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

[wecpc]

I see that the Beta.BT forum is down yet again, maybe it has got a touch of PHORMITIS.

Colin

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by xlmp

Even though i live in England and have a GB passport i am American at heart as i lived in Santa Cruz, California for the great majority of my life so far. Santa Cruz is by far the most liberal of counties in the union apart from San Fransisco. Not that smoking marijuana has anything to do with Phorm but i helped canvass for prop 215 when it first came out so this will give you an idea of my political stance on ones right to privacy, hopefully.

Hello!

[madslug]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

more coming... or there would be if I could find the EoN transcripts... he corrects Alistair at one point and says words to the effect, "my information is 160,000", I'll see if I can find it in the audio (unless someone can direct me to a transcript).

Judging by the length of text, this quote comes from around 1h15m to 1h20m

AH> Given the possibility that BT involved a possible 130,000 customers, this is based on the reports we have had in the press, in the trails, do you believe the gravity of this issue requires direct government action as opposed to the local police force?

EoN> Local police inforcement for this issue would be inappropriate in any event. It is a deeply complex issue technologically and the lack of ability ... would not be able to handle it. So you get back to the way in which a nation, the TCU emasculated within Soca and that sort of thing - give us part of the question again, I have forgotten.

AH> Given the possibility of the quantity ...

EoN> Yes, it is extremely serious in my view and I dispair that ... that the authorities are ...

AH> Passing the buck?

EoN> It is not only passing the buck ... they are being dismissive of it. Sure, it is a bit like a hot potato. So the Home Office passes it to the ICO. The ICO passes it to Socca so round and round the mulberry bush we go. So in that sense there is a degree of passing the buck. But I think there is a more serious issue: it is that presumption that appears to exist that dispite affecting and reports of 130,000. I have heard as many as 160,000. And not all of them will be as disgruntled as each other but nevertheless a fair proportion of them will and this is potentially a criminal offence. And the authorities, whoever it may be, to treat it so dismissively. It is the dismissiveness that I find so objectionable.

[Portly_Giraffe]

Originally Posted by Hank

Where do I find your "Tube Leaflet" Phormwatch?

I have a trip to make next week and may be in the general vacinity

Hank

You can certainly use the Phormwatch special edition. Alternatively I've put a new set up on Inphormationdesk, tidying up the text and offering it in different formats:

Black for printing 2-up landscape 2-sided on A4 paper and then guillotining into two A5 flyers (probably the most useful format):
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_A5.pdf

Black for printing 2-sided on A5 paper:
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_A5.pdf

Original navy A4 with optional House of Commons and BT addresses on the back:
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer.pdf

Special edition for MPs, navy A4 :
http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_MP.pdf

Feel free to use - also please let me have any corrections and suggestions, and let me know if any other points of contact should be listed.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Pete-

Yo! Stop! It's cool, man. The quotes about what they were going to do can't be used, since they've since stated that the trial was in fact much smaller than originally intended. I have used the Register quote. That'll do fine. Thanks!

Well, to finish off, from Alex's interview with EoN (he doesn't say where the information came from, but clearly it well positioned to receive accurate information from Government);

EoN: The first part of the question again? I've forgotten.
AH: Given the possibility of the quantity of the people involved in the trials?
EoN: Yes yes the gravity of it. Erm, it is extreemely serious in my view, erm, and I despair that, that erm, the authorities are
AH: Passing the buck?
EoN: Well, its not only passing the buck, erm, they're being dismissive of it, erm sure its a bit like a hot potato so the Home Office passes it to the ICO, the ICO passes it to SOCA and round and round the mulberry bush we go. So in that sense there is a degree of passing the buck but I think there's a more serious issue. It is that the presumption that appears to exist that, erm, despite affecting according to press reports 130,000. I've heard as many as 160,000. Not all of them will be as disgruntled as each other, but never the less a fair proportion of them will and this is potentially a criminal offence. Erm, erm, and for the authorities (whomever it may be) to treat it so dismissively, is the dismissiveness I find so objectionable.

Edit; Madslug beat me to it! (thanks!)

[Digbert]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Do we have a definite number for the number of people affected or the number of page interceptions which occured during the 2007 covert trials? I need a counterfactual quote to:

"BT can confirm that we conducted a very small scale technical test of a prototype advertising platform on one exchange in June 2007. The test was specifically conducted to evaluate the functional and technical performance of the platform. Absolutely no personally identifiable information was processed, stored or disclosed during this trial. As with all Service Providers, it is important for BT to ensure that, before any potential new technologies are employed, they are robust and fit for purpose."
- Adam Liversage, Chief Press Officer of BT

There's always this quote from the Phorm/121Media Annual Report for 2006.

