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

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Kursk

The suggestion of an 'inner circle' is pure idiocy. If some members want to chat in secret then carry on, but this forums' strength is in the volume and complexity of contributions by a wide range of people. Let Phorm read it all. Let them know that opposition is not abating; let them know what they face if their technology is deployed. Some kind of covert geek group will not successfully take this forward as will sheer numbers, with or without masks. Good grief.

As I said this thread grows so fast if the questions were posted and PMed to Alexander he wouldn't miss them and the chances Phorm spies would has increased..

The more people show they are actively still fighting phorm the better for all concerned.

Alexander has managed a small miracle in a very short time we are very fortunate that Alexander is fighting our corner with us.
I had high hopes for 18/20 and still hope they see the error of the ways phorm will profile, log and intercept our online experience then they might join forces with us and fight for the persons right to continue to have Internet supplied by the supplier as it always was just a connection to the WWW not somehtin sniffed into to reap benefits when after all we have already paid them to allow us to your the internet for our own pleasure/searches...

[AlexanderHanff]

ok class is done for the day but I seriously need a nap after being up all night again, so I will see you all this evening. If people want to come up with some questions or start the ball rolling, please do so and we can discuss them.

It is important to try and get very comprehensive and focused questions together, we don't want to be wasting the Earl of Northesk's time so the better the questions, the more chance we have of them being heard and hopefully answered.

Alexander Hanff

[Florence]

I have noticed one webdesigner is desparate to stop phorm phishing his website and going as far as gathering IP banks fro BT to block them all from his webspace using .htaccess he is plannig on doing the same with Talktalk and VM.

This is drastic action but as he says his website has pages that ppl login on and he doesn't want anyone piggy backing on the members connectioin reading the pages.

[roadrunner69]

Originally Posted by OF1975

...there is an issue that Phorm have a significant advantage in that they can sit here and monitor our plans, our activities and the legal points/questions. Their previous activities on the badphorm site re the badphorm user page is a worrying development.

The suggestion of a private forum/IRC channel was not to negate discussion here but to try and prevent Phorm from leveraging that significant advantage when it comes to the questions we put forward to the Earl of Northesk for his meeting with Alexander.

Agreed. The point of a separate irc/private forum would be to formalize the questions to the Earl of Northesk in a (temporary?) important side issue from the main forum.

The issues would still continue to be debated here, and the same questions asked openly but without giving phorm or the ISP's involved prior notice of our detailed intentions.

[AlexanderHanff]

Before I go, interesting to see "Carol and Son" on iii talk about the middle east and the US with regards to being easier for Phorm to exist than the UK. Maybe someone should point out to here that the telco's in the US are already facing significant legal action as a result of the wiretaps they did for the FBI without the relevant documentation. So if she thinks the US are going to sit back in the current light of things and allow the ISPs (run by the same telecoms companies) to wire-tap for commercial use, when the President himself is being chastised for illegal wire-taps, she has another thing coming.

It would actually be more difficult to roll Phorm out in the US than it would in the UK right now, why do you think they have targeted the UK first

Alexander Hanff

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Before I go, interesting to see "Carol and Son" on iii talk about the middle east and the US with regards to being easier for Phorm to exist than the UK. Maybe someone should point out to here that the telco's in the US are already facing significant legal action as a result of the wiretaps they did for the FBI without the relevant documentation. So if she thinks the US are going to sit back in the current light of things and allow the ISPs (run by the same telecoms companies) to wire-tap for commercial use, when the President himself is being chastised for illegal wire-taps, she has another thing coming.

It would actually be more difficult to roll Phorm out in the US than it would in the UK right now, why do you think they have targeted the UK first

Alexander Hanff

Probably my fault as I did in one of my posts there raise the spectre that phorm may find it easier in the US than the UK. Will make sure to include your points in a post there if no one has beat me to it. Get some sleep, alexander

[AlexanderHanff]

Oh and don't let the share movement today worry you, it has not been a significant swing and we have BBC "Click" coming later this week. Me vs Kent and we know how much the people love an underdog

Alexander Hanff

[Florence]

As many know I have moved to ADSL even though my cable will not stop until next month..

I had my last phone bill they owe me 51pence lol wonder if I will ever see it..

More to the point of this post included in the bill was a leaflet last page ask a question..

Why do I need PC security?

If you don't have up-to-date security software you could be placing yourself at great risk.

For example, internet nasties ( mm phorm comes to mind as the worst) can download themselves onto your computer without your knowledge and use it for fraudulant activities, or if you shop online your card details could be cloned. ( mm would you buy from a advert forced on you by phorm since this is where your card might be cloned)

If you download PCguard software (ermm do they mean phormguard)

the leaflet goes on to say this is suported by Tech suport does this mean I call the 09 number for support
Well had a good laugh at the leaflet migh scan it later to start a thread to tear apart click as it is called...

Surelly with pcguard VM dont need Phorm or is Phorm another name for PCguard..

Either way what use is the security when thye sell you out to the spy king from a few years back..

