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

[phormwatch]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-snooping.html

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:26 ----------

Still no update from Alex!

What's going on, Alex? Share some news!...

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by madslug

If I recall, earlier there was some webwise content on BT - back in the days when they hosted a link from the home page and it was within a webwise subdirectory as well as the webwise subdomain. Duplicate content (unlikely) or server domain management. With the external hosting still having the same content over multiple domains it is likely that this has always been their domain hosting method.

www2= 217.32.165.135
217.32.164.0-217.32.167.255 BT-IGNITE Content Hosting

So it seems there is a copy of the webwise materials on an internal BT controlled server (Sandridge North London).

Then there is the whole range of domains hosted at Gyron in London... bt.webwise.com, webwise.bt.com (plus all the other Phorm domains). As you say, probably one copy, on two machines (round robin DNS 31/32).

Then there is that lingering server in PSInet in the USA which also holds a copy of the webwise materials.

?

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-snooping.html

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:26 ----------

Still no update from Alex!

What's going on, Alex? Share some news!...

Alex is probably giving them more time to reply but did you spot this in one of his latest posts.

I have to go to work now but I will update the NoDPI web site tomorrow with the details of the call.

Alexander Hanff

[phormwatch]

Yes, and it is tomorrow.

OK, I'll settle down...

[popper]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

I suspect that what Alex will tell us about the City of London police is something like this :
They've confirmed they've got it, but have far too many cases of international fraud involving substantial amounts of money being stolen etc to devote any meaningful resources to a case where no-one appears to have lost any money or suffered any real harm.

They are stretched, I had dealings with the Serious Fraud Office about 10 years ago and at that point they could not allocate any personnel to crimes where less than £1m had been purloined.

I suspect things have not improved in that time and that your case will be just chucked on a pile and left to gather dust.

Personally i think that is the approach they should take. I know I will be in the minority here !

Far happier for the police who's salaries I pay through my taxes to concentrate on real crime.

well thankfully, the courts and the bench are the people that are best qualifyed to Judge on the question of suffering and harm, not you as a private person.

the judges have reams of documents and ruleings going back centurys to help them come to a reasonable and ballanced view based on justice, not how much money you the victim have.

as for the "they could not allocate" that again seems to be taken out of context as it seems clear they chose not to allocate personel in your case, but given enough words in the righ ears they surely would have allocated personel to any case that serves the public interest and justice on the wide scale.

you chose not to accept that this case has effected a large section of the public and private firms world wide and that is your right.

as for your stance that only the rich people and faceless companys in a position to be able to have 1million riped off in the first place, get access to justice, while others that will never even see anything like that 1million+ written down in their books cant, stinks, but again you are entitaled to have that minority view if you so wish.

OC you also make the obvious wrong assumption that these faceless compays when they break our laws cant also be held accountable, and more to the point, the real people inside them can and ARE able to be held accountable for their unlawful actions, as can be seen in the likes of the top Uk executive stansford case.

being a high ranking executive inside a company that can afford to keep 1million+ in the bank doesnt help you
when your stood infront of the judge that got his BT BB line wiretapped (and there are sure to be a lot of them given the No.s and areas covered in the trials), and the court ordered findings of facts point to you directly as the person in charge that authorised these unlawful RIPA etc wiretaps and related offences does it.

OC it doesnt, that just makes the effected sitting judge and his peers look that much harder at the existing case law and rules/guidence to make sure you serve the right longest term and recompense for your crimes as any other rich or poor person might expect in a court of law.

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by madslug

If I recall, earlier there was some webwise content on BT - back in the days when they hosted a link from the home page and it was within a webwise subdirectory as well as the webwise subdomain. Duplicate content (unlikely) or server domain management. With the external hosting still having the same content over multiple domains it is likely that this has always been their domain hosting method.

Back in the old days when BT cookies leaked like a sieve, and Phorm handled BT webwise enquiries on the sly (collecting PII from the leaky cookies on the way, my DPA statutory request pending)... and theplanet.com and fasthosts and godaddy.com were the hosts of choice (not listed in Safe Harbor agreement) for handling BT customer PII (sigh) - I asked BT if perhaps they could mirror the BT Webwise pages on something approximating to a UK/EU controlled location within their domain. They then produced a UK mirror and changed the enquiry handling to custhelp.com.

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

I had dealings with the Serious Fraud Office about 10 years ago...

Just stay out of trouble in future and you'll be okay.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-snooping.html

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:26 ----------

Still no update from Alex!

What's going on, Alex? Share some news!...

Well I tried to give the officer in charge another opportunity today to change his position but he has failed to do so and has given his permission for me to publish the audio fom the calls. It is quite shocking and I really don't want to ruin his career but since he is refusing to change his stance I have little choice.

I have forwarded the info to Chris Williams to see if he wants to do an article on it and I won't publish the details until i get a response from Chris (he is in a much better position to get the news out via an article).

I worked until 4am this morning so I was sleeping til shortly after lunch and have been battling my internet issues again since I got up. Which is why I haven't responded until now.

I will say one thing though, once the information is released the proverbial is going to hit the proverbial and I think it is likely to guarantee BT will be charged once the storm eases.

Alexander Hanff

[bluecar1]

http://www.out-law.com/page-9348

ryanair is cancelling all flights booked by screen scrapers, says quicker remedy than courts

peter

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by bluecar1

http://www.out-law.com/page-9348
edit to remove company name

peter

I see the article specifically mentions website copyright issues in connection with the successful court case so it may have relevance to the website copyright issues being discussed in connection with Webwise/Phorm.

"***** believes these ..... are nothing more than video or software pirates and we will continue to campaign across Europe for legislation to prohibit this unlawful ****** and this breach of copyright laws, which will prevent these profiteering middlemen from engaging in the mis-selling of *****’s *** and information," said *****'s Michael Cawley after the Vtours ruling.

and

*****'s Irish case against ***** says that that company breaks laws on trade marks and copyright and that its use of *****'s content to sell its services amounts to 'passing off'.

[AlexanderHanff]

Anyone got a direct link to the Home Office report on Phorm please, I appear to have misplaced it.

[Edit] Its ok I got it.

Alexander Hanff

[HamsterWheel]

I'm back..............

Come on Alex - give us a clue !

[BetBlowWhistler]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Anyone got a direct link to the Home Office report on Phorm please, I appear to have misplaced it.

[Edit] Its ok I got it.

Alexander Hanff

This one?

http://cryptome.org/ho-phorm.htm

edit: doh!

[AlexanderHanff]

I have given the police until 5pm to reconsider their statement.

Alexander Hanff

[HamsterWheel]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

I have given the police until 5pm to reconsider their statement.

Alexander Hanff

I see, does awfully remind me of the start of a Neville Chamberlain speech !