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

[gnilddif]

Originally Posted by Hank

LOL Mr Jones, very funny!! Absolutely possible given the limited info about the opt in/out page they have shared with their customers. ROFL!
Hank

Full Tiddles post is here:
http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/th...t=0&start=1440

gnilddif

---------- Post added at 11:09 ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 ----------

Originally Posted by Green Disease

I am going back over stuff that I remember reading on this thread and elsewhere. Has anyone contacted/had any replies back from Google, in regards to BT/Phorm using the Googlebot to determine whether they are allowed to profile sites? Whether they are thinking of doing what Phorm are doing?

I informed Google about a month ago and had no reply.
gnilddif

[Julian Smart]

This is slightly off-topic but is another appalling invasion of our privacy that makes Phorm almost seem mild in comparison and has drawn criticism from Simon Davies and other parties. It makes you wonder what on earth our leaders are smoking. In fact this one is so ludicrously bad I want to scream.

Apparently we will be subjected to round-the-clock Olympic broadcasts from giant big-brother-type screens in 60 towns and cities, and these screens will be made permanent:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle4393535.ece

No doubt advertising is going to play a big part in this and councils will get a big fat payoff.

How can anyone even begin to think that is a good idea that won't cause a storm of protest? I can't believe this isn't some kind of hallucination or bad joke.

[Wildie]

Originally Posted by Julian Smart

This is slightly off-topic but is another appalling invasion of our privacy that makes Phorm almost seem mild in comparison and has drawn criticism from Simon Davies and other parties. It makes you wonder what on earth our leaders are smoking. In fact this one is so ludicrously bad I want to scream.

Apparently we will be subjected to round-the-clock Olympic broadcasts from giant big-brother-type screens in 60 towns and cities, and these screens will be made permanent:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle4393535.ece

No doubt advertising is going to play a big part in this and councils will get a big fat payoff.

How can anyone even begin to think that is a good idea that won't cause a storm of protest? I can't believe this isn't some kind of hallucination or bad joke.

our town got one of them and guess what it not making money infact it is costing the tax payers.

on a side note anyone seen the new friends reunited ad, does it remind you of another company?

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by ilago

I like to see something that indicated any technological expertise in any government, my own included. At least in the US there seems to be some members with technology backgrounds. Our parliament here seems to be made up of ex civil servants and party officials, lawyers, accountants and farming interests. I don't think there is one scientist or engineer among them. Don't know about your lot.

This paper was linked on BadPhorm. It's a valuable insight into privacy and conceptions of privacy. In particular, it debunks the "nothing to hide" argument.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=998565

There is a link to download the PDF. Worth reading from end to end. There are several arguments that may help convince those that don't understand the implications of a loss of a right to privacy and what it really means.

Excellent read and very enlightening views on the meaning of privacy. I notice once again our good friend Bruce Schneier (Chief Security Technology Officer of BT) is well quoted from the Eternal Value of Privacy article on "wired.com" .

This BT/Phorm/Webwise/ (Government spying??) relationship must sit very heavy on his conscience. It seems to go against many beliefs he has written about.

Incidentally, I love Bruce's quote in that article in "wired.com" on countering the faulty premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong.

"Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide"

@R Jones - You should use that quote in some targeted BT correspondence to Emma

[phormwatch]

Morning, all. If anyone is interested, I've exported and sanitized a version of all my Google email alerts from April to July 2008 on the word 'Phorm'. I compiled all the emails into one big text file, which I have just uploaded to BadPhorm.

It is currently awaiting approval.

I thought this might come in handy for anyone looking for a news article on Phorm which appeared on the web in the past few months or is doing some other kind of research. If I had the time, I would measure (subjectively) the ratio of positive vs. negative articles, and how this changed over time.

Anyway, I'll post the URL shortly.

---------- Post added at 12:45 ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 ----------

A *very interesting* technological solution to ISP snooping:

http://code.google.com/p/obstcp/

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by Julian Smart

This is slightly off-topic but is another appalling invasion of our privacy that makes Phorm almost seem mild in comparison and has drawn criticism from Simon Davies and other parties. It makes you wonder what on earth our leaders are smoking. In fact this one is so ludicrously bad I want to scream.

...cut

No disrespect but I think you are possibly mixing up privacy (the right to peace and quiet) with privacy (I don't want all my date wire tapped). I don't think Phorm is mild by comparison as Phorm/WebWise affects everybody in the world who has a website with HTTP and certainly those on BT. These large screens only affect 0.00001% of the worlds population at a guess.

But saying that I do agree that it is a disgraceful invasion of our privacy and you are right to complain albeit slightly off-topic.

[Rchivist]

To any Plusnet customers here to learn about Phorm/Webwise. (And any other guests/lurkers)

If you are new to the whole subject, then there some helpful links here in my welcome post 11849.

One piece of advice - learn to read between the lines of any public statement or reassuring email from your ISP. It's more important what they DON'T say, than what they DO say.

ISP's can say a number of reassuring things that sound as if they are not using or going to use Phorm. They may even deny ever having a relationship with the company or ever having done trials - but experience tells us that they may be being economical with the truth, they may be lying and they may be simply trying to confuse you with semantics.

