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

[Privacy_Matters]

Originally Posted by Wildie

web pages last week was blank untill a refresh and some even timing out, also notice the trace routes are different again compared to last week and the one before that less hops now last week more hops inside the bt network.

I'm having alot of blank pages too. Some will load with a refresh, some won't!!!

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by Privacy_Matters

I'm having alot of blank pages too. Some will load with a refresh, some won't!!!

I have a question about Web Browser Operation.

What Really happens when a Browser receives a 307 relocate request & the relocated Site is blocked either in the Hosts File or a Firewall?

Does the Browser repeat the request for the Original WebSite or retry on the 307 relocate, if it is the Original Website then the Webwise System may have a real problem; how do they stop looping if the cookie option is no longer being used to test for it?

I was wondering whether this could be the cause of many reports of Routers re-syncing & more rst commands in the past couple of weeks?

[Wild Oscar]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

very worrying development in sweden

http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../06/17/0126243

sweden are looking for sweeping power to tap any communications that crosses their border (E-mail, fax, telephone, web, SMS, etc. 24/7) WITHOUT A WARRANT

It seems strange there is nothing on the RELAKKS site about this, since they are based in Sweden you would think they would be aware of it!

Legal
RELAKKS is a company incorporated in Sweden. The service is basically a Swedish broadband subscription offered over the Internet. This means that the legal framework mainly consists of the The Electronic Communications Act 2003 389.

What will this mean if:
· Swedish authorities or,
· Other organization or individuals demands access to information protected by RELAKKS?

RELAKKS Safe Surf enjoys the strongest legal protection possible under Swedish Law because of the service type (pre-paid flat-rate service). This means that RELAKKS do not have to keep an ordinary customer database (to be able handle transactions etc.). This is of importance if forced to hand over information.

If Swedish authorities can prove beyond reasonable doubt that they have a case for demanding subscription information from RELAKKS (they have to be of the opinion that if convicted the user will be imprisoned – fined not enough). .

RELAKKS then have to hand over the subscription information entered by you (but that’s all). RELAKKS do not store any subscribtion information about you except what you entered yourself when signing up for the RELAKKS Safe Surf service.

For Swedish authorities to force RELAKKS to hand over “traffic data” including your RELAKKS IP at a specific point in time, they will have to prove a case with the minimum sentence of two years imprisonment.

Regarding inquires from other parties than Swedish authorities RELAKKS will never hand over any kind of information.

The combination Swedish high-tech encryption and the strongest legal protection give you true access to Internet, safer and speedier then ever before.

[bluecar1]

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

I have a question about Web Browser Operation.

What Really happens when a Browser receives a 307 relocate request & the relocated Site is blocked either in the Hosts File or a Firewall?

Does the Browser repeat the request for the Original WebSite or retry on the 307 relocate, if it is the Original Website then the Webwise System may have a real problem; how do they stop looping if the cookie option is no longer being used to test for it?

I was wondering whether this could be the cause of many reports of Routers re-syncing & more rst commands in the past couple of weeks?

if you are on about home routers, look at http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../06/07/1727240
peter

[jtechs]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Well, yes, possibly. Perhaps the more curious admins might. It's not a way to reach a huge audience, but we may a few dozen people interested that way.

what about btweblies.com ?? I was bored so I made a site. nothing really.

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

if you are on about home routers, look at http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../06/07/1727240
peter

Not really, for instance my ADSL Router does not crash, it just re-syncs for a connection every so often more & more over the last couple of weeks.

The only change on reconnection is a new WWW IP address.

I've been using the beta SP3 for months & this problem did not start until a couple of weeks ago.

This is why I asked about details of how a Web Browser handles aborted 307 requests?

[Florence]

Brown seems to either not understand civilian liberties or chooses to not understand.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...n_ippr_speech/

[davews]

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

I have a question about Web Browser Operation.

What Really happens when a Browser receives a 307 relocate request & the relocated Site is blocked either in the Hosts File or a Firewall?

Does the Browser repeat the request for the Original WebSite or retry on the 307 relocate, if it is the Original Website then the Webwise System may have a real problem; how do they stop looping if the cookie option is no longer being used to test for it?

