Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 532

Rchivist · 04-06-2008, 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by jelv

I wonder if someone with an account on iii might like to post the following link:

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...&orderby=value

I've posted the Heat Map as you requested on the ii discussion board. Nice to see Phorm in that bright red final square - well spotted. The last week has been unprecedented for the long negative climate for Phorm, and I've been watching the stock for a few weeks now, not just the price but the trades/volumes etc.

Remember BT, gloves are off, we're watching you watching us, and we're really enjoying listening to what you aren't telling us, and watching what you don't want us to see you doing. It's all most instructive.

jelv · 04-06-2008, 14:00

If only...

http://startupearth.com/2008/04/12/p...ropping-phorm/

bluecar1 · 04-06-2008, 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by jelv

If only...

http://startupearth.com/2008/04/12/p...ropping-phorm/

shame that was mid april, seems like as the article suggests BT were lying to the customer to try and keep him onboard

SelfProtection · 04-06-2008, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florence

Might be worth keeping a close eye on these IP ranges as I have rocked the boat asking about the routers the contact us links to and about the WWW possible later issues.

At least 1 ISP is bending the Protocols laid out for safe WWW usage.

Different Companies should not have Duplicate IP Addresses, it is in fact the same as Cookie forgery!

http://all.net/journal/netsec/1996-06.html

NTLVictim · 04-06-2008, 16:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

Different Companies should not have Duplicate IP Addresses, it is in fact the same as Cookie forgery!

http://all.net/journal/netsec/1996-06.html

So who do you complain to?

Deko · 04-06-2008, 16:27

Ghostbusters

tarka · 04-06-2008, 16:30

I apologise if I have misread all of the posts, but I think you may have the wrong end of the stick so to speak regarding ip address duplication.

It is entirely possible for multiple websites to have the same ip address. In this instance they would all be running on the same server, it all works by using the host headers sent by your browser (or virtual hosts in the apache world). I don't believe they are duplicating ip addresses, if they did the results would be totally unpredictable eg you could visit one website but get another depending on which server responded first etc.

Apologies if you are already aware and I misunderstood all the posts, but I thought it best to point that out before complaints were raised.

Regards...

T

BetBlowWhistler · 04-06-2008, 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarka

I apologise if I have misread all of the posts, but I think you may have the wrong end of the stick so to speak regarding ip address duplication.

It is entirely possible for multiple websites to have the same ip address. In this instance they would all be running on the same server, it all works by using the host headers sent by your browser (or virtual hosts in the apache world). I don't believe they are duplicating ip addresses, if they did the results would be totally unpredictable eg you could visit one website but get another depending on which server responded first etc.

Apologies if you are already aware and I misunderstood all the posts, but I thought it best to point that out before complaints were raised.

Regards...

T

That's standard http 1.1 operation isn't it?

tarka · 04-06-2008, 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

That's standard http 1.1 operation isn't it?

yes it is.

I just got the impression that people thought there were multiple physical servers using the same ip address so thought I would check.

jca111 · 04-06-2008, 16:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarka

I apologise if I have misread all of the posts, but I think you may have the wrong end of the stick so to speak regarding ip address duplication.

It is entirely possible for multiple websites to have the same ip address. In this instance they would all be running on the same server, it all works by using the host headers sent by your browser (or virtual hosts in the apache world). I don't believe they are duplicating ip addresses, if they did the results would be totally unpredictable eg you could visit one website but get another depending on which server responded first etc.

Apologies if you are already aware and I misunderstood all the posts, but I thought it best to point that out before complaints were raised.

Regards...

T

I was thinking the exact same thing. This is very common and perfectly legitimate practice. Hosting companies could not work without host header resolution, as they would run out of IP Addresses in no time flat. Unless the whole world moves over to IPv6 it would be impossible for all websites to have unique IP addresses.

---------- Post added at 15:43 ---------- Previous post was at 15:40 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarka

yes it is. I was just got the impression that people thought there were multiple physical servers using the same ip address.

They could be on separate servers, as they could be on a network behind the firewall. Something at firewall/router level would just be looking at the Host Header and routing it to the various different physical servers. But to the user/client - they all appear as one IP. This is all OK tho.

tarka · 04-06-2008, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by jca111

I was thinking the exact same thing. This is very common and perfectly legitimate practice. Hosting companies could not work without host header resolution, as they would run out of IP Addresses in no time flat. Unless the whole world moves over to IPv6 it would be impossible for all websites to have unique IP addresses.

---------- Post added at 15:43 ---------- Previous post was at 15:40 ----------

They could be on separate servers, as they could be on a network behind the firewall. Something at firewall/router level would just be looking at the Host Header and routing it to the various different physical servers. But to the user/client - they all appear as one IP. This is all OK tho.

Yes, the F5's and Cisco ACE modules perform exactly this type of thing (if I recall correctly, I'm not a network bod) but it would be transparent to the end user.

SelfProtection · 04-06-2008, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by jca111

I was thinking the exact same thing. This is very common and perfectly legitimate practice. Hosting companies could not work without host header resolution, as they would run out of IP Addresses in no time flat. Unless the whole world moves over to IPv6 it would be impossible for all websites to have unique IP addresses.

---------- Post added at 15:43 ---------- Previous post was at 15:40 ----------

They could be on separate servers, as they could be on a network behind the firewall. Something at firewall/router level would just be looking at the Host Header and routing it to the various different physical servers. But to the user/client - they all appear as one IP. This is all OK tho.

The real concern is not just the joint IP address which resolves as you say usually to one Server & is then routed properly to it's destination.

It is this particular mix of companies behind this Server & the way they are internally routed & linked.
Given that Webwise, Phorm, BT & Oix are currently involved in the Webwise System, which is trying to pose as an Anti-Phishing System when it is in fact an AD Serving DPI mirroring abomination!

AlexanderHanff · 04-06-2008, 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Alex-

You stated a while back that Google was aware of the Phorm situation and was working on 'something'. Any further news about this?

If you can't say what they are, exactly, can you at least confirm that something is in the works for the near future?

I really can't say anything about Google at the moment especially given new evidence which came into my possession today which I need to talk to Google lawyers about (no Google did not do anything wrong but they have been wronged) so I need to speak to them before I disclose anything on the Google front.

Just to reiterate, I am now in possession of some very important evidence regarding the 2006 trials. I will be writing an article about it shortly and I think it is going to shock even the most cynical among us.

Alexander Hanff

tarka · 04-06-2008, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

The real concern is not just the joint IP address which resolves as you say usually to one Server & is then routed properly to it's destination.

It is this particular mix of companies behind this Server & the way they are internally routed & linked.
Given that Webwise, Phorm, BT & Oix are currently involved in the Webwise System, which is trying to pose as an Anti-Phishing System when it is in fact an AD Serving DPI mirroring abomination!

I totally agree, I just wanted to clarify that the suggested ip address forging was not the case.

vicz · 04-06-2008, 17:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

...

Just to reiterate, I am now in possession of some very important evidence regarding the 2006 trials. I will be writing an article about it shortly and I think it is going to shock even the most cynical among us.

Alexander Hanff

Goodness Alexander, stay out of dark alleys and away from the path of speeding busses won't you!