Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 677

icsys · 25-06-2008, 19:41

The full speech given by Meglena Kuneva, European Consumer Commissioner, can be read here...
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleases...guiLanguage=en (Scroll down the page)
HTML, PDF and downloadable DOC

Worthy of emphasis are the following paragraphs...

"There is current legislation being drafted addressing tracking issues both under the telecommunications package and in the RFID communication. New challenges will come, notably in the context of e-health, social web profiles, and biometric technology."

"It is therefore extremely important that we address the issues in a cross cutting way and that we do it on time. Retrofitting business models that develop on wrong basis is difficult. So the time is really now. Now is the time to strike a balance that allows us to capture the benefit of commercial use of data whilst addressing the concerns related to tracking and privacy."

"Trust is the currency of the on-line world. I want that in the heated debates surrounding privacy, the voice of the consumers is clearly heard. For that reason, I want to step up our work to develop core consumer principles that feed into policy across sectors and technologies delivering a more consistent approach the conditions surrounding tracking and profiling. "

As has been done with Charter and NebuAd in the states... Now is the time for the ICO, Home Office or the EU commission to instruct BT and phorm, or any other ISP/company considering similar user profiling programs, to suspend any trials or implementation while these important privacy concerns can be properly addressed.

Privacy_Matters · 25-06-2008, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildie

would it be possible to block places that buy ad space for their goods on phorm,
or a ad blocker to intercept the ad and follow the link and then block it end of.?

This should be possible. Creating an Add-on similar to AdBlockPlus, which includes a script to extract the first part of an ad address ie:

http://www.a.adscum.co.uk/adserver/adprovider/admorecrap/annoyingad.gif can extrapulate http://www.a.adscum.co.uk and add to the Host File.

Anyone care to have a shot at creating?

warescouse · 25-06-2008, 20:20

Report in el reg

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

AlexanderHanff · 25-06-2008, 20:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue Miller

Dear Cable Forum,

Since I spoke in the Lords about data protection, I have learnt more about the gaps in the regulations covering organisations such as Phorm and their webwise system. I agree that there are serious questions to be answered about information interception through ISPs and its implications for web users and website owners.

I am grateful to several forum members for contributing to my understanding of the next steps that can be taken in legislation.

Data protection and privacy are increasingly under threat in this country, partly because the internet is awash with people’s personal information. The general public has, like me, a pretty basic understanding of the technology, so it has been especially useful to have such a lively correspondence following the debate. Thank you for working hard to bring to light the issues involved in this case. While the Lords may not seem to you to be a natural place to debate questions of online data security, I assure you that the Liberal Democrats in both Houses will work hard to ensure the better regulation of data protection both off- and on-line.

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson

I would just personally like to thank you for making the effort of posting directly to this forum. I can honestly say I am speechless.

If you would like to get together sometime for a face to face chat about the issues I would be happy oblige, I think it would do a lot of good for the people in both houses to actually listen to the public for a change instead of just being fed PR by Phorm.

Alexander Hanff

phormwatch · 25-06-2008, 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildie

would it be possible to block places that buy ad space for their goods on phorm,
or a ad blocker to intercept the ad and follow the link and then block it end of.?

You know, that's a very good idea. Once the advertisers start advertising using Phorm's OIX spyware, we can create a hosts.txt file which will block all of their OIX adverts and possibly even their websites.

icsys · 25-06-2008, 20:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by warescouse

Report in el reg

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

Better late than never

AlexanderHanff · 25-06-2008, 21:00

I had an email from Leo Laporte today regarding the Security Now podcast, he seemed quite excited and has passed my details onto Steve Gibson.

Alexander Hanff

Kursk · 25-06-2008, 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue Miller

Dear Cable Forum,

Since I spoke in the Lords about data protection..... <snip> .....of data protection both off- and on-line.

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson

Thank you for taking the time to find out more about this issue and for posting here Baroness Miller. Quite apart from Phorm's invasive technology, I think many of us here were becoming frustrated with those in authority to whom we look to protect our civil liberties and it is rewarding to hear your assurances.

Welcome and once again, thank you.

popper · 25-06-2008, 21:19

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/news/EkEuFlEpZFpkvyZWvm.html
"
25 June, 2008 - 9:04 AM
Phorm Responds to ISPreview's Alexander Hanff Interview
We recently interviewed the prominent anti-Phorm campaigner Alexander Hanff about his stance against the controversial advertising technology and its potential implementation by some UK ISPs.

Unsurprisingly Phorm disagrees with Hanff's views, calling them "inaccurate and misleading" and has regurgitated some of its usual PR in the form of a three point response.

