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

[davews]

As I posted on btbroadband.support Mark W is well aware of the problems at the BT Beta forums and has passed the problem on to their technical people. I get intermittent server problems there and failure to load the CSS style sheets but it does work, you just have to keep trying a few times... after all I managed to post on it!

---------- Post added at 15:25 ---------- Previous post was at 15:19 ----------

This has been posted this afternoon on the BadPhorm forum:

"I am on the phone to TalkTalk customer services and just had it confirmed that they HAVE implemented Webwise."

see http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi...topic.php?5947
(posting at 1.49pm)

Not sure if we should believe this or what.... any TalkTalk people on here?

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by davews

As I posted on btbroadband.support Mark W is well aware of the problems at the BT Beta forums and has passed the problem on to their technical people. I get intermittent server problems there and failure to load the CSS style sheets but it does work, you just have to keep trying a few times... after all I managed to post on it!

---------- Post added at 15:25 ---------- Previous post was at 15:19 ----------

This has been posted this afternoon on the BadPhorm forum:

"I am on the phone to TalkTalk customer services and just had it confirmed that they HAVE implemented Webwise."

see http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi...topic.php?5947
(posting at 1.49pm)

Not sure if we should believe this or what.... any TalkTalk people on here?

I doubt that very much. I suspect it is a case of the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. If it had been deployed it would have been reported either on the BBC, the Guardian or El Reg.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 15:34 ---------- Previous post was at 15:32 ----------

There should be an article posted later today on a popular news site regarding my dissertation. I will post the link once I have it.

Alexander Hanff

[Wildie]

There is posts missing again from the bt webwise thread

---------- Post added at 16:10 ---------- Previous post was at 16:03 ----------

getting ad`s popping up here they getting past my blockers.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Wildie

There is posts missing again from the bt webwise thread

---------- Post added at 16:10 ---------- Previous post was at 16:03 ----------

getting ad`s popping up here they getting past my blockers.

Visit a load of ISPs and www.ispreview.co.uk then see if the adverts turn into relevent adverts for ISPs or you start to get special offers for BT

post a few tracerts also to see if they get bounced around use BBC.co.uk

[Wildie]

just tried to send feedback via the feedback clickly at the bottom of the ad (btw was a full ad like a tv not your still) and cos I put age under 16, they refused to take the feedback due to the age, btw lied about me age to test it, so it`s ok for them to spam the ad too a minor but can`t take feed back from one, think they need to stop now.

---------- Post added at 16:44 ---------- Previous post was at 16:34 ----------

Tracing route to www.l.google.com [66.249.93.104]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 32 ms 100 ms 99 ms api.home [192.168.1.254]
2 27 ms 23 ms 25 ms esr5.sheffield3.broadband.bt.net [217.

3 25 ms 25 ms 25 ms 217.47.73.13
4 26 ms 24 ms 25 ms 217.41.176.17
5 96 ms 207 ms 202 ms 217.41.176.66
6 25 ms 25 ms 24 ms 217.41.176.78
7 25 ms 25 ms 24 ms 217.41.176.46
8 26 ms 25 ms 25 ms 217.47.19.114
9 25 ms 24 ms 26 ms core1-pos4-1.sheffield.ukcore.bt.net [
.181]
10 26 ms 31 ms 30 ms core1-pos8-0.birmingham.ukcore.bt.net
146]
11 33 ms 32 ms 32 ms core3-pos0-8-0-4.ealing.ukcore.bt.net
.253]
12 31 ms 31 ms 31 ms core1-pos10-0-0.redbus.ukcore.bt.net [
254]
13 33 ms 33 ms 33 ms 195.99.125.110
14 41 ms 43 ms 74 ms 72.14.232.149
15 76 ms 43 ms 42 ms 72.14.233.79
16 43 ms 50 ms 51 ms 216.239.47.229
17 43 ms 42 ms * 216.239.47.229
18 42 ms 42 ms 42 ms ug-in-f104.google.com [66.249.93.104]

Trace complete.

Tracing route to www.bbc.net.uk [212.58.253.67]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 54 ms 99 ms 99 ms api.home [192.168.1.254]
2 25 ms 25 ms 26 ms esr5.sheffield3.broadband.bt.net [217.47.73.144]

3 25 ms 26 ms 27 ms 217.47.73.13
4 27 ms 27 ms 25 ms 217.41.176.17
5 26 ms 25 ms 26 ms 217.41.176.66
6 26 ms 24 ms 26 ms 217.41.176.78
7 25 ms 24 ms 25 ms 217.41.176.54
8 27 ms 25 ms 26 ms 217.47.73.107
9 30 ms 29 ms 25 ms 217.32.171.249
10 28 ms 26 ms 27 ms core1-pos15-0.manchester.ukcore.bt.net [62.6.201
.249]
11 32 ms 33 ms 34 ms core1-pos0-9-0-0.ealing.ukcore.bt.net [194.74.65
.121]
12 32 ms 30 ms 31 ms core1-pos5-0-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net [194.74.6
5.122]
13 30 ms 32 ms 33 ms 194.74.65.42
14 32 ms 32 ms 34 ms 212.58.238.129
15 33 ms 33 ms 31 ms te12-1.hsw0.cwwtf.bbc.co.uk [212.58.239.222]
16 32 ms 33 ms 32 ms www-vip.cwwtf.bbc.co.uk [212.58.253.67]

Trace complete.

[Rchivist]

Chasing up some BT Webwise javascript mentioned over on BadPhorm
http://www.webwise.bt.com/includes/c...ise/webwise.js

It seems that the cookies DO contain an ISP identifier.

