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

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

The Article in question has still "NOT" been corrected properly the last paragraph states the ICO cleared then of wrong doing (effectively the 2006-2007 trial)
This is not true ICO said "technical breach".
ICO doesn't have enough power to prosecute is the real reason!

Quite - the full (?) list of errors is here
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34...post11934.html

[rryles]

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

The Article in question has still "NOT" been corrected properly the last paragraph states the ICO cleared then of wrong doing (effectively the 2006-2007 trial)
This is not true ICO said "technical breach".
ICO doesn't have enough power to prosecute is the real reason!

Very true. At least it was a step in the right direction. I've corrected my post.

Originally Posted by JackSon

Perhaps they tried to upload the PIA earlier but the webserver couldn't handle that much bad news which caused it to crash.

If its that bad for them I think they will just conveniently forget they still have the interim version posted.

[Dephormation]

http://www.8020thinking.com

Anyone else getting no pages?

UPDATE: Looks like a networks/routing/ISP issue round here. 8020 site is up.

[rryles]

Originally Posted by JackSon

Perhaps they tried to upload the PIA earlier but the webserver couldn't handle that much bad news which caused it to crash.

I tried using the contact us page to ask phorm when the PIA would be published. However, when I clicked the submit button it did nothing. Perhaps something to do with me claiming to be a Mr First Last with telephone number 0555 555 5555.

---------- Post added at 14:34 ---------- Previous post was at 14:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Dephormation

http://www.8020thinking.com

Anyone else getting no pages?

Works fine for me.

[SelfProtection]

At least someone's turning up the heat!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...v=rss_business

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by warescouse

Strictly speaking (and someone correct me if I am wrong in any way) nothing is incompatible with the Phorm webwise system with a bit of tweaking. Insomuch that Phorm/Webwise rely on DPI (Deep packet inspection) to intercept the data stream. This means that apart from browser headers being different the data contained within can be intercepted just as easily.

Strictly speaking, from a non technical understanding of the previous 800 pages and other things I have read while Safari is compatible, Safari screams and shouts and warns the user of all the 307 redirects going on (after all they could be phishing attacks) and makes Phormed browsing such an unpleasant and intrusive experience that Phorm decided to not intercept flow with x-safari or whatever it is in the browser description.

[rryles]

BT AGM Questions posted:

http://www.btplc.com/Sharesandperfor.../Questions.htm

I wouldn't get too excited though. The only relevant bit is as follows:

Webwise

Several questions were raised concerning BT’s proposed use of the technology of Phorm Inc., a US based software company, particularly over the nature of early technical trials conducted. Several members of the Board responded to these questions. They explained that BT and other companies have announced an agreement with Phorm to offer a free internet service, called Webwise. This provides protection against fraudulent websites and offers more relevant advertising based on sites that customers visit and the topics that they search for. In a competitive market this is a good commercial opportunity for BT. Two technical trials have already taken place, before which BT took legal advice. Another trial is due to begin shortly and customers will be free to choose if they wish to participate in it.

I leave it as an excercise for the reader to spot all of the errors and omissions in that bit of spin.

[NewsreadeR]

Originally Posted by SelfProtection

At least someone's turning up the heat!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...v=rss_business

NebuAd can, but does not, monitor e-mail, instant messages or Internet phone calls, a spokeswoman said.

That's good of them isn't it. So if Phorm has similar technology, they could also. Of course we all know that they wouldn't don't we, after all, that would just not be British to do so.

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

Strictly speaking, from a non technical understanding of the previous 800 pages and other things I have read while Safari is compatible, Safari screams and shouts and warns the user of all the 307 redirects going on (after all they could be phishing attacks) and makes Phormed browsing such an unpleasant and intrusive experience that Phorm decided to not intercept flow with x-safari or whatever it is in the browser description.

Something I haven't seen mentioned is how would in be possible to uniquely identify an individual browser/user without a cookie on that system especially also if the user normally surfs without scripting enabled!

Even when sharing a UID with phorm, could the system identify a Single Browser/Session or only the Account Holders UID?

[tarka]

Originally Posted by rryles

BT AGM Questions posted:

http://www.btplc.com/Sharesandperfor.../Questions.htm

I wouldn't get too excited though. The only relevant bit is as follows:

Webwise

Several questions were raised concerning BT’s proposed use of the technology of Phorm Inc., a US based software company, particularly over the nature of early technical trials conducted. Several members of the Board responded to these questions. They explained that BT and other companies have announced an agreement with Phorm to offer a free internet service, called Webwise. This provides protection against fraudulent websites and offers more relevant advertising based on sites that customers visit and the topics that they search for. In a competitive market this is a good commercial opportunity for BT. Two technical trials have already taken place, before which BT took legal advice. Another trial is due to begin shortly and customers will be free to choose if they wish to participate in it.