Naturally we've added an additional (4th) page to the interview piece and readers wishing to see what the other side has to say can now do so here:

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/articles/08phorm
"

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...om_nebuad.html
"Charles Arthur
With Phorm in the wings, US ISP cancels ad-tracking system from NebuAd

While BT's next ad-serving trial with Phorm is nearly ready to start, Charter Comms in the US has suspended a deal with NebuAd, offering similar services
June 25, 2008 10:36 AM

"

warescouse · 25-06-2008, 21:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by popper

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/news/EkEuFlEpZFpkvyZWvm.html
"
25 June, 2008 - 9:04 AM
Phorm Responds to ISPreview's Alexander Hanff Interview
We recently interviewed the prominent anti-Phorm campaigner Alexander Hanff about his stance against the controversial advertising technology and its potential implementation by some UK ISPs.

Unsurprisingly Phorm disagrees with Hanff's views, calling them "inaccurate and misleading" and has regurgitated some of its usual PR in the form of a three point response.

Naturally we've added an additional (4th) page to the interview piece and readers wishing to see what the other side has to say can now do so here:

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/articles/08phorm
"

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...om_nebuad.html
"Charles Arthur
With Phorm in the wings, US ISP cancels ad-tracking system from NebuAd

While BT's next ad-serving trial with Phorm is nearly ready to start, Charter Comms in the US has suspended a deal with NebuAd, offering similar services
June 25, 2008 10:36 AM

"

I just read the 4th response page from Phorm re: Alex Hanff interview. It's the same old regurgitation of out of context quotes and misinformation. I really think Phorm PR are scraping the barrel if that's the best they can do. Are they stuck on a hamster wheel! Not only are their PR efforts monotonous they are becoming very boring. I suppose you can only squeeze so much juice out of a lemon!

Tezcatlipoca · 25-06-2008, 22:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue Miller

Dear Cable Forum,

Since I spoke in the Lords about data protection, I have learnt more about the gaps in the regulations covering organisations such as Phorm and their webwise system. I agree that there are serious questions to be answered about information interception through ISPs and its implications for web users and website owners.

I am grateful to several forum members for contributing to my understanding of the next steps that can be taken in legislation.

Data protection and privacy are increasingly under threat in this country, partly because the internet is awash with peopleÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s personal information. The general public has, like me, a pretty basic understanding of the technology, so it has been especially useful to have such a lively correspondence following the debate. Thank you for working hard to bring to light the issues involved in this case. While the Lords may not seem to you to be a natural place to debate questions of online data security, I assure you that the Liberal Democrats in both Houses will work hard to ensure the better regulation of data protection both off- and on-line.

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson

Welcome to Cable Forum, Baroness Miller

davethejag · 25-06-2008, 22:07

Baroness Sue Miller,

A BIG BIG THANK YOU!

Dave.

Florence · 25-06-2008, 22:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by popper

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/news/EkEuFlEpZFpkvyZWvm.html
"
25 June, 2008 - 9:04 AM
Phorm Responds to ISPreview's Alexander Hanff Interview
We recently interviewed the prominent anti-Phorm campaigner Alexander Hanff about his stance against the controversial advertising technology and its potential implementation by some UK ISPs.

Unsurprisingly Phorm disagrees with Hanff's views, calling them "inaccurate and misleading" and has regurgitated some of its usual PR in the form of a three point response.

Naturally we've added an additional (4th) page to the interview piece and readers wishing to see what the other side has to say can now do so here:

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/articles/08phorm
"

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...om_nebuad.html
"Charles Arthur
With Phorm in the wings, US ISP cancels ad-tracking system from NebuAd

While BT's next ad-serving trial with Phorm is nearly ready to start, Charter Comms in the US has suspended a deal with NebuAd, offering similar services
June 25, 2008 10:36 AM

"

Thank you for drawing my attention to this Mark hadn't said anything in the mods forum but he will konw I have seen it now when he comes online in the morning anyone wishing to add their views as amember of the public can do.
I have started a thjread to reply to Phorm since with articles there is no way to reply maybe we should all request the right to reply to phorm.
Sorry before this starts as this is going to be a long post.

Quote:

Recently Alexander Hanff was interviewed by Mark.J this can be read http://www.ispreview.co.uk/articles/08phorm

Below is Phorms response to this I am going to post my views lets see what you all think.

Quote:

1. Claims that Phorm sell information to the highest bidder.

Phorm: This is simply not true. The Phorm advertising and anti phishing system does not store any personally identifiable information nor store any browsing histories so there is no personal data to share or sell. In fact, academic Richard Clayton supports our privacy claims stating that:
“Phorm argue, with some justification, that their system does not permit them to identify individuals and that they meet and exceed all necessary Data Protection regulations — producing a system that is superior to other advertising platforms that profile Internet users.”

When anyone visits a server the server logs the IP number so anyone with a mind can access these logs and match them to the UID that you place on the computer.
Phorm use cookies and by nature this method is insecure and open to abuse infact Phorm abuses cookies by placing forged cookies on peoples computers.

Quote:

2. Misrepresentation of Phorm’s plans for user consent once its advertising and anti phishing system is fully deployed in the UK.

