With regard to your article:-

Privacy advocates, Bazalgette reckons, "do not acknowledge the importance of commerce."

But we do understand the overall effect this will have on commerce that it why we have been looking at it from both the Web User & the Website Perspective, if the WWW does not operate coherently with proper recognized rules then both the Users & the Websites will suffer!

http://www.fipr.org/press/081125phorm.html

Panic setting in ?
BT scramble to sanitise their forums byremoving any trace of customer questions and complaints about phorm/webwise

Good show chaps, tooo late all the relevant threads will have been copied and stored ready to bite your arses with.
This will all come back to haunt you, and so it should.
Morons

geegie

BT have just effectively removed all proper possibilities of discussions about BT Phorm/Webwise by removing the only thread that was allowed on either the Business Forum or the Support Forum.

Way to go BT "Censorship & Anti Democracy" at it's absolute best!

http://www.beta.bt.com/bta/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=7395&tstart=0

Jacqui Smith's Orwellian plans to permanently store the whole population's electronic communications, including browsing history, in a huge central database

It definitely looks like these current plans are in direct conflict with this UN Charter designed to prevent Governments or other Powerful bodies from creating the same sort of outrages which led to WWII doesn't it!

Both Article(s) 12 & 30!

http://beta.bt.com/bta/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=45940#45940

BT don't even seem to be able to keep this Webwise Trial inside their Own Network, so how many BT Telephone/Broadband connections are actually hooked up to this Profiling System?

http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,70440.0.html

Posted on Nodpi site by forum member today

'Notice of new terms and conditions from BT which I have received this morning:

"9. Unless we have made a change to the prices or terms and conditions that is to your material disadvantage or paragraphs 10 and 11 of the BT Total Broadband service terms apply you must pay a charge for ending BT Total Broadband within the minimum period by way of compensation to us. This charge will be equal to the total of the monthly rental charges left in the minimum period. This charge will not be subject to VAT.

10. We may also charge you up to £45 for the home hub and £150 for the mobile phone(s) we have provided to you as part of the service."

BT attempting to stem flow of customers leaving because of PHORM by threatening them with charges that breach Unfair terms and conditions regulations regarding FAIR contracts. No party can alter the terms of a contract without consulting the other party. If they do it is not enforceable. Leave and tell them see you in court. You will be there on your own, because they won't be there because they know they will lose.

The covert trials by BT and Phorm were not the only mistake they have made.

BT repeatedly lied about the trials afterwards.

Phorm has hired an army of PR goons to spread misinformation around the net:

Phorm's Wikipedia entry was sanitized by the PR goons.

Phorm conducted a supposed 'open discussion' meeting in London. The public were told that we need not film it, as Phorm would hire professionals to film it and later releas it to the public. Guess what happened? Phorm got slammed in the debate, and the video was never released on the net.

BT, Phorm and Phorm's PR goons repeatedly make misleading or simply wrong statements about the way Phorm operates. 'Opting out' of Phorm does not mean your traffic is not intercepted as claimed. Your traffic is still intercepted, but you are not served ads.

BT and Phorm claim that they have evidence to show that consumers want this 'service', yet they don't release the data showing this is the case. Considering the furious backlash against BT and Phorm, I highly doubt that consumers are begging for their private communications to be intercepted in order to receive better junkmail.

BT presents Phorm's adware technology as primarily 'anti-phishing' technology, and a 'free service'. Wow! How could any consumer be against that? What they don't do is tell consumers that most browsers already have anti-phishing mechanisms built in, or more importantly, that turning on this 'service' means that all their traffic is intercepted and analized to build up a profile on them.

...and so on, and so forth. I think the point has been made. BT and Phorm have shown themselves to be mendacious and untrustworthy in the extreme - and you're asking consumers to trust BT and Phorm to do exaclty what they say they're going to do, nothing more, nothing less? Why on earth should consumers believe a word either BT or Phorm have to say about anything?

@Not in my interest

Browser hijacking
Cookie Forgery
Illegal Interception of WWW Traffic intended for another Party!

Is it necessary to go on, if this had been done by anyone but a Powerful Company with the Ear of Government intent on a Surveillance Database , the Police would have swooped on them before they could get started!

If any Website openly does this on the WWW it is likely at least to be shutdown & then most probably Prosecuted for the Data Stolen & other Legal Issues.

Subversion of the WWW protocols in order to serve ads "which are often not relevant" is a Minefield; when you start breaking the law for Commercial reasons where does it stop!