I was wondering whether this could be the cause of many reports of Routers re-syncing & more rst commands in the past couple of weeks?

If you block webwise.net etc in your host file so that it points to 127.0.0.1 then the redirect will try and access that and it will end there. Depending on your browser you will either get a message that the page is not available or a blank page. Effectively it will stop your browsing stone dead, you will go nowhere, it will not retry. You will get a similar effect if you try blocking in your software firewall.

It has nothing to do with routers resynching though, they will be doing this because you have a noisy line or whatever. Phorm hopefully has no way of resetting your router...

[Privacy_Matters]

Phorm Contingency Plan

Right Guys

Time to set in motion a real plan to aid people if Phorm gets rolled out.

I propose that a webpage is created to cover the fundamentals of dealing with contracts; OFT; etc, and a guide to get out of of contracts, including reimbursement of advance payments.

Who is with me on this?

[bluecar1]

Originally Posted by Privacy_Matters

Phorm Contingency Plan

Right Guys

Time to set in motion a real plan to aid people if Phorm gets rolled out.

I propose that a webpage is created to cover the fundamentals of dealing with contracts; OFT; etc, and a guide to get out of of contracts, including reimbursement of advance payments.

Who is with me on this?

sounds like a good idea, bt's main arguement with me at the moment is they do not see the change to the privacy clause as a material change so not reason to break the contract, if we can get a legal opinion on that it would be a good start

I am trying to get exact wording changes out of BT but they are resisting at the moment which leads me to suspect they are still rewording or they have something to hide as there may be more changes elsewhere in the contract we have not noticed yet

does anyone have a full copy of the T's and C's of last year they can PM me as i have access to software that does a nice document compare

peter

[Privacy_Matters]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

sounds like a good idea, bt's main arguement with me at the moment is they do not see the change to the privacy clause as a material change so not reason to break the contract, if we can get a legal opinion on that it would be a good start

I am trying to get exact wording changes out of BT but they are resisting at the moment which leads me to suspect they are still rewording or they have something to hide as there may be more changes elsewhere in the contract we have not noticed yet

does anyone have a full copy of the T's and C's of last year they can PM me as i have access to software that does a nice document compare

peter

Nevermind T&Cs

You are protected by Consumer Statutory Rights. The indepth details can be found on (and linked from) the OFT Website.

In a Nutshell, Companies like BT must ensure that Contracts do not contain unfair clauses. It should be noted that an unfair clause is determined by the Customer, and ratified (in most cases) by the OFT - rendering BT powerless, ie they cannot claim that you feel the contract is not fair, contrary to your own feelings.

In cases like this, your Consumer Statutory Rights take precedence over ANY contract, therefore you will have the right to leave without penalty. Also, Companies like BT will then face Punitive action.

You should note, T&Cs ARE NOT THE CONTRACT!!!

[BetBlowWhistler]

Originally Posted by davews

If you block webwise.net etc in your host file so that it points to 127.0.0.1 then the redirect will try and access that and it will end there. {snip}..

What about if they use an IP block that doesn't have reverse lookup configured in the dns? That wouldn't get caught by your hosts file unless you did it by IP address.

[vicz]

Hot news in El Reg

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...horm_meetings/

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

What about if they use an IP block that doesn't have reverse lookup configured in the dns? That wouldn't get caught by your hosts file unless you did it by IP address.

That's correct the hosts file can be bypassed by using the Real IP address & my router is not being reset the line sync drops, particularly when I visit the BT Forum to view the posts & my router logs the error and reconnects.

My line is in no way noisy it is above 4000/400 & there is nothing else connected to the line.

[NTLVictim]

Originally Posted by vicz

Hot news in El Reg

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...horm_meetings/

Bootnote from that article;

"
We tried to obtain an interview today with Andrew Knight via a direct email approach. A Home Office press officer called soon after to say that "I'm not impressed by that... you [El Reg] do not do that, you come through us. If you do you will not get any response [at all to your queries]".
We asked if it was Home office policy to threaten journalists with excommunication if they try talking to senior civil servants. "No," she said. "It's just the way it is.""


Which part of "Civil", and "servant" doesn't she understand?

I pay her wages, I want her fired.