AlexanderHanff]

My reply from Emma Sanderson:

Mr Hanff

Thank you for your email and of course I am disappointed to hear about the proposed subject of your dissertation.

As you know BT has confirmed that we conducted two small scale technical tests of a prototype advertising platform, one during September - October 2006 and the other in June 2007. In each instance, a small number of customers on one internet exchange (they were two different internet exchanges) were randomly selected for the test and were completely anonymous. Absolutely no personally identifiable information was processed, stored or disclosed during this test. BT has no way of knowing - because the trial was completely anonymous - which customers were part of the test. The purpose of the tests was to evaluate the functional and technical performance of the platform and they were transparent to all but a very small number of customers. It is important for BT to ensure that before any new technologies are deployed, they are robust and fit for purpose. BT took legal advice at the time, both BT and Phorm have obtained extensive legal and other external advice on Webwise functionality over the last two years.

BT has also said that we expect to begin technical trials of the BT Webwise service in the coming weeks. We will be inviting around 10,000 BT broadband customers to take part in the trial. The trial invitation will be presented through a special web page that will appear when those customers start a web browsing session. At this point, those customers invited can choose to switch on BT Webwise, choose not to take part or to find out more information. Customers choosing not to take part will not have their browsing information mirrored or profiled, and no information will go to the BT managed profiler. No information is gathered, and therefore no information is forwarded to Phorm. Customers who opt out will not come into contact with any Phorm-managed equipment. The www.bt.com/webwise site also contains detailed information on the service and a one-click option to switch the service off, which can be activated at any point during the trial. Alternatively customers can block the www.webwise.net domain. The BT Privacy Policy and BT Total Broadband Service Terms will be amended accordingly. As you may have seen, BT has also confirmed publicly that in parallel with the trial, we are already developing a solution for customers that do not want the service - that removes the need for 'opt-out' cookies altogether.

I should also stress that prior to the announcement BT thoroughly researched Webwise and was encouraged by the very positive consumer response to the service.

Clearly our customer's privacy is extremely important to us. Information on users’ browsing is completely anonymous. The system doesn't store personally identifiable information, doesn't store URLs, IP addresses or retain browsing histories and the raw data used is deleted in real time - by the time the page loads. Webwise does not scan webmail pages so our customers emails on Gmail, Yahoo mail or Hotmail are not scanned. Secure pages like banking websites and web forms like any online registration or sign-up forms are not scanned. No personal information often contained in form fields is therefore ever captured by the system. No data is passed outside of BT's network. Webwise privacy standards have been verified by external auditor Ernst & Young and leading privacy advocate Simon Davies, MD of 80/20 Thinking, has also carried out a Privacy Impact Assessment on Webwise technology. Of course BT, and I am sure the same applies to TalkTalk and Virgin Media, have all completed appropriate due diligence on Phorm, we also understand that other ISPs both in and outside of the UK are currently talking to them.

BT is, of course, aware of the legal requirements regarding interception of communications under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. We consider that these steps will meet the legal requirements of RIPA and also ensure that customers are able to take a fully informed decision as to whether to take the service.

To summarise, our customer research shows that lots of people would be keen to see advertisements that are relevant to their interests, we are planning to trial the service shortly, BT customers may be invited to participate in the trial (via a webpage) but the choice as to whether or not they participate is entirely theirs. Furthermore BT is committing to providing it's customers with a choice as to whether they want this service - it will be optional.
Regards
Emma
(Emphasis added)

Note the bold paragraph I have highlighted. Interesting how she states the opt-in they are implementing will satisfy RIPA. It could easily be interpreted that the lack of the opt-in process for the trials failed to satisfy RIPA.

Alexander Hanff

[Winston Smith]

Originally Posted by manxminx

Phorm Tells FTC it Endorses 'No Retention' of Consumer Data for the Sake of Behavioral Advertising



Ye Gods . . .

Also from that link:

"It cannot know where the user has been"

Am I misreading it? If it doesnt know where you've been whats the point of it?

And how does that square with this from Badphorm:

"With almost shocking frankness, Virasb Vahidi the Chief Operating Officer of Phorm has told the New York Times that “We actually can see the entire Internet.”.

The article also says Phorm is boasting that it will collect the most complete information of all.

Mr Vahidi is quoted as saying “As you browse, we’re able to categorize all of your Internet actions”, seemingly at odds with Phorm's repeated statements that they only match data to pre-existing categories."

[amateria]

Well done, Alex.

"Customers who opt out will not come into contact with any Phorm-managed equipment."

So it's opt-out.

"Webwise does not scan webmail pages ... banking websites ... web forms"

I'm not technical, but I thought "Webwise" had to intercept everything first in order to decide whether it was something it was not going to "scan"

"Webwise privacy standards have been verified by external auditor Ernst & Young and leading privacy advocate Simon Davies, MD of 80/20 Thinking," [this is how I read it first time through. So yes, they are using him.]

