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

[warescouse]

Excuse me if this has already been posted but has anybody read this?

http://blog.iwr.co.uk/2008/05/behaviour-model.html

Interesting statement near the end of the article.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by warescouse

Excuse me if this has already been posted but has anybody read this?

http://blog.iwr.co.uk/2008/05/behaviour-model.html

Interesting statement near the end of the article.

"there is no way around it, they will do what they want and damn the webmasters wishes"

I heard on the Badphorm grapevine there is a sensational new industry standard about to be announced that will eliminate this dilemma once and for all.

It will solve the problem for web masters who want to protect their content, and those who want to participate in Phorm.

Rumour suggests it will be announced tonight, or perhaps tomorrow. I'll let you know as soon as I do.

[vicz]

May help to digg this up - Nebuad - quite old though

http://digg.com/tech_news/ISPs_Sneak...ing_Experience

[mark777]

Don't think this has been posted yet. Charles Arthur on Charter and (nebuad?)

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...p_charter.html

[Wildie]

What I want to know is how they going to not profile my kids in or out they still mirror and profile but no ads.

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by Wildie

What I want to know is how they going to not profile my kids in or out they still mirror and profile but no ads.

I can confidently tell you that BT have ignored that question completely because I don't think they know the answer. They don't KNOW about your kids. They have no way of knowing who they are - you are just an account and some sub-accounts. They could announce a method linked to the BTYahoo Parental Controls, but they haven't - not sure whether it would work anyway.

Scenario one - a win98 computer which the whole family uses, one computer login/browser profile, different ISP mail or homepage logins. Hopeless - the kid could respond and opt-in, and you'd never know but everyone's browsing would be profiled, and ads targetted to everyone together.

Scenario two - an XP or Vista or MAC or Linux ? computer, different user accounts per family member, again - the kid could login on their own account and opt-in, they would all have their own user profiles and separate cookie lists, but the IP address would be common to everyone as would presumably the traffic routing. Even if primary account holder did NOT opt-in, presumably if someone else DID opt-in, everyones traffic from that IP address would be routed via the profiler? Depends on the exact opt-in solution adopted by BT which they aren't telling us so they don't have to answer those questions.

There are a shedload of detailed questions that need to be thrown at the ISP's once the actual Webwise model to be used, is announced - the first chance will be the model chosen for the trials - they will say they haven't decided on final implementation but they will still have to demonstrate that the trial itself avoids some of these questions particularly those involving minors.

[popper]

in related news, this seems odd
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...sense_account/
"Google kills Anonymous AdSense account

How Scientology funded the anti-Scientology movement

By Cade Metz in San Francisco → More by this author
Rate this story 1 Ratings
Published Wednesday 14th May 2008 18:52 GMT

...
"While going through our records recently, we found that your AdSense account has posed a significant risk to our AdWords advertisers," read Google's letter to Enturbulation, a kind of home base for the now famous Anonymous movement. "Since keeping your account in our publisher network may financially damage our advertisers in the future, we've decided to disable your account."

Of course, it's not Enturbulation's fault that Google was serving the site pro-Scientology ads. AdSense automatically chooses ads based on a site's content. And like any AdSense advertiser, the Church of Scientology has the power to ban its ads from individual domains.

Google did not respond to our requests for comment. But it should be noted that the company's new AdSense policies say that partner sites may not include "advocacy against any individual, group, or organization."
...
"

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by Wildie

What I want to know is how they going to not profile my kids in or out they still mirror and profile but no ads.

Don't worry, the Information Commissioner has been given 'assurances' by Phorm... and is leaving it to 'technical experts' like us (apparently Phorm is engaging with us... I haven't seen them answer a question for around 2 months). Rather than wasting money investigating Phorm out of their own budget.

The Information Commissioner apparently accepts that children under 16 can be allowed to surf the internet while being profiled, (opted in or out), as long as they are being supervised at all times by an irresponsible adult.

And if those requirements are breached, as in 2006/7, the ICO accepts BT's excuse that the scale of the crime was 'on the small side' and though illegal no one found out so that's ok.

So, in other words, an individuals right to opt in/out isn't sufficiently important to warrant any action at all, let alone 38,000+ people. So opt out why don't you. And if you find they profiled your kids anyway? Who do you think you are going to call to complain?

Good luck, I'm still waiting for a reply to my email.

Pete.

[serial]

Originally Posted by Wildie

What I want to know is how they going to not profile my kids in or out they still mirror and profile but no ads.

This was asked at the meeting and Kent used his spintacular skills to waffle on whilst making sure to not actually answer the question.

Phorm, video please? *sound of crickets*, *a bird sings*...

[mark777]

Originally Posted by popper

in related news, this seems odd
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...sense_account/
"Google kills Anonymous AdSense account

How Scientology funded the anti-Scientology movement

When all net ads are served by two or three big systems, the big advertisers will then decide which sites are denied advertising funding. It's the way to go, have a nice day.

Simon Davies tectonic shift.

[basa]

Let’s face it, you can chew the fat forever and a day about the deployment of the Phorm/Webwise software, but I feel it will change nothing. The heat has gone out of the fight both here and at El Reg.

