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

[warescouse]

I wonder if Kent will get that Hitler feeling someday soon. You know, the one where he is sitting in his bunker thinking to himself, where did it all go wrong?

A few months previously everything seemed to be going well with the 'phormal solution' then all of a sudden, it all goes wrong.

Don't worry Kent, as we all know good usually eventually triumphs over bad.

How does the saying go?
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln, (attributed)

Once fooled, never forgotten (WareScouse)

How I used to unlove my one two one media helpers.

Sometimes the world resists conquering.

[bluecar1]

the earl has been asking questions again

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...rant_spending/

wonder if phorm fits into this as it does reveal where someone has been

peter

[Florence]

And now the brown stuff is going to hit the fan and the UK government is sitting right in the middle
A big thank you to the Earl of Northesk for his question that has exposed this:

UK government has paid £19 million to UK comms for snooping.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...rant_spending/


Is this the reason our government are not stopping or prosecuting BT for illegal activity since they are doing it also.

Damn you blue you just pipped me

[bluecar1]

one thing i have recently thought about

BT Webwise is supposedly run and trialed by BT Retail on kingston RAS and yet stephen mainwaring was a BT business customer and was affected by the trial

does not add up

could this be a BTW / BTR collusion issue, or again BT are trying to put a smokescreen in front of the system and limit information of the system /trial until forced to admit the truth

any thoughts anyone??

alex, you have the full report of the trial, anyway of knowing from the IP addresses in the report if any BT biz clients were affected?

peter

[BetBlowWhistler]

I know that Stephen had a business running on the end of his connection, but was his connection a business ADSL?

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

I know that Stephen had a business running on the end of his connection, but was his connection a business ADSL?

According to the Register - yes.
According to the person himself - yes

[bluecar1]

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

I know that Stephen had a business running on the end of his connection, but was his connection a business ADSL?

i did make the assumption (possibly incoerrectly) a business would be running on a business broadband service

do we have a way of finding out?

peter

Update

just found this

"BT acted illegally and dishonestly. Not only did they do this to me (a long term satisfied BT Business Broadband customer) but to thousands of other customers out there."

posted by stephen mainwaring on http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/...t-spreads.html

seems to show BT business links WERE affected, so seems to kill the idea this is BT Retail only

peter

[oblonsky]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

i did make the assumption (possibly incoerrectly) a business would be running on a business broadband service

do we have a way of finding out?

peter

Update

just found this

"BT acted illegally and dishonestly. Not only did they do this to me (a long term satisfied BT Business Broadband customer) but to thousands of other customers out there."

posted by stephen mainwaring on http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/...t-spreads.html

seems to show BT business links WERE affected, so seems to kill the idea this is BT Retail only

peter

BT business broadband is a product of BT retail, AFAIK. It's an end-user ISP product sold to a business as an end user (B2B), and differs only from a residential service in the terms, download/upload speeds and limits etc offered.

BT wholesale, on the other hand, sell connectivity to other ISPs, who then sell to other customers. The end customer could be business or residential, but the key thing is that BTs customer is another ISP, who will resell connectivity in some form or another.

Have BT made a clear and unambiguous statement regarding BT Business Broadband?

It is clear from the leaked documents that ISPs who use BT wholesale product will not be Phormed by default, as Phorm's equipment sits in the BT retail ISP kit.

[dav]

Update from the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7545766.stm

[icsys]

According to the last sentence in this video, the Information Comissioner is investigating BT's actions.

I look forward to the results of that investigation.

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by dav

Update from the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7545766.stm

The times they are a changing! The BBC Technology page is beginning to look more like the Register every day. Two lead stories in two days. Both bang on target.

Does this mean that BT will miss their Olympic deadline?

I haven't been quite so optimistic since the last BT leaked document came out.

The phorm shares continue on their downward curve whereas the media coverage is on an upward curve. Keep up the pressure everyone.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by R Jones

The times they are a changing! The BBC Technology page is beginning to look more like the Register every day. Two lead stories in two days. Both bang on target.

Does this mean that BT will miss their Olympic deadline?

I haven't been quite so optimistic since the last BT leaked document came out.

The phorm shares continue on their downward curve whereas the media coverage is on an upward curve. Keep up the pressure everyone.