"Chief Executive Officer's Report

The Company has built on its existing PageSense platform to create a new server-based architecture called ProxySense. In Q4 of 2006, we conducted a live user trial of PageSense with a UK ISP, and we are about to start a larger trial of ProxySense with a test base of several hundred thousand users"

http://www.phorm.com/reports/Annual_Report_2006.pdf

[Florence]

Originally Posted by wecpc

I see that the Beta.BT forum is down yet again, maybe it has got a touch of PHORMITIS.

Colin

Not down seems to have vanished.. The link in Favs that used to take me to the forums now brings up.

Not Found
The requested object does not exist on this server. The link you followed is either outdated, inaccurate, or the server has been instructed not to let you have it.

[wecpc]

Originally Posted by Florence

Not down seems to have vanished.. The link in Favs that used to take me to the forums now brings up.

I was getting nothing at all but now that's the message I get in Firefox 3.0, but in IE7 I get a 404 error.

Colin

[phormwatch]

Bwahaha. Maybe they thought the forum was getting out of control, so they took it down.

[Dephormation]

On a related note. The PSInet server, seemingly hosted in a block assigned to One Voice Technologies, is still alive and kicking out BT Webwise pages;



Obviously, no one told it that BT Webwise was supposed to be hosted in the UK. Actually, supposed to be hosted inside BT rather than Gyron Internet, if truth be told.

Put the IP and hostname into your hosts file to confirm. Beware, any interaction with webwise.bt.com is not handled by BT, and if you make the above changes to your host file, the site you visit will be served from the USA (outside UK/EU data protection laws). Clear any BT.com cookies beforehand.

Whois
OrgName: Performance Systems International Inc.
OrgID: PSI
Address: 1015 31st St NW
City: Washington
StateProv: DC
PostalCode: 20007
Country: US

[gnilddif]

Originally Posted by wecpc

I see that the Beta.BT forum is down yet again, maybe it has got a touch of PHORMITIS.

Colin

Down *again*? It's never done this before has it? It's been abnormally slow for the last few days, and it's interesting that the Mods didn't respond to a number of posts about that. But now the whole thing is dead.
gnilddif

[Florence]

maybe the kitchen got to hot for BT to handle after all the truth is coming out the onger it goes on the more we seem to find out..

[gnilddif]

Originally Posted by Florence

maybe the kitchen got to hot for BT to handle after all the truth is coming out the onger it goes on the more we seem to find out..

I can't believe they would sacrifice such a powerful and valuable wide-ranging customer resource as that, when they know very well that the phorm/Webwise faeces will stick on them publicly anyway. Maybe they were getting worried that increasing numbers of BT customers were getting Webwise-wise through those forums, and, faced with the Intesticular Page, if it ever appears, would have doubts and click No Thanks.
There certainly was an increasingly significant quantity of intensely anti-BT sentiment expressed on many threads in several topic areas within the forums, and maybe they thought that this was the only way to get rid of it, rather than censor it piece by piece.
Whatever the reason - a desperate effort at censorship or a massive hardware/software failure - it doesn't look good for BT, who claim that Phorm/Webwise is fit for purpose in their hands. If they can't keep the hardware/software that runs the forums running smoothly, then how can they be trusted to maintain scrupulously and securely the Phorm-provided servers and software?

gnilddif

[madslug]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

On a related note. The PSInet server, seemingly hosted in a block assigned to One Voice Technologies, is still alive and kicking out BT Webwise pages;

When I visit the IP address, I am given a 301 redirect to the URL http://www.phorm.com/ - content length 309

The servers are giving me different times on their clocks, so my guess is that the actual site is hosted on the 2nd server, and in UK as per IP address.

www.phorm.com and webwise.bt.com are giving me clock times which suggest they are on the same server.

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by wecpc

I see that the Beta.BT forum is down yet again, maybe it has got a touch of PHORMITIS.

Colin

The BT Beta forums have been creaking for some time, and fall over every few days now. Yesterday they were routinely taking 45-60 seconds to respond to any action by users, logged in or not logged in. I'd incline towards the cock-up rather than the conspiracy theory - although I'm sure the BT network must be getting more confusing by the day with all the fiddling they are doing putting in their spykit, and re-routing things all over the place.

They have spoken of replacing the Beta forums with the same software used on the Business platform forums - but like the Webwise trials - no clear idea when.

No customer announcements about the failed forums - as usual. There is this, although I can't see how that would affect the bt.com end of things, and anyway it's well after 4.00am
Planned Outages:
We will be carrying out planned works on the BT Yahoo! Broadband platform from 02:00 to 04:00 on Tuesday 5th August. This is to perform essential network maintenance. During this time, customers may be unable to access the Buy to Click for up to 2 hours. We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.

Anyway - why bother telling customers? What do they matter? As long as they keep paying their direct debits, what else matters? BT stopped talking to or listening to their customers a long time ago.