I'll answer my Own Question in this case "IT IS BETTER TO NOT EVEN TO START TO THINK OF BREAKING THE LAW!"

Slight lie - I work for ISP though not one of the three.

I think that the main problem here is that all of the questions repeatedly asked on many of these comments pages and the forums have been answered many times in other places - If research is done (and I don't pretend that this is easy- I have been following since the early days) you can find most of the answers.

The system, if properly regulated, can work without destroying privacy - many people seem to be 'au fait' with Google as it is seen as a choice. This system must now also be a choice- accepted that at the moment the choice is a complicated one to avoid - but the tiny size of the Trial (operative word here folks) really discounts this to a larger extent. If you don't like you can move not moan.

The upshot of this technology is that it may well be one of a narrowing set of options that allow us to improve on what I'm sure everyone agrees is a decrepit internet infrastructure for such a small island first world country.
If we continue to moan about prices vs. bandwidth and illogically deny the ISPs the chance to generate the revenue needed to upgrade their network then we are in danger of losing large swathes of the country to internet loss in the aftermath of provider collaspe.

It may not be everyones cup of tea but in this 'credit crunch' era there are many people who would not be adverse to having discount offers and cheaper alternative offered to them at opportune moments - let the service provide to them and opt out yourself if you object. Don't fall subject to the extremists niave view that any company could feasibly work a business model that 'stole peoples data regardless of choice' in such a privacy concious world - they really would have been invetigated by the CoL PD.

Behavioural targeting is something of a holy grail for advertisers - It means that they waste less money on campaigns and this is why it can generate vastly higher revenues- This doesn't aid internet users but it could be forced to filter back as reduced pricing/higher download limits/larger bandwidth. It will be pushed for by the ad industry and they WILL find a way to profile people somehow- would it not be better that we are aware and have some influence upon it or shall we wait until they do deals with the Gov't and sneak their way into the 'covert' boxes everyone pretends to not know/care about?
At least this company was marginally more public about their system than their brothers in the US -Nebuad/frontporch were running commercial (not technical) trials without notifying anyone - Phorms biggest mistake was running their tech trials without notification.

I think the main reason for such pro-phorm aggression is the anger at inaccuracies presented over and over again and the demand that every question be answered in its place - there are 18,000 people asking questions and one small tech company answering - come on bloggers I know that you don't think that you are the centre of the internet - so don't act the child! Search and ask don't demand - you might find some sympathy.

This only covers a small section of the many question out there and I'd like to answer more but I only know some of these answers (right friends right places) I don't personally think that this system itself is thing to worry about - I think that we should create a set of standards and make them abide by them - allow but restrict - and then we can control any further joiners to this gang without fear of the dreaded "creep".

Ps. on another note I'm not sure that the argument stretches to periphery/unrelated issues - the release of Email addies from the BT forum really isn't a valid point in this arena - but I'm sure there are upset types who'll shout back.

for someone who doesn't care Noddy seems to keep cropping up spouting the same "tin hat" nonsense but never has a reply to questions about the workings of Phorm. Just answer the questions. Anybody from Phorm or BT anybody.
If you are so sure it's squeaky clean why the secret trials?
Why all the avoidance and meaningless repetition of the Phorm PR handbook?
Why is talking about Webwise a dirty word on BT forums?
Where is all this customer research saying we just LOVE Phorm ?
Why wont the BERR show us a copy of the letter to the ICO but will "discuss the line we took" with BT?*

* (source a FOI request to BERR)

I agree with "Why So Hostile", it would be helpful if the pro-Phormers posting here actually made a case as to why anyone would want it rather than just caricaturing their opponents.

@"Not logged In" 7:20 The fact you post a link to the Bazalgette article shows you haven't even bothered to read my original post, which was about that very article!

Why is there so much open hostility from the pro-phorm minority?


Are they possibly scared that their investments in this company and it's as yet, unproven technology, are now next to worthless because they backed a technology that is at best, intrusive and unwanted, and at worst illegal?


There have been many clear arguments against the technology, including some from very respected sources, yet there have been no actual arguments put forward by the pro-phorm lobby to say why the technology is so good.
They seem to be great at mud slinging and avoiding issues, they try to drag people down, but fail to make a case of their own.


The facts seem simple, phorm under their previous guise of 121Media were responsible for distributing malware, they have a history of deceptive behaviour.
This deception continued with the stealth trials of their new ISP based systems when they performed trials with British Telecom on large numbers of customers without obtaining consent from those customers, and then they and BT both lied when asked repeatedly if such trial had or were taking place.


