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

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by mart44

That's interesting. You're the first person I've ever seen mention offline privacy (as in not 'The Internet'?). We divulge a great deal of information about ourselves to the government, councils banks, hospitals, doctors etc. These are people who know our names and where we live. The information is probably all on computers that talk to each other somewhere. Probably quite a bit known about us all in all. Yet we don't seem to worry about this as much as privacy on the Internet.

Ok lets look at this from another angle for you then Mart. You give information to hospitals. Do they provide you a useful service? You provide infromation to councils. Do you get a useful service in return? Same with banks? Useful service, yes or no?

Now to Phorm and webwise. Anti-phishing that already exists in IE7, Firefox, various anti-virus/anti-spyware applications. Useful to you, yes or no? Then "more relevant adverts", useful to you yes or no?

Personally I see absolutely no value to me as an end-user of Phorms WebDumb and yet I see a huge cost in terms of my privacy rights and right not to have my communications intercepted without a warrant or due legal process.

[roadrunner69]

Originally Posted by mart44

I may or may not act as a guinea-pig if and when the time comes.

The point is YOU decide whether you want to be a guinea-pig or not, the way the phorm system works, as we understand it noone will have a choice whether to have their internet traffic intercepted or not.

[Julian Smart]

Originally Posted by mart44

I can't possibly read all the posts but it is obvious from reading a cross-section that the general feeling is indignation and anger. As I've said, I'm undecided. I may or may not act as a guinea-pig if and when the time comes.

I think it is true that as soon as Internet privacy is mentioned, there does seem to be a knee-jerk reaction. It immediately throws up a barrier against any other point of view. Minds are made up and closed and that's that I suppose. Nothing that Virgin, Phorm or anyone else says is likely to be given house-room.

I think you underestimate the intelligence of people who have looked at this thing (in disbelief) and have been appalled by what they see. I normally don't react to Internet privacy stories. Neither does my wife. Yet when we see (for example) BT's arrogance and utter contempt for the opinion of their customer base, and the sheer pervasiveness of the system and the slimeballs they're happy to work with, then we're both hopping up and down in front of the TV seething and wondering why business ethics have gone right out of the window.

I don't believe this is your average internet privacy story, and that's why you've seen such a strong reaction from the public and press. It's breathtaking in its scope.

[Barkotron]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Re: MI Info, we have to say we are a little confused here when it comes to your endorsement. If you take a look at the site and their terms and privacy policy you will see that Mi-Info collects and stores your personal data.

Hi PR Team,

Be confused no longer! Go and have a quick look in a dictionary, and look up the words "informed", "consent", and "opt-in" (if "opt-in" counts as one word). I know Kent Ertufhdisijf doesn't understand them as he's stated before that he doesn't see what the big deal is, but believe me the consent issue is part of what's getting people really wound up about the spyware your bosses are peddling.

Not that many people here would be rushing to sign up for mi-info or any other suchlike service, but as you can see from the survey and the sheer level of vitriol being spat at Phorm across the web, if people weren't being railroaded into the Phorm system then very few people would be signing up for it either.

Quite apart from the legal issues, people object to the extremely high-handed way they have been treated over this. Working for a PR company, I'm sure (and I hope for your sakes if you intend to carry on doing PR ) you can understand how miserably Phorm and the ISPs have handled it all. Have a look at labougies post here. Virgin are, in effect, saying that they have already got all the consent they need and there's nothing the customer can do about it, even though the customer was not aware of any intention to implement Phorm's system when they signed the contract. The customer feels powerless, duped and angry, and not without good reason.

Most people feel, quite rightly in my opinion, that the implementation of the Phorm system by their ISP involves a massive change in the relationship between the ISP and the customer, and legitimate concerns can and should not be brushed aside using Terms and Conditions which did not relate to Phorm's "service" when the customer signed up. Leaving aside whether VM's statement would stand up in court or not, surely you can see what a terrible piece of customer service that is from a PR point of view?

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by mart44

I don't know what to think about Phorm. I didn't object to WGA and haven't suffered any ill-effects so far from allowing it onto the system. I think that's my own practical yardstick. I'm not particularly worried by Internet privacy providing nothing affects everyday life, which it hasn't so far. This has been the attitude for around eight years now, so perhaps that's a reasonable trial.

WGA was done very publicly and with detailed explanation of the reasons, what it does how it works and how for any legitimatly licenced person there will be no effect. Microsoft needed to do something when their software is so widespread and easy to copy.
Compare to how Sony installed rootkit software on peoples PCs when they played certain CDs to achieve the same objective of preventing copyright theft.
Here we have another ex-rootkit company trying to install software at our ISPs.