I leave it as an excercise for the reader to spot all of the errors and omissions in that bit of spin.

I think someone needs to rewrite their hymsheet! Since they stopped "engaging" the public you very much get the feeling they are just putting their fingers in their ears and wishing it would all just go away!

Originally Posted by rryles

BT AGM Questions posted:

http://www.btplc.com/Sharesandperfor.../Questions.htm

I wouldn't get too excited though. The only relevant bit is as follows:

Webwise

Several questions were raised concerning BT’s proposed use of the technology of Phorm Inc., a US based software company, particularly over the nature of early technical trials conducted. Several members of the Board responded to these questions. They explained that BT and other companies have announced an agreement with Phorm to offer a free internet service, called Webwise. This provides protection against fraudulent websites and offers more relevant advertising based on sites that customers visit and the topics that they search for. In a competitive market this is a good commercial opportunity for BT. Two technical trials have already taken place, before which BT took legal advice. Another trial is due to begin shortly and customers will be free to choose if they wish to participate in it.

I leave it as an excercise for the reader to spot all of the errors and omissions in that bit of spin.

Blatant omission, well at least it will be obvious to all newly aware shareholders. Dephormed comments to follow no doubt ....

Reference Safari screaming 307 re-directs, could Firefox be modified to perform the same?, just wondering if the developers would appreciate a heads up for such (hopefully not) future technologies this feature could be popular for them also.

[phormwatch]

If there are any BT shareholders who are reading this and don't feel the AGM summary regarding Webwise is accurate or complete, feel free to send in feedback:

'We welcome feedback on the AGM and live webcast. Please email btgroup@bt.com and insert 'AGM feedback' in the subject line.'

---------- Post added at 15:46 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ----------

By the way, if anyone here hasn't already done so, please notify the Anti-Phishing WorkGroup:

http://www.antiphishing.org/index.html

...which is linked to from the Phorm website, and tell them that you think it is inappropriate for an unethical spyware company to be a sponsor of the APWG. (http://www.antiphishing.org/sponsors.html)

Email one of the following email addresses:

Press inquiries:

pressrequest@antiphishing.org

Other general questions:

info@antiphishing.org

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by rryles

Webwise

Several questions were raised concerning BT’s proposed use of the technology of Phorm Inc., a US based software company, particularly over the nature of early technical trials conducted. Several members of the Board responded to these questions. They explained that BT and other companies have announced an agreement with Phorm to offer a free internet service, called Webwise. This provides protection against fraudulent websites and offers more relevant advertising based on sites that customers visit and the topics that they search for. In a competitive market this is a good commercial opportunity for BT. Two technical trials have already taken place, before which BT took legal advice. Another trial is due to begin shortly and customers will be free to choose if they wish to participate in it.

I leave it as an excercise for the reader to spot all of the errors and omissions in that bit of spin.

Questions were raised, few answers received, particulary the question asking if Gavin Patterson authorised the trials.

In a competitive market, shooting both of your own feet off with your own shotgun is suicidal, not sound business planning, and not a good commercial opportunity to exploit.

For the truth about BT and Webwise visit the Inphormationdesk.

For the full story about the questions; see here.

---------- Post added at 16:12 ---------- Previous post was at 16:02 ----------

Mr Ryles, you missed this one

Board salaries

One shareholder expressed the view that Ian Livingston’s remuneration package was too high and that the performance criteria for the Board were too low. Maarten van den Bergh, as Chairman of the Remuneration Committee, explained that the remuneration policy is rigorously reviewed using external consultants. That policy is to set stretching targets and reward success accordingly. This year BT is increasingly linking remuneration to the creation of long term shareholder value by increasing the proportion of pay received in incentive shares, where any payout requires sustained long term shareholder return performance. It is the most performance-related package for a BT chief executive, where 76% of Ian’s remuneration is variable and directly related to BT’s performance.

[rryles]

Interesting article - and there is a photo of the protest

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articl...ing-trials.htm

edit:

That's interesting as in it has some good and some not-so good aspects. I quite like this bit:

"Protesters said BT had conducted at least two secret trials, in 2006 and 2007, that involved up to 350,000 customers, a figure BT did not deny at the AGM"