[thebarron]

Just a thought, it might be silly (I'm good at them) We have been promoting OPT-In or no phorm at all for Users but surely Website owners should be OPT-In too. So if the website does nothing, then it is by default opted out! That would screw it all completely.

[OF1975]

I had forgotten all about click. Thats put a smile back on my face.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

So if she thinks the US are going to sit back in the current light of things and allow the ISPs (run by the same telecoms companies) to wire-tap for commercial use, when the President himself is being chastised for illegal wire-taps, she has another thing coming.

It would actually be more difficult to roll Phorm out in the US than it would in the UK right now, why do you think they have targeted the UK first

Alexander Hanff

Smaller English speaking market where rolling out to 3 ISPs covers a significant percentage of the market, though Wiki puts it at about 85%. Per Wiki 10% for TT. 35% for VM and 40% for BT.

Now you have 85% of the user base (on an opt out basis) so say 75% of the user base you can go to your advertisers and say to them, how would you like to provide targeted marketing to 75% of the internet users in this country.

To do that in the US would require buy in from ATT and many other baby bells for the ADSL, Verizon (ADSL and FIOS), Time Warner, ComCast, Cablevision would capture some big areas and then well this lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor..._United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor..._United_States
Now I admit that will cover the US in the same way that adding France Telecom and other big European companies would cover Europe but then you get into the complexities of serving multiple languages and in the US you would be pitching to national companies wanting to target ads nationally.

With reference to the US privacy issues these are some basic background...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_war...ce_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepting_v._AT%26T

[manxminx]

Well yippee do da, I've had a reply from my MEP !

Re: Phorm and internet privacy

Thank you for your email regarding the use of Phorm software by Internet Service Providers. This is an issue that the Liberal Democrats have been aware of a while.

My colleague in Westminster, Don Foster, who is the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for culture, media and sport, recently wrote to the Chairman of BT asking him to account for the company's secret piloting of the Phorm system last summer. BT has now said that its trial was a purely technical one and that no personal information was processed, stored or disclosed.

As far as I'm aware, EU regulation states that subscribers must be given full explanation about how information relating to their online activities will be used before they themselves consent to it being used by third parties. The UK Information Commissioner has clarified this to an extent, ruling that internet users must opt-in to Phorm rather than opt-out, which is encouraging - especially as far as less experienced internet users are concerned.

But I realise that there are still many questions surrounding exactly how this opt-in system will work in practice. At a public hearing in January the European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee came to general agreement that IP addresses constitute personal data, and, as such, any threat to their security must be treated with the utmost seriousness.

My Liberal Democrat colleague in the European Parliament, Liz Lynne MEP has recently written to Ofcom and the Minister responsible for Information Rights to ask what is being done to ensure that consumer rights to online privacy are being upheld by internet service providers.

In light of concerns raised by a number of my constituents I have also submitted a written question to the European Commission on this issue.

Please be assured that this is an issue that the Liberal Democrats are taking very seriously. I will be in touch again when my colleague receives a reply to her letters and I receive an answer from the European Commission.

Yours sincerely

Fiona Hall MEP

Excellent reply. Looks like she's fully aware of the current situation - and firmly on our side.

"The UK Information Commissioner has clarified this to an extent, ruling that internet users must opt-in to Phorm rather than opt-out, which is encouraging - especially as far as less experienced internet users are concerned."

I really can't see how Phorm, BT or anyone else can continue to say that their opt-out process meets legislation. Even My MEP has interpreted the ICO as saying it must be opt-in!

[AlexanderHanff]

Postie just delivered another 4 books, thanks everyone.

Alexander Hanff

[OldBear]

Originally Posted by OF1975

The suggestion of a private forum/IRC channel was not to negate discussion here but to try and prevent Phorm from leveraging that significant advantage when it comes to the questions we put forward to the Earl of Northesk for his meeting with Alexander.

Originally Posted by dav

Anyway, my suggestion was only related to Alexanders news that he is to meet with the Earl of Northesk and the list of points they were to discuss. I'm sure most of these are now in the public domain anyway, but if there was some absolute Webwise-killer that someone came up with it may be best to keep it on the QT until it has been confirmed as such and then hit them with it at such a time to give them minimum wriggle-room.

Apologies, fellas; I missed the point about this 'side forum' as a method of discussing this one point (Alexander and the Earl), and thought you were suggesting an elite task force to take over the whole issue on the forum's/public's behalf, something I and, I'm sure, other members would not be too happy to see.

It was not my intention to start any sort of division in the ranks, as I do think we need to stand together against these people.

OB

[Ravenheart]

That sure is a positive response Manxminx. I was interested to see her mention Liz Lynne in her reply to you, as I got in touch with her at the end of last month. She told me then that she would be writing to Ofcom, and also to Baroness Ashton of Upholland, the Minister responsible for Information rights and Data protection and she would get back to me when she had their replies.

It seems our Lords and MEP's are far more interested in the effects of Phorm than the majority of our MP's.