I don't know what Plusnet are up to. But push hard for clear explanations and denials that are UNambiguous, keep pushing, and don't be satisfied with the sort of platitudes or lies that have been used by ISP's such as BT - or the fence sitting that Virgin Media have indulged in.

Anyway welcome to the debate - great to have you onboard.

[phormwatch]

Google 'Phorm' Alerts compilation is here:

http://badphorm.co.uk/download.php?view.21

It's important for people to realise that this is not just a BT issue.

BT is just the main focus of many of the discussions because they are known to have have conducted secret trials of Webwise and have publicly announced - albeit under pressure - that they plan to use this system.

From an ISPs point of view this is potentially a big money maker and if it goes ahead all of the other ISPs will effectively have to join in or close down.

Even if they didn't it will still affect you because Phorm and BT will be reading and processing everything that you send or receive to any BT customers. BT have not said that they won't use this information to profile and target other ISPs customer but you should read this article from the BBC which reports that BT have already identified and targetted Tiscali customers and are likely to be sued for this behaviour.

If you wouldn't want your postman to open and read your letters then you need to join the fight to stop ISPs from being allowed to open and read your internet data.

[Florence]

To add more intrugue into this on another forum a person posting as unregistered picke dup on my spelling mistake ifnore instead of ignore all others had understood but he said it was confusing, I got curious since he said he followed a link from another site to the thread.

He seems to be from here so why are they interested in phorm?

@ R Jones I started a thread on ISPreview knowing we have a forum rep checking weekly and one member posted a link to a scanned copy of his letter. link to scanned letter

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by Peter N

It's important for people to realise that this is not just a BT issue.

BT is just the main focus of many of the discussions because they are known to have have conducted secret trials of Webwise and have publicly announced - albeit under pressure - that they plan to use this system.

From an ISPs point of view this is potentially a big money maker and if it goes ahead all of the other ISPs will effectively have to join in or close down.

Even if they didn't it will still affect you because Phorm and BT will be reading and processing everything that you send or receive to any BT customers. BT have not said that they won't use this information to profile and target other ISPs customer but you should read this article from the BBC which reports that BT have already identified and targetted Tiscali customers and are likely to be sued for this behaviour.

If you wouldn't want your postman to open and read your letters then you need to join the fight to stop ISPs from being allowed to open and read your internet data.

Personally I don't think it is a great money spinner if customers have the legal opt in choice as instructed by the ICO. That is why Phorm craftily had it originally (illegally) as opt out as the only choice as default. We have to ensure that if it ever does see light of day customers are fully aware of what happens if they opt in and the implications on their privacy. We should also ensure that they know that under the current model of operation their data is intercepted opt in or opt out so they can vote with their feet should they wish to do so.

[Julian Smart]

Originally Posted by warescouse

No disrespect but I think you are possibly mixing up privacy (the right to peace and quiet) with privacy (I don't want all my date wire tapped).

Well; like DPI, it's another intrusion, and there are other points of similarity with Phorm: unwanted advertising, the lack of an opt-in choice (unless you count shutting your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears, which has H&S implications), and no doubt there will be CCTV cameras attached to (or near) the screens to record any attempts to smash the wretched things. I was intrigued (and heartened) by Simon Davies/Privacy International's condemnation of them, Simon being an expert on public CCTV.

Apart from anything else, the sheer lack of taste is staggering, as is the arrogance in thinking we're all interested in sport.

Even with a 10% take up amongst the big three ISPs, you're still looking at 1,700,000 people. If Phorm pay the ISP's £1 per opted-in customer per week you are still looking at £88,400,000 per year.

That's a lot of money for basically allowing Phorm to do all of the work - they don't even have to pay for the equipment.

In order to reduce the ISP's income by the same amount of money you'd need to persuade over 5,000,000 customers to move to a none Phorm using ISP - assuming that there are any left.

[phormwatch]

Hi - this Anti-Phorm website I started a while back is unfinished:

http://business-openletter.blogspot.com/

If anyone would like to finish the text in full, I will publish it immediately. I could use some help, as I have many things on my table at the moment.

If we can get this done, we can publish it on business community websites, forums, and newsgroups.

Originally Posted by Julian Smart

Well; like DPI, it's another intrusion, and there are other points of similarity with Phorm: unwanted advertising, the lack of an opt-in choice (unless you count shutting your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears, which has H&S implications), and no doubt there will be CCTV cameras attached to (or near) the screens to record any attempts to smash the wretched things. I was intrigued (and heartened) by Simon Davies/Privacy International's condemnation of them, Simon being an expert on public CCTV.

Apart from anything else, the sheer lack of taste is staggering, as is the arrogance in thinking we're all interested in sport.

There's a few huge difference that make it irrelevent to this discussion - it's not targetted and it's nothing to do with Phorm, ISPs or internet privacy.

Phorm have tried many times to create this sort of false comparison - saying that Webwise is not as bad as something else. It never stands up to basic scrutiny and is only ever done to distract people. It usually happens just around the same time that there is a big fall in Phorm's share prices.