There does not appear to be any effective legal or commercial challenge. Big businesses like BT/VM can generally do what they like, especially when the Government and the Law are not really interested (it is way too small an issue to be high on their agenda). In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if the Government would support such deployment as it would tie in nicely with their anti-terrorist paranoia, especially following Browns proposed Communications Data Bill. Add to that that the ICO have effectively endorsed the system if 'opt-in' is utilised.

Most people in the UK are so used to being manipulated, screwed, ripped-off and spied upon, they no longer have the heart or tools to fight, even if they knew what was going on.

We here who know of these things are a minority. Your majority internet punter won’t have a clue and will be sucked into any opt-in, EULA or change in T&Cs to allow this crap with the seductive promise of a 'safer surfing experience'.

On the other hand BT & VM would probably love to be rid of us (the geeks) who are a thorn in their side and more than likely the greatest users of their bandwidth.

[G UK]

Originally Posted by basa

Let’s face it, you can chew the fat forever and a day about the deployment of the Phorm/Webwise software, but I feel it will change nothing. The heat has gone out of the fight both here and at El Reg.

There does not appear to be any effective legal or commercial challenge. Big businesses like BT/VM can generally do what they like, especially when the Government and the Law are not really interested (it is way too small an issue to be high on their agenda). In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if the Government would support such deployment as it would tie in nicely with their anti-terrorist paranoia, especially following Browns proposed Communications Data Bill. Add to that that the ICO have effectively endorsed the system if 'opt-in' is utilised.

Most people in the UK are so used to being manipulated, screwed, ripped-off and spied upon, they no longer have the heart or tools to fight, even if they knew what was going on.

We here who know of these things are a minority. Your majority internet punter won’t have a clue and will be sucked into any opt-in, EULA or change in T&Cs to allow this crap with the seductive promise of a 'safer surfing experience'.

On the other hand BT & VM would probably love to be rid of us (the geeks) who are a thorn in their side and more than likely the greatest users of their bandwidth.

Nice and pessimistic of you, I've heard this echoed more than once as well unfortunately.

I for one though will never surrender and will take a few of the less well informed with me. I have been quiet here for the most part now but have been working where I can to inform and guide opinion on phorm in those around me. The more I can spread this to in person the better.

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by basa

Let’s face it, you can chew the fat forever and a day about the deployment of the Phorm/Webwise software, but I feel it will change nothing. The heat has gone out of the fight both here and at El Reg.

Cut....

Sorry Basa, I totally disagree. If you feel heat has gone out of the fight, it can only be because the heat is now on the other side of the fence.

I am certain BT know they are in deep poo in many respects, and I suspect they are desperately trying to find IMHO an unsolvable answer to make Phorms interception somehow legal to at least show some face. The hole they have been digging is getting deeper.

It may seem quiet at times but I strongly believe behind the scenes, movement is ongoing. I consider it the calm before the storm! Virgin media seem to be coming to their senses according to rumours. Kent is not welcome!

The bottom line is Phorm is a can of worms from the top of the tin to the bottom and anybody who wants to eat from this can deserves the full force of any action that follows.

ps.
Anybody know where's the video that was promised by that forked tongue Slipperyman?

Originally Posted by basa

Let’s face it, you can chew the fat forever and a day about the deployment of the Phorm/Webwise software, but I feel it will change nothing. The heat has gone out of the fight both here and at El Reg...

I disagree Basa.

Yes, it's like swans/ducks on a lovely tranquil stream... they are gliding along beautifully - but this is whilst paddling like the clappers beneath the surface trying to stay afloat and in an effort to maintain movement in the right direction.

Might look calm Basa, but believe me, I know the corporates, and behind the doors... it really isn't!

---------- Post added at 23:46 ---------- Previous post was at 23:41 ----------

We still wait...

Questions for Written Answers - Asked 24 April (Answers due 8 May)

1. Earl of Northesk to ask Her Majesty’s Government which law enforcement agency, Department or other statutory body has responsibility for investigating and prosecuting possible criminal breaches of (a) the Data Protection Act 1998, (b) the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and (c) the Computer Misuse Act 1990. [HO] HL3267

2. Earl of Northesk to ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any official or Minister in the Home Office has offered written or oral advice to any executive of the company Phorm as to the legality of their targeted advertising software product; if so, what was the advice; in what circumstances was it given; and what was the justification for giving it. [HO] HL3268

Battle is lost is it Basa? Not yet sir! The answers will come. And yes, they are paddling those webbed feet furiously at Government offices, BT and Phorm HQ.

---------- Post added at 23:53 ---------- Previous post was at 23:46 ----------

I've asked why there is such a delay answering the first question of the Earl above...

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/contact-us

I could sware that one of those was originally allocated as a question to be answered by the 'CO' (Cabinet Office') previously? Will have to check back on my posts here. Wonder when they will finally answer these questions. Big questions with consequences hopefully!

[Phormic Acid]

Originally Posted by popper

in related news, this seems odd
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...sense_account/
"Google kills Anonymous AdSense account

How Scientology funded the anti-Scientology movement"

The joys of keyword matching. On the BadPhorm forum, serial has already suggested a most-inappropriately-placed-ad competition, to provide light relief for anyone who gets caught up in a Phorm trial.