Virgin Media Hijack customers browser search options

[Milambar]

Originally Posted by dev

I assume by this you're perfectly happy with OpenDNS doing it as opt-in but not happy that VM are doing it?

The problem is, with services such as OpenDNS, I choose to opt-in. With VM's implementation, they opted me in without my permission (or knowlege until I mistype a url), and I must choose to opt-out.

Also as someone pointed out IF the service is being provided by a 3rd party company, who isn't even in the UK, then there may be some privacy issues.

I don't have a chip on my shoulder about the company. I am satisfied with my broadband and telephone service. Their offshore call centers have a lot to be desired, but once you get someone competent and not a script reader, problems do get fixed. However, I DO object to them sneaking things like this in, and the underhand method of sneaking it in without telling anyone until after the fact, makes me wonder what else they are planning.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Is this active for everyone?

No it's a staged rollout.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Milambar

makes me wonder what else they are planning.

World domination

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Milambar

Also as someone pointed out IF the service is being provided by a 3rd party company, who isn't even in the UK, then there may be some privacy issues.

Well by the looking at the companies client list, if you ARE worried then moving to another ISP might not help.

http://www.nominum.com/customers/index.php

[webcrawler2050]

Originally Posted by Milambar

The problem is, with services such as OpenDNS, I choose to opt-in. With VM's implementation, they opted me in without my permission (or knowlege until I mistype a url), and I must choose to opt-out.

Also as someone pointed out IF the service is being provided by a 3rd party company, who isn't even in the UK, then there may be some privacy issues.

I don't have a chip on my shoulder about the company. I am satisfied with my broadband and telephone service. Their offshore call centers have a lot to be desired, but once you get someone competent and not a script reader, problems do get fixed. However, I DO object to them sneaking things like this in, and the underhand method of sneaking it in without telling anyone until after the fact, makes me wonder what else they are planning.

I think, personally, alot of you are being "over" paranoid about this - it's nothing major, really, just a simple "dns cannot be found" holding page, nothing major really? As i've said before, alot if not all ISP's do it. To list a few, BT, Talk Talk, Tiscali, Namesco etc etc.

[Wayfair]

I am with Milambar with this one, I would much rather opt in to something and not opt out when I get round to noticing something is not quite right.

As far as you saying 'it's nothing major' webcrawler, how many nothing majors do you have to join together to make something major?

Paranoia is not even an issue here, I don't feel the need to get my tin-foil hat out from the bomb proof cupboard under the stairs but surely it's within everyone right to be aware on what is going on around them.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by dev

How does it exactly break VPNs? From what i can tell, it should make no difference as you should be using the VPN target's DNS servers as there could be differences between internal and external resolution on any domains the company uses.

And how is windows supposed to know which DNS to use? VPNs are an additional virtual interface, not an entire new protocol stack that assimilates the entire PC. It binds to the physical interface via DNE in every case I know of, Deterministic Network Enhancer, and the DNS is only used once those further up the DNE stack are used.

You can't use the internal DNS on a VPN all the time, when you disconnect you won't be able to resolve a thing.

Have you actually used VPNs at all dev, given that you made a comment 'from what I can tell'?

You have no evidence what VM will use the money for, do you really think the exec types will go for something like this rather than a simple price increase (something that they would actually understand)?

Nor do I care any more than I care what they do with the subscription charges. I said it was a money grab, I made no guess what was being done with the money but given that I doubt it's going to be all sent to charity it would seem likely it's going to VM's bottom line. If you think the exec types weren't aware of this given its' potential for bad publicity that's simply silly. Of course they were, presented to them as a value add with potential revenues that may be received from it.

I assume by this you're perfectly happy with OpenDNS doing it as opt-in but not happy that VM are doing it?

Yes perfectly happy. I had a choice to use OpenDNS and when you sign up it informs you what it will be doing to your service and gives you the option to opt out. I can't remember getting that option when my router took the DHCP lease from VM with those addresses on it.

---------- Post added at 15:56 ---------- Previous post was at 15:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Is this active for everyone? Just that I don't get the redirection at all for failed DNS requests.. Might be the business BB I have even though it's still going though the usual VM DNS servers

Although all VM customers now, in theory, receive the same DNS addresses these are different servers, with the server one uses selected by Anycasting.

---------- Post added at 16:00 ---------- Previous post was at 15:56 ----------

Originally Posted by webcrawler2050

I think, personally, alot of you are being "over" paranoid about this - it's nothing major, really, just a simple "dns cannot be found" holding page, nothing major really? As i've said before, alot if not all ISP's do it. To list a few, BT, Talk Talk, Tiscali, Namesco etc etc.

As per http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34854400-post84.html I'm not paranoid it's just irritating in that it breaks some things. Regardless of whomever else does it it doesn't justify someone else doing it, and that it's outsourced gives some nice ammo to the more paranoid

[BenMcr]

Just a question but does this actually affect all lookups or just those on the HTTP protocol (if there is a difference)

If you ping a non-existant domain what happens?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Just a question but does this actually affect all lookups or just those on the HTTP protocol (if there is a difference)

If you ping a non-existant domain what happens?

The VM DNS will respond with the address of the search page. There is no way to determine if a lookup is for HTTP or another protocol, so you'll be pinging the server farm hosting the search page. Tech support may have some fun with that one

[Toto]

Not wanting to quote anyone in particular, but to all those who bang on about Internet standards as being the be-all that ends-all (?), who of you, or us, have security measures in to protect their PC's/Networks that breach fundamental RFC's? Probably everyone who is concerned about their security, and most of those against this mechanism quote a potential security issue.

Me puts hand up.

Granted this DNS hijack should probably have been opt in rather than opt out, but as has already been pointed out we are at liberty to say no, once and for all.

"Mission creep", "erosion of privacy", "breaking internet standards", "money grabbing ISP's" are all terms we love to bandy about like sweets flying out of a pinata.

We talk about Internet standards in terms of "must", "do" or "should" as if it really matters, or it supports an argument. Well that's fine in one way, but surely the same argument has to be applied to other things reliant on the same standards that we don't appear to mind, can we have it both ways?

VM have provided many with a reliable Broadband service, reasonably consistent speeds near to the advertised package, and a host of other bits n pieces such as security software, email, and other services such as V Stuff(ed) and that new music thingy coming out this year.

So, they want to make a few pence of each link me may click on if we get a page error, assuming we haven't opted-out. I don't have a problem with it. Security breaches from said service? XSS perhaps - get a good browser with some decent add ons such as no-script - cracking utility in my opinion.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Toto

Not wanting to quote anyone in particular, but to all those who bang on about Internet standards as being the be-all that ends-all (?), who of you, or us, have security measures in to protect their PC's/Networks that breach fundamental RFC's? Probably everyone who is concerned about their security, and most of those against this mechanism quote a potential security issue.

No idea, my router responds normally to ICMP as a node should

In my defence I didn't talk about it being a privacy or a security matter, just a pain in the backside that breaks things.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Broadbandings

No idea, my router responds normally to ICMP as a node should

In my defence I didn't talk about it being a privacy or a security matter, just a pain in the backside that breaks things.

However some here seem to think the bloody world is about to end because of this

[Mick Fisher]

A journey of a 1000 miles is accomplished 1 step at a time.

Who is best placed to decide when a step is a step too far.

The treader or the trodden on.

Just a thought.

Next up, someone will quote Pastor Neimoller....

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Sirius

However some here seem to think the bloody world is about to end because of this

Quite - that's half the frustration the way it's been done has given more fuel to those fires that were born out of Phorm.

Hey I'm a poet and I....