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

[Dephormation]

Full size versions (click to enlarge);

[davethejag]

Hi All, not sure if this has been posted but here it is anyway! Might be of interest. -

http://www.webuser.co.uk/news/257815.html

Dave.

[BadPhormula]

Originally Posted by Wildie

on a side note found this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ls-emails.html
talk about abuse of powers.

Give them the ability to abuse their power.. And they will.

This is what some people just don't seem to understand about why Phorm is hated so much..

(here's what weeny thinks) "it's just a word parsing system to create targetted adverts?!? I don't know what all the fuss is about"

No it isn't! It is the first steps on the way towards the acceptance of a system to watch/read/intercept/analyse then CONTROL YOU. Today the smarmy shysters like K~nt says "nothing to worry about". Then several years down the line through mission creep and extended function they have a system so entwined into every decision and thought you make, they will literally be able to target an individual and control them through various means we cannot even comprehend today. K~nt will do deals with anyone and do anything for money, if you think the thousands of people abused by councils throughout the UK using RIPA is a problem now imagine how they will abuse 'citizens' when K~nt offers them Webwise+ (millions)

Thanks to people like Stratis Scleparis former CTO of BT (now CTO of Phorm) abusing his position to beta test an illegal spying system at BT then jump ship to Phorm so he can overlook the smooth transition of WebSpies without being questioned or challenged. Thanks Stratis you back stabbing greedy money motivated b~stard.

[bluecar1]

just added the below to the footer my website

********
I explicitly deny ISP's from Using Deep Packet Inspection Technologies such as WebWise, Phorm, NeBuAd or similar technologies from intercepting any traffic to or from this website for the purpose of profiling the content to serve targeted advert or otherwise spying on visitors to MY WEBSITE
********

that should do for a start

peter

[labougie]

Sadly, so sadly - this is the way of the world. At the dawn of computing we were promised paperless offices. We were not promised Orwellian control, which seems to be the main use to which computing power is being put. Governments already know more about you than they have any good right to and no matter what user-friendly name the department is called, they are NOT about upholding your privacy rights - they've been undermining those rights themselves and it wouldn't be at all surprising if they've given the green light to others who want to collect information, as long as they share it with the government. Expecting the LAW to be with you on this one would be like expecting turkeys to vote for Christmas. Sorry, but a rearguard action is the only thing that's happening around here. An extremely valiant one - but the times are not on our side. Anyone who voted for Margaret/Ronnie must now hang their head in shame because corporate indifference to legality was always part and parcel of the package.

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by mark777

I've spent the last hour or so going through the leaked document again and it's still mind-boggling how much 'dirt' is in there.

I've posted an analysis with 13 points in it, (12 of which are not about charity ads) over on BT Beta forums - it may be helpful for anyone planning an ICO letter or MP letter because I've put in page numbers etc. to save everyone squinting at the scan.

I mentioned this a day ago but a lot of sewage has flowed under the bridge since then.

You should be able to access it here (scroll down to my post on June 5th 11.27am)
http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/th...t=750&tstart=0
I've also expressed my views on the legal heavyweight action in a seperate post - just got back from London and am catching up!

I really wonder whether Bt would want to be taken through that leaked document point by point in front of a jury. It's not as if their reputation could have been damaged by the noDPI article - it was on the floor already - and a courtroom cross examination of a BT executive with detailed questioning of all the things they have have done and said would be most unwelcome for them.

Imagine them discussing their understanding of the word "transparency" as used in the leaked document, and then asking them what it means when Kent uses it in a PR statement or when he speaks to his privacy auditors or the ICO

Imagine getting them to explain in court just what they meant by "stealth trial" - or "avoiding any perception that their system is a virus" (while reminding them what their support staff called it when Stephen Mainwaring rang them.) - getting them to explain the circumvention of T&C's by 121Media's cookie dropping campaign - the monitoring of helpdesk calls while not actually "helping" any customers who wanted to know what the *** was going on - their awareness of customer complaints about the trials but their cover up of what they were doing - their intention to improve "transparency" in the second trial (which sort of transparency was that Ms Sanderson? Your sort or the sort Phorm PR team were touting? Covering up while pretending to be open?) - the admission of javascript injection - the misinformation regarding IP addresses in terms of submissions to the ICO when it would seem that IP addresses were in fact available -

Do they really want to be taken through all that in cross examination?
As well as have either a lawyer or Alex take them through his paper on the trials, paragraph by paragraph and ask them about it - in court - under oath? Are they sure they want to do that?

[AlexanderHanff]

Beta Forums now require a password and username to read the threads. Or at least that is what I was presented with when I clicked your link above.

Alexander Hanff

[labougie]

You're expecting justice when the system itself is skewed. The man (a few pages back) who "accidentally" leaked the BT document to Private Eye did a whole lorra good. The fact "My Learned Friends" have been on to Alex is a sign of their weakness, not their strength. But the HO is your big problem. They're doing exactly the same thing themselves. And again, sadly, those guys MAKE the law. If you think that the judge in any important case isn't either selected or leaned on, you're a fool.

[AlexanderHanff]

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...als_in_uk.html

Alexander Hanff

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Beta Forums now require a password and username to read the threads. Or at least that is what I was presented with when I clicked your link above.

Alexander Hanff

And same for I. Very secretive!

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Beta Forums now require a password and username to read the threads. Or at least that is what I was presented with when I clicked your link above.

Alexander Hanff

http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/th...t=750&tstart=0
and then scroll down - I've edited my post above. Sorry - the url when logged in obviously doesn't work for those who aren't.

[XBNM]

I love the preformance critieria in the report especially No 7 Security

Requirement
Verify pageSense Conforms to BT Security Standards

Success Critieria

Measrure the effectivenesss of the 121Media application click through rates
Revenue share model
Projected Revenue share based on trial Click through rates and proposed Revenue sharing model

Does this mean the only measure of security in BT is profit ?

Good to know the trial was compliant in this area.

[BadPhormula]

Message #8038 from one time poster 'oro' was deleted, along with others regarding the Phorm Advert hijacking thread. I kept my copy of the message before it was deleted.

I found it strange that one time poster 'oro' was dropping heavy hints and tips about this hijacking matter prior to Phorm lawyers threatening Alexander. Friendly insider info? Agent provocateur? Man with crystal ball?

[mark777]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Beta Forums now require a password and username to read the threads. Or at least that is what I was presented with when I clicked your link above.

Alexander Hanff

I've always used the link below to get to the thread, then click 'last post' to get to the end. Trying to reference individual posts does not appear to work for non-BT users.

http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/th...?threadID=3152

[labougie]

Does this mean the only measure of security in BT is profit ?

GET REAL - profit is the ONLY thing that MATTERS!