It is claimed by Phorm and their ISP partners that they have market research that shows people want their communications intercepting and profiling to receive better adverts, yet to date, neither phorm or their partners have been willing to reveal the actual research or it's results to the public.


Phorm and their ISP partners at first tried to deploy this technology to be invisible to end users, they ran tests of it against users connections without consent, they wanted to run the system so that the only way to opt-out was not to be served the adverts, but still pass through the profilers.
They still intercept all communications a phormed user makes with any website that isn't https and profile that data, without consent of the owner of those sites, and use that sites copyrighted material to serve adverts to users for competitors who sign up to their OIX scheme.
All we ever hear from Phorm is empty promises and PR talk, all we hear from their supporters are insults towards those oppose the use of what is essentially spyware based on the ISP side of the connection.
I would say they either need to put up or shut up.


Show us the results of the genuine market research that they claim shows this is wanted.
Stop throwing mud and give some positive arguments FOR the technology if you can.


Their only thing close to a positive argument so far have been "it's no worst than gmail" or "well google profile users" but these arguments fail on one major point; Google doesn't sit between a user and the internet profiling everything the customer looks at, google and their gmail service can properly be described as optional, people have a choice whether to use the service or not, with phorms system, it is there all the time, spying on a users every move.


Hugo Drayton described them (Phorm) as a search engine for people, Virasb Vahidi admitted that when a users connection has been phormed that "we can see everything they do."
Phorm claim that their technology is privacy enhancing.
I can think of one simple way to enhance privacy even further, it is a simple one, that seems to have eluded them thus far, so I shall spell it out simply for them. The easiest way to be privacy enhancing is to stop profiling people.


So now, I ask the pro-phorm lobby, which is it to be, are you going to actually going to come up with some reasonable arguments or continue getting your hands dirty by throwing more mud?

Oh I forgot to add,

BT are now saying it's not their fault if the anti-phising doesn't work. (terms and conditions for supposed trial now taking place that no one can find any evidence of)
As they can't guarantee that their list will be kept up to date.So that buggers that claim then doesn't it ? No anti-phising for PHORM then. Anything else that won't work? False claims again.

Geegie,

I don't care. I really don't much like, most rational citizens. I just post on the odd occasion to give the anti-phorm mob some hope that someone actually does care. I'm not "the opposition", nothing to do with BT, Phorm, Nebuad, or anything at all.
It's the same hard-core posting the same old rhetoric time after time with no substance behind it whatsoever apart from huge chips on shoulders.
It's nothing to get excited about, far more important things in life I'm sure.
If people don't agree with something, move on but don't try and force your opinions on others.

Hello Noddy,
seems you've managed to drag out the entire PR office then. Where's the rodent, to ashamed to show his face after being thrown off other forums for making false statements?

it's opt in not opt out. In order to opt out I and anyone else don't have to do ANYTHING. It's the law.
Explain has requested how my data is not profiled when I don't OPT IN as my data still has to pass through the system.
Explain why I or anyone else would want to OPT IN to this?
Explain in clear and concise language any benefits anyone opting IN would receive as anti-phising and the other claims made by PHORM are quite capable of being carried out by my browser without PHORM. ?
Explain in clear and concise language how you can say this is anonymous, when it's been proved not to be so?

I agree with Noddy - where ever I have been reading any article about this company it is always the same speil and the same posters- will they not go out into the real world and enjoy some sunshine? Maybe the subsequent seritonin release will help quell their paranoia a little. read a very interesting peice by a guy called Peter Bazalette http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=10420
At least some one has something constructive and forward moving to say - rather than fearing that their grey haired noggins are being scanned from above!!

I don't really need to give my Real Name, I'm sure BT Phorm & anyone looking at my data using that DPI kit already know what I'm doing when I'm doing it & why I'm doing it?

 Talk about lack of Privacy on a supposed 2 way communication system!

By the way still waiting for answers just like most people, about how this system really works & the Security of the ongoing Auditing System & how much of my Info may be leaking to anyone this System want to use it for!

I hear the BT Forums leaked Personal Info so badly they had to suspend it for about a week, they "still haven't fixed one of the Main Leaks though!"

Makes me really wonder "even if this System was legal" whether BT could manage to keep any of my Data Secure seeing as it's own Websites & Security Systems already  "leak worse than a sieve!". 