The BBC coverage is good news for the petition also since it seems to be going up faster again Signatures: 16,642

[Frank Rizzo]

I guess I need to give an update from my perspective.

BT Business Broadband
Yes I was a BT Business Broadband customer. A more than happy business broadband customer from 2001 up until June 2007 when all the lies and deception started.

note some of the differences between business broadband and home broad band were

20:1 contention ratio instead of 50:1
Free helpline number instead of XX per minute
Better webspace and email facilities
Payment quarterly (I think home you have to pay monthly?)
Cost was effectively 17.5% higher than home broadband (VAT exclusive / inclusive)

I run my online business at home. The limited company paid for the internet connection. As the director I authorised my self and my family to use the internet connection for personal use in accordance with Inland Revenue Homeworking guidelines.

So how come my 'business' internet connection was being intercepted by sysip.net? How many other businesses (either small, work from home, medium, SDSL, leased line businesses were also being intercepted?

Yes, the Kingston RAS was the key here. BT have always said that 'The tests were done on ONE EXCHANGE' so that would be Weston-S-Mare then?

No. What they are not telling you is that the test was done on ONE SUPER EXCHANGE - the Kingston RAS. This is a RAS where something like a third to a half of all BT connections go through. It covers an area from South Wales, South West, West, South East and parts of London.

Anyone within those areas could have been part of the trials.

ICO Investigating
I don't want to make this post seem like a rant about the ICO but every question I ask them is replied with weasel words and cop outs. They also seem to be desperate to find technicalities in order to not investigate the matter fully.

I will just point out one of the latest responses from them.

When I informed them that IP addresses are personally identifiable information, and thus they have a duty to investigate the processing of MY data under the DPA, they wrote back to me saying:

"As your internet connection was paid for by your limited company... the DPA only applies to living beings rather than companies ... we will therefore not investigate further."

Quite astonishing that. I replied with:

"I authorised the use of the internet connection for my self for personal use and for my family. At the time of the trials my son was using the internet daily. BT had therefore intercepted and processed the personal data of my self and my family without our consent. What is the point of the ICO and the DPA if a large company can profile and process the personal data of a minor and get away with it?".

European Commission
When all this erupted back in February / March someone told me that it would be up to Europe to sort this mess out. At the time I thought it did not have to go that far: we have the ICO, the home office, the police, MPs who would be eager to get justice done.

I can now see that communicating with them has produced more action than if I had gone straight to the local police - as it was suggested to me a few months ago.

(I do note and appreciate the good work done by Earl of Northesk and Baroness Miller but they must be as frustrated as the rest of us with the lack of response from the various government departments and agencies).

Compensation
I don't want to say too much about this as it is ongoing. I have put in a claim to BT and this was initially turned down (as expected).

I am in contact with a customer services person (I think this is the top level customer services team - very efficient, friendly, helpful and understanding. This is a Swindon number which redirects to a Scottish location). The latest I am told is that the office of E.S. has written to me this week although I have not yet received that letter.

What I did say to the CS person is that I am not willing to go back and fore explaining this and that. IMO the position is perfectly clear:

BT intercepted my communications and processed personal data. They did this without consent.

This had a considerable impact on my business and I am claiming compensation for it. The fact that they lied about the trials, and told me (insisted) I had a virus, and the fact that those lies went on until March this year made the matter worse.

I have no doubt that what BT did was illegal and I have submitted a claim. If they do not pay I will take this to HMCS. BT will therefore have to explain why they are not paying and this will presumably involve them explaining why they think the trials were not illegal...

[tarka]

sorry but this part made me laugh.

He believes the Home Office should have sought legal advice about a document it prepared for BT on the legality of the service in relation to RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act).

[D_Advocate]

Originally Posted by R Jones

Does this mean that BT will miss their Olympic deadline?

What deadline is that ? Has there been an official announcement that I've missed ?

I've seen some unsubstantiated gossip* in an earlier post - is that what you are basing your assumption on ?

(* I would use the term 'heresay', but as IANAL, I am not sure if that would be valid in this context)

Some people would prefer facts about when the trials are going to begin (if ever), and they can only come from BT.

Chinese whispers don't help the anti-phorm cause in any way.

D_A