Phorm: Once we deploy our system in the UK, participation will always be a choice and we look forward to demonstrating how we will exceed existing industry standards for valid informed user consent. Users will always be given a transparent choice of using the service.

Only problem with this is transparent by the leaked trials information means stealth something we distrust the Phorm management due to previous rootkits.
As for valid user consent unless you actually say exactly what you plan to do you will never have a genuine informed consent from users. To sell this as anti phishing is not getting informed consent that is the smoke screen to get consent.

Quote:

3. Misrepresentation of Phorm by using our broadly worded ICO Registration document to suggest the company’s advertising and anti phishing system stores personally identifiable information.

Phorm: Phorm’s advertising and anti-phishing system does not store any personally identifiable information – a fact verified by independent experts including Richard Clayton, 80/20 Thinking and Ernst & Young. We simply show relevant ads to users on an anonymous basis based on predefined advertising channels triggered as a result of their Internet browsing.

Start with ICO they have not officially given consent only said maybe! I have emails from Simon Watkin which says this, also they saw no evidance from any legal documents. Didn't have anyone check out what Phorm does just listened/read the Pr sell talk.
Richard Clayton the PIA still hasn't been released as far as we know but even if it is it is so far out of date that it will be wrong. Phorm had a public meeting which Simon from 80/20 organised they had professionals videoing this which was supposed to be on-line unedited this is still somewhere in phorm offices still not released.

Earnest & Young there is a lot about the internet by them read this also they tested against US laws strange how in America the similar company to Phorm has been stopped from continuing its roll-out.

Quote:

Separately, we have registered with the ICO as there is data that all companies handle in order to manage their businesses from marketing enquiries to employee performance reviews. This is entirely unrelated to the operation of the advertising and anti phishing system.

Personally if I was in employment i wouldn't wish to have a company with your murky past knowing anything about me in work. Is this some sort of we will do this on the cheap you get phorm rolled out in UK.

Has the Government sold the public out for 30 pieces of gold?

Quote:

Not only is the Phorm technology a ground breaking step forward in online privacy but it has the potential to radically improve the Internet. It addresses the two biggest concerns users have about the Internet by reducing the amount of irrelevant advertising that people will see and will give them a safer Internet experience with its always on anti phishing protection.

In real life what Phorm plan to do would be classed as stalking and is illegal. To move onto the phishing this makes me laugh since you host servers at a company that is in the top 10 phishing hosting website companies in the world. That put on one wide all browsers also have phishing protection, google also has this even email clients have the ability to warn you if an email is suspect all without giving up your privacy, having your connection hijacked then redirected 4 times before you arrive at the wanted website.
In real life what Phorm plan to do would be classed as stalking and is illegal.

Quote:

With our technology small websites and ISPs will, for the first time, get a slice of the billions spent on Internet advertising. Last year just 50 US websites got 91% of all the all online advertising revenues while the average user in Japan is connecting to the Internet at speeds 10 times faster than in the UK. The Phorm system will help redistribute advertising money more widely so that Internet users will benefit from a greater diversity of content and from increased investment in better services.

Did Japan use the customers clicks to raise money to build their network or just good management reinvesting a percentage of the profits back into the network.

Small websites would lose out if phorm harvests keywords from them then directs the visitor to other competitors.

How many websites had their copyright violated to give profits to 50?

posted http://www.ispreview.co.uk/talk/show...519#post203519

OldBear · 25-06-2008, 22:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by warescouse

I just read the 4th response page from Phorm re: Alex Hanff interview. It's the same old regurgitation of out of context quotes and misinformation. I really think Phorm PR are scraping the barrel if that's the best they can do. Are they stuck on a hamster wheel! Not only are their PR efforts monotonous they are becoming very boring. I suppose you can only squeeze so much juice out of a lemon!

Yes, and it's interesting that they are still trying the same old trick they've been trying for months with regards to Dr. Richard Clayton.

From Dr Clayton's own blog: http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

Quote:

Update (2008-04-06):
Phorm have now quoted sections of this article on their own blog: http://blog.phorm.com/?p=12. Perhaps not surprisingly, theyÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ve quoted the paragraph that was favourable to their cause, and failed to mention all the paragraphs that followed that were sharply critical. They then fail, again how can one be surprised? to provide a link back to this article so that people can read it for themselves. Readers are left to draw their own conclusions.

My bold.

In Dr. Clayton's own words, "Readers are left to draw their own conclusions".

OB

icsys · 25-06-2008, 22:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBear

Yes, and it's interesting that they are still trying the same old trick they've been trying for months with regards to Dr. Richard Clayton.

From Dr Clayton's own blog: http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

In Dr. Clayton's own words, "Readers are left to draw their own conclusions".

OB

DITTO
I was just about to post the same.

Take a single pro-comment and constantly regurgitate and milk it for all that it is worth.

Did Richard Clayton verify that Phorm’s targeted advertising and data-phishing system does not store any personally identifiable information? or is this another spin?