To think this all started cos some punter couldn't flog his horse racing tips online and hooked up with a serial litagent. Tinfoil hats ago-go!
When will the hate mob get it through their heads that no-one cares but them?
Still, keeps them off the streets I suppose and they can hide behind funky aliases apart from the main privacy expert who strangely enough signs everything he posts with his real name!!

Watching Phorm's flailing PR efforts is a painful experience. Would all of the pro-Phorm posters here be able to confirm that they have no commercial connection with the company? Informed choice means opt-in only - opt-out means breaking the law. Simple as that.

------

verified by Ernst & Young) and an opt out option is ALWAYS available.

-----

1: Ernst & Young is USA & not Applicable to UK Law & it has be reported that Phorm violates its OWN Privacy Rules!

2: The ICO has stipulated OPTIN not OPTOUT which should mean the Web User does not come in contact with the Profiler/Proxy if not OPTED IN but according to all the diagrams or notes, this is blatantly NOT true!

3: Everytime a Phorm PR poster appears on a blog to comment about other posters concerned by this subversion of the WWW technology out comes the denigration attempts without any kind of constructive rebuttal. 

Kind of makes it clear that they have no proper answer to the questions being asked doesn't it!

BUT

4: Just to be fair I ask them once again to PROPERLY explain the processes involved so that all Web Users can make a proper assessment of whether or not to OPTIN! 

And to be honest the first post- " dephormation" ?? oh FFS !! sounds like the same little gang that has nothing better to do than work themselves up to a frenzy over Phorm have re grouped and are leading their little media campain again!!! hey guys? go wrap your houses in aluminium foil to stop Phorm reading your minds....

I think Hogge is living in the dark ages. To compare a behavioural add servring sytem to the postman reading your mail is infantile and naive. If she'd bothered to get off of her NIMBY soap box and read what she choose to waffle about, she'd see that it's proven to be anonymous. ( verified by Ernst & Young) and an opt out option is ALWAYS available.

I also suggest she saves her venom for
a) Google
b) yahoo
( or does it suit to pretend they are less invasive??!)
c) the government

BT, you are not being entirely honest with your customers are you?

The Phorm technology means we will be profiled whether we opt-in or opt-out. That means that everything that is sent via the internet from a users PC via BT is scanned (examined). We are told that certain data categories are not scanned. It should be the users choice, not yours as to what is private or not.

You are dressing up the 'real issue' of profiling by hiding it behind your 'so called anti-fishing' offering and by being oblique and obscure to 'ordinary internet users'.

The technology used to profile users on the internet, 'Deep Packet Inspection' (DPI), has already been declared to be unacceptable by the legislature in the USA, and has still not been approved by the EU.

Reputable companies such as Symantec (Norton) and F-Secure categorise trails left on users computers from your companies as spyware or adware or otherwise undesirable.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote to BT to complain about this and received the following in reply:

 Dear Mr Young,

Thank you for your e-mail dated 5/10/08 about "clandestine probes".

Unfortunately I have been unable to speak to you regarding this matter.

I understand your issues regarding this article and I can advise you BT are not installing "clandestine probes" .

The
article you have seen from what you have said seems to be touching of
the webwise and phrom trials I have details these below for you:

BT
Webwise is a free service giving you a safer, more personalised online
experience.  BT Webwise checks for known fraudulent websites and warns
you if you visit one, with no need to download or install any
software.  BT Webwise also replaces generic adverts you see on
participating websites with adverts more relevant to your interests,
based on the websites you visit and the things for which you search. 

BT
Webwise momentarily uses website address, keywords and search terms
from the page viewed to match a category or area of interest (eg:
travel or finance).  No browsing data leaves BT network and no
personally-identifiable information is generated or stored by the BT
Webwise service or Phorm, the company that provides the technology
behind the service.  BT Webwise does not scan webmail pages.  Secure
pages like banking websites, and webforms such as online registration
or sign-up forms are also not scanned.  No personal information, often
contained in form fields, is therefore ever used by the system.

BT
will be trialling BT Webwise from Tuesday 30 September with selected
customers who will be invited to participate into the service.  Only if
they choose to participate, will they receive the service.  The trial
is being used to assess the technical operation of the Webwise system.

Simply
go to www.bt.com/webwise.  You'll be able to see whether BT Webwise is
turned on or off on the computer, user account and browser you're using
at the time, or if it is not available in your area, and click 'BT
Webwise Off' or 'BT Webwise On'.