[manxminx]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi everyone
Hope you are all looking forward to the weekend - looks like a bit of rain.

Re: MI Info, we have to say we are a little confused here when it comes to your endorsement. If you take a look at the site and their terms and privacy policy you will see that Mi-Info collects and stores your personal data.

Not to mention the fact the release is misleading, suggesting (wrongly) that Phorm sells or passes on customer data.

Our ISP partners have not sold and will never sell your data. No data leaves the ISP network and no PII data is stored by Phorm's technology. We do not tie into the ISP's authentication server or any other information the ISP holds on their subscribers.

For the record, once again, we do not store personal data or any information on which sites a user has visited. Nor do we store any personally identifiable information such as IP addresses etc (unlike Mi-Info) and we do not pass on any information (unlike Mi-Info).

Unlike Mi-Info, Webwise users are anonymous to the system – the technology observes anonymous behaviours and draws a conclusion about the advertising category that's most relevant. All the data leading to that conclusion is then deleted by the time each page is loaded.

Webwise is far more secure simply because it does not store any data and therefore it cannot be lost. As always for more information, especially on the new levels of privacy and security that Webwise sets, go to http://www.webwise.com or http://www.phorm.com

Hia! Long time no hear from. Great to see you back and posting, don't leave it so long next time eh?

Seeing as it was me that posted the link to http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...4786614&EDATE= I suppose I'd better answer your post.

Let me say first of all that I would never sign up to any advertisement scheme.

However, from reading the info at that link, I feel this scheme trumps your in a few ways.

Firstly, it is opt-in only.
Secondly, no-one hijacks your browsing to ask you if you want to opt out.
Thirdly, no-one hijacks your browsing, full stop. No interception, no scanning of webpages, no mirroring, no on the fly profiling.
Fourthly, as for the information profiled - whoever signs up to this scheme enters their own data into the profiler. They choose what to enter, and what not to enter. Which means . .
Fifthly, the user has complete control of what their advertising profile contains
Sixthly, to view the targeted adverts, they have to browse to a certain page, which means . . .
Seventhly, other users of the computer would not see the targeted ads during their browsing sessions (unless they knew exactly what page to go to).
Eighthly, Clicking on the targeted ads earns points which can be exchanged for shopping vouchers. What does Phorm give me in return for using their system? Nothing!

So, on the basis of what I have read so far about Mi Info, if I had to choose which technology to sign up to, Yours or Mi Info, I would choose Mi Info every time because 1. it gives ME control and 2. does not intercept, mirror, scan or otherwise profile my personal browsing.

[Barkotron]

Originally Posted by manxminx

Hia! ... [whole bunch of very sensible stuff] ...browsing.

Er, what s/he said.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Far less technical. Looked out the window. Have a good weekend.

My weekend will be spent informing as many people as i can about you spyware system. Hope you get rained on .

[mart44]

Originally Posted by Julian Smart

I think you underestimate the intelligence of people who have looked at this thing (in disbelief)

You underestimate me if you think I underestimate the intelligence of people who have looked into this thing. I don't. However, surely it doesn't hurt to look at the other side of the wall does it? Doing this and then offering even a suggestion of going against popular opinion on a forum often isn't easy you know

[kt88man]

Richard Clayton (FIPR) has just released his write up of Webwise/Phorm:

http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

Detailed technical:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/080404phorm.pdf

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by mart44

You underestimate me if you think I underestimate the intelligence of people who have looked into this thing. I don't. However, surely it doesn't hurt to look at the other side of the wall does it? Doing this and then offering even a suggestion of going against popular opinion on a forum often isn't easy you know

I've looked at what Phorm in its various guises has said, how it has answered questions (or not as the case may be) and how it has conducted itself.

My choice is not to have any of my information going anywhere near them. "Trust us, we've changed" doesn't work with me.

[mart44]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

Here we have another ex-rootkit company trying to install software at our ISPs.

Did you read the interview in its entirety (see post 2184)? I don't think it will affect your feelings on the issue but in the interest of at least hearing the other side out maybe?

[Ravenheart]

Originally Posted by kt88man

Richard Clayton (FIPR) has just released his write up of Webwise/Phorm:

http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

Detailed technical:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/080404phorm.pdf

kt88man thanks for that link

That invitation has backfired on Phorm now hasn't it

[manxminx]

Originally Posted by kt88man

Richard Clayton (FIPR) has just released his write up of Webwise/Phorm:

http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

Detailed technical:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/080404phorm.pdf

Excellent, many thanks for those links. Been waiting for these. Now to go read what has been written . . .

[mark777]

Originally Posted by kt88man

Richard Clayton (FIPR) has just released his write up of Webwise/Phorm:

http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2...ebwise-system/

That will do - another nail goes in.