"our customer research shows that lots of people would be keen to see advertisements that are relevant to their interests"

If BT had conducted a Privacy Impact Assessment then this research would be made available to stakeholders. But they're not, and we have no idea what questions BT asked.

[Kursk]

We will not invade Poland. The rest is history.

[Ravenheart]

Alexander,

That reply from BT looks like it could have been written by Phorm themselves, it's interesting they throw the old Ernst & Young (who assessed it for US law) and Simon Davies into the mix. Do they not realise how things have moved on since those early days?

As usual it's just spin.

[Winston Smith]

"Customers who opt out will not come into contact with any Phorm-managed equipment."

I cannot rember the article off the top of my head, but I am sure I read somewhere (possibly El Reg) that Phorm will 'gift' the equipment to the ISP in order to get round various laws etc.

If this is the case then BT's statement (whilst mealy-mouthed to ridiculous levels) could be seen as technically correct.

If it is such a good proposition for 'us' as customers why can they not just respond to the myriad questions that have been raised?
The silence would indicate because they cannot respond sufficiently well to prove their case and therefore I cannot accept what they say (or rather don't say)

[amateria]

Originally Posted by Winston Smith

"Customers who opt out will not come into contact with any Phorm-managed equipment."

I cannot rember the article off the top of my head, but I am sure I read somewhere (possibly El Reg) that Phorm will 'gift' the equipment to the ISP in order to get round various laws etc.

If this is the case then BT's statement (whilst mealy-mouthed to ridiculous levels) could be seen as technically correct.

I was just thinking the same. They don't actually say that opted-out people will not be subject to the interception.

[mogodon]

Originally Posted by unicus

When I tried (then dumped) vista I got this version of PG2 working;

http://phrosty.phoenixlabs.org/pg2-rc1/

Yeah, that version does work on Vista x86 although sometimes it dies when loading the lists at startup.

In which case creat the .bat file below to re-start it (obviously amend "C:\Program Files\PeerGuardian2" if you have installed it elsewhere:

cls

tskill pg2
del /Q "C:\Program Files\PeerGuardian2\lists"
del /Q "C:\Program Files\PeerGuardian2\cache.p2b"
del /Q "C:\Program Files\PeerGuardian2\history.db"
"C:\Program Files\PeerGuardian2\pg2.exe"

cls

[manxminx]

Originally Posted by Alexander

Interesting how she states the opt-in they are implementing will satisfy RIPA. It could easily be interpreted that the lack of the opt-in process for the trials failed to satisfy RIPA.

Sorry Alexander, I disagree with you. No-where in that letter does it say BT will operate an opt-in or opt-out system. What it says is:

At this point, those customers invited can choose to switch on BT Webwise, choose not to take part or to find out more information. Customers choosing not to take part will not have their browsing information . . . .

In other words, three choices - opt in, opt out or find out more.

Now, you tell me exactly where in that letter "she states the opt-in they are implementing".

[AlexanderHanff]

Its pretty obvious she is referring to the "switch on" part. I never said her interpretation of RIPA was correct, merely pointing out that the consent details she offers are clearly the difference between the trials and the planned implementation. Which although she never stated, can be read to mean the trials were not compliant.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:31 ----------

Reply to Emma:

Hello Emma,

Just to let you know, it is not a proposed subject for my dissertation, it is almost complete and will be published on the internet within the next 12 hours as there has been significant interest in it. There is quite a heavy publicity campaign to launch the paper into the public domain as well, so you might want to check Digg in the morning and read the paper for yourself.

It would be rhetoric to address all the points in your reply as they are already covered in the paper.

Alexander Hanff

[Bobcat]

Hi All.
I'm actually a BT customer but their threads have all but died so I hope you won't mind if I post here occasionally if/when I see something which might be of interest.
Viz: I Googled "Webwise" and this URL http://www.webwise.com/ only shows BT and Talk Talk as Webwise users. No mention of VM. Interesting? Or have I made a boo-boo on my first post.

[Winston Smith]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

My reply from Emma Sanderson:

[I]Mr Hanff

Customers choosing not to take part will not have their browsing information mirrored or profiled, and no information will go to the BT managed profiler. As you may have seen, BT has also confirmed publicly that in parallel with the trial, we are already developing a solution for customers that do not want the service - that removes the need for 'opt-out' cookies altogether.

Interesting, would that be two of the three ISP's going for a bypass of Phorm supplied equipment or am I just naive?

"Clearly our customer's privacy is extremely important to us."

So BT made annual pre-tax profits to £2.5bn in 2007 and I have seen quoted profits of circa 85M per annum for their tie-up with Phorm. So for (my math may be wrong) a third of one percent they are willing to destroy their image. Good call!

Yes, clearly! How could I have been so foolish - now I see the light. All hail Phorm, who needs privacy after all.

[Ravenheart]

to the forum Bobcat

AYe we noticed the VM logo had vanished from the webwise site, it certainly seemed odd at the time.

But a few statements from VM since then seem to suggest they're still undecided on the whole Phorm thing.