Phorm is a digital technology
company.  It is focused on user privacy, a more relevant internet
experience, and more value for Advertisers, Publishers, Internet
Service Providers and others in the online ecosystem.  With offices in
New York, London, and Moscow, Phorm (AIM: PHRM, PHRX) is a Delaware, US
incorporated company, publicly listed on the London Stock Exchange's
Alternative Investment Market (AIM) since 2004.

With its ISP
partners, Phorm launched the Open Internet Exchange (OIX) to
revolutionise online advertising while fully protecting user privacy
and anonymity.  Phorm has established contracts with major ISPs. Phorm
has created Webwise; a new system designed to make the internet safer
and more relevant to internet users.  Webwise includes enhanced
protection against online fraud and relevant advertising features.

I
hope this has clarified the exact details for the so called
'monitoring' of  customers for you, should have any further queries
please do not hesitate to contact us again via e-mail.

Thank you for contacting BT.

Yours sincerely,

Lesley Neve
eContact Customer Service

I have been watching how BT are communicating with customers and shareholders over Phorm/webwise. BT are not communicating with customers on the BT forums they censor the discussion about this banning as many customers as they can. They have changed the T&C not allowing signatures to link to the online petition or any website that mentions Phorm.

Phorm is the old 121Media who even while BT were doing stealth trials had rootkits on peoples computers, they are famous for the peopleonplaces rootkit that killed many people’s computers when they tried to remove it...

There is more deception, half truths and PR to try and force this product through. Function creep will end up changing the internet from its present form into edited internet what they wish to give you...

This product will break websites copyright since none will be approached for a licence the sites will be scrapped for presenting adverts for your competitor. Any website that emailed in requesting to be blacklisted after checking logs found they had been completely checked out with every page scrapped so allowing phorm to be able to profile a visitor from cache. In the patent they intend to try and persuade you to give up more privacy.

A quoted from Hugo about sums up what Phorm plan to do.
by Hugo Drayton, CEO Phorm's closing statements:

"The Phorm model works by the ISP gathering data which publishers can tag via an exchange. It promises to offer a breadth and targeting opportunity which has not existed before.

Think of it, says Drayton, as a search engine for people.

One comment which may be of particular interest to information professionals is a final thought which Drayton left with the audience: if the Phorm models works for driving targeted and behavioral advertising on the internet, then it is perfectly possible that you can do the same for content. Drayton, an ex-newspaper man said he stood by the need for the editorial process (i.e. the editor making a judgement on what his or her readers want to see). But there may also be room for content sent to people determined by their previous search behaviour. The world of content and information may never be the same again."

The time has come for the UK citizen to take back control of their privacy and anyonwe invaiding it should be brought to justice.

Phorm is one aspect of how commerce is interested in what web users do but though there are many references to the, "Great Firewall of China", not many people in the UK realise that technology is already used to monitor and filter web access across most major ISP's.

The main technology is "Clean Feed" which is a term used by BT to describe how they monitor the requests to all web sites from users on their network and block requests depending on whether the web site address matches a blacklist of child porn maintained by the non-governmental "Internet Watch Foundation" or IWF. There is some information on wikipedia about it.

Demon use this system as well as BT and there are many other ISP's who also use it.

Filtering out child porn is not in itself a bad thing but what it does mean is that the technology to inspect all web page requests is already installed in most major ISP's and the step from monitoring to logging web requests is not a great one either in technology or in how the ISP's deal with the information they inspect. Ms. Smith's idea that all users' web access will be logged is only a question of finding a suitable database technology as the monitoring equipment is already in place.

There is also the filtering implication. A filter can be expanded to filter out whatever you want and I've never heard a government ever express a desire to reduce filtering on the internet. The creep towards a "Government Approved" internet will not be slow once the public have become used to the idea that all their online actions are logged.

If you thought that the UK population currently has free, unmonitored and unfiltered access to web sites on the internet think again.

You'll find some useful info about Phorm and Webwise here;

The Inphormationdesk and
Do Not Trust Webwise

The internet is a communication network. Web traffic is just one form of private communication carried over that network. If web traffic can be intercepted, it doesn't bode well for the future of other private communications such as email, voice over IP, SMS, FTP... any data communication you care to mention.

Apart from the personal privacy intrusion, Phorm is effectively mass industrial espionage. It strips web sites and ecommerce business of their customers, selling intelligence about their visitors to competitive advertisers. This site would be vulnerable; its not encrypted.

The fact that UK 'regulators' like ICO, Ofcom, Police, Home Office have failed to prosecute BT for secret trials in 2006 and 2007 that secretly profiled tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of people is simply astounding.