I then had a look at the video on Webwise.com - it carries the same linking graphic as in the js file above

Interestingly - that vidoe only contains logos from BT and TalkTalk like the rest of the Webwise.com site.

If that is the video that BT are planning to show us to inform us about Webwise then it leaves a lot to be desired in terms of being a comprehensive description of Webwise, to comply with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

[Florence]

Strange you are BT yet I can arrive at those destination in less hops than you I get 12 and 13 hops on an entanet network.


RAS server is the authentication server and I really don't know why you have to go twice to it which one tracert earlier showed but yours hasn't..

217.47.73.13
inetnum: 217.47.30.0 - 217.47.153.255
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: RAS Boxes
country: GB
-------------------------
217.41.176.17
inetnum: 217.41.168.0 - 217.41.176.255
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
-------------------------
217.41.176.66
inetnum: 217.41.168.0 - 217.41.176.255
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
-----------------------
217.41.176.78
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
------------------------
217.41.176.46
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
------------------------
217.47.19.114
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB

[popper]

http://www.ghacks.net/2008/05/20/antiphorm-software/

[wecpc]

Originally Posted by Florence

Strange you are BT yet I can arrive at those destination in less hops than you I get 12 and 13 hops on an entanet network.


RAS server is the authentication server and I really don't know why you have to go twice to it which one tracert earlier showed but yours hasn't..

217.47.73.13
inetnum: 217.47.30.0 - 217.47.153.255
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: RAS Boxes
country: GB
-------------------------
217.41.176.17
inetnum: 217.41.168.0 - 217.41.176.255
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
-------------------------
217.41.176.66
inetnum: 217.41.168.0 - 217.41.176.255
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
-----------------------
217.41.176.78
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
------------------------
217.41.176.46
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB
------------------------
217.47.19.114
netname: BT-MIDBAND
descr: BT-MIDBAND
country: GB

I just tested mine out of curiosity on my O2 (non LLU) account using the using the same destinations and I got 11 & 8 respectively.

Colin

[JackSon]

Originally Posted by popper

http://www.ghacks.net/2008/05/20/antiphorm-software/

Glad you've already commented on the innacuracies there, Popper. Is never pleasing when someone is making up statements and also plucking revenue figures out of their rear end. Lies do not help a cause.

[Wildie]

so any ideas why i am bouncing around inside bt like

[SimonHickling]

I've had some new replies from BT - paraphrasing, here goes :

It's use of the robots.txt is to determine whether or not the page should be deemed to be in the "public domain"

it is assumed that the page is available to Webwise as long as the requester of the page consents, and we are not informed otherwise by the Website.

But then it explains that it doesn't crawl like a bot, but uses the information in robots.txt to decide whether or not the page contents should be analyzed.

The system uses the rules set out in the robots.txt file which apply to the Googlebot user-agent.

It then goes on to explain that it is the responsibility of the broadband subscriber to explain to casual users of their systems (family, friends, etc) that Webwise is turned on - they liken it to security settings.

All in all with another couple of bits they have really made me quite angry again.

I am trying to see how robots.txt can stop access to password protected pages, but I didn't ask that and I don't have a reference to a quote about that - has anyone got one knocking around?

[mark777]

Originally Posted by SimonHickling

It then goes on to explain that it is the responsibility of the broadband subscriber to explain to casual users of their systems (family, friends, etc) that Webwise is turned on - they liken it to security settings.

I bet the "come and join us" screen won't carry that health warning.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Wildie

so any ideas why i am bouncing around inside bt like

Well if you have some stale sessions it can happen have you tried switching off router for an 30mins then reconnecting to clear any stale sessions other wise it is something BT are doing bouncing ppl around additional servers so when webwise goes live you are already used to extra hops to the destination.

[Rchivist]

Finally got a reply from BT about my blocked emails - blocked by the spam filters - they say they have "no idea" why they were blocked.

The reply contained a denial that trials were starting on 26th May so I have pointed out the press release that stated that they were starting within 28 days of 29th April.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communicatio...9408146,00.htm

It was also pointed out to me that not everyone has my "voracious appetite for detail" - which I found quite amusing. I suppose they are rather relying on that, to sneak Webwise past a snoozing public? Certainly there appear to be plenty of people within the decision making process at BT with a very poor grasp of detail.

I've pointed out that Phorm seem to have a poor eye for detail too - now that they have revised their advice to Richard Clayton about how the system works.

I'd post this on BT Beta forums but they are still playing up. Must be a server with a poor appetite for detail.

---------- Post added at 19:14 ---------- Previous post was at 19:11 ----------

Originally Posted by SimonHickling

I've had some new replies from BT - paraphrasing, here goes :

It's use of the robots.txt is to determine whether or not the page should be deemed to be in the "public domain"

But then it explains that it doesn't crawl like a bot, but uses the information in robots.txt to decide whether or not the page contents should be analyzed.

It then goes on to explain that it is the responsibility of the broadband subscriber to explain to casual users of their systems (family, friends, etc) that Webwise is turned on - they liken it to security settings.

All in all with another couple of bits they have really made me quite angry again.

I am trying to see how robots.txt can stop access to password protected pages, but I didn't ask that and I don't have a reference to a quote about that - has anyone got one knocking around?

I have no explanation of HOW BT Retail claim to do this, but I do know that they claim they won't be going past password logins. Haven't time to look it up but you may find it on the Webwise FAQ.

It's when you ask "HOW" that they clam up. And quite often it means that when you really look at what they have said, it doesn't quite say what they hope you think it said. They are very good at being vague.