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

[Ravenheart]

Oooh this could prove interesting

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03...rm_av_vendors/

Top security firm: Phorm is adware
Home Office advice suggests RIPA worries for webmasters

[mertle]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

Cable TV ads are targetted. The audience per channel is far smaller and more demographically defined so the advertising is more targeted. Do you see many feminine hygene advertisments on "Dave", compared to "Living"

Thats still pretty general though its still not personal advert profiling. What I think we might see targeting adverts in the interactive, VOD side by linked by your viewing habits of that box. Watch alot sport get sports adverts etc.

They could even link the broadband personal profiler and use it during VOD/interactive. Although that would be crazy but when was this idea had any logic.

We likely to be pounded if more and one user uses the pc with others adverts. IT according to phorm is our fault not having multi accounts.

So I think they could combine if they do move into TV too.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Nice analogy, but wouldn't it be more accurate if you replaced "letter" with "postcard"? And it wouldn't be the postman having a look, but the sorting office. I'm not sure that any laws would then be broken.

Not really
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmi...ntrol_Protocol
TCP, the main transmission protocol we are talking about here to use the wiki words

The Internet Protocol (IP) works by exchanging groups of information called packets. Packets are short sequences of bytes consisting of a header and a body. The header describes the packet's destination, which routers on the Internet use to pass the packet along, generally in the right direction, until it arrives at its final destination. The body contains the application data.

So a TCP packet contains an envelope or header which everyone needs to read, and a private body (though the privacy is about as strong as a paper envelope). Thus at the moment the header should be the only part that is read (it is all the router needs to read), but now the body will be looked at too.

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Nice analogy, but wouldn't it be more accurate if you replaced "letter" with "postcard"? And it wouldn't be the postman having a look, but the sorting office. I'm not sure that any laws would then be broken.

Your analogy does not hold water IMO. A postcard is in open sight for anybody who handles or sees it to read. The writer of a postcard knows that obvious fact when they choose that method of communication and by choice opts for zero privacy. Anybody who seals communication within an envelope or packet has the expectancy, under law, that any unlawful or unjustified breach of privacy will be punished under the various laws covering snooping.

The question remaining is whether you wish your on-line activities to be considered to be as a postcard or private closed packets. If its in plain view (postcard) then if the range of the proposed imposition of spying had better stay within the realms of ad serving. If it is ever expanded as an online crime fighting tool then we had all better hope that the fuss and furore over modem cloning is rubbish and that we all make sure that our wireless connections (routers) are never compromised (thousands are already). I would never mind being held answerable for my own activity but no way would want to be held responsible for something I knew nothing about let alone the source.

[popper]

a question, do you trust charles to report this fairly, he does seem very pro Phorm?, but then the Guardian is signed up to the service....
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...s_consent.html
"
Home Office on Phorm: it's legal if users consent

An analysis by the Home Office of Phorm's proposed system suggests that it's legal - as long as users give their consent
March 12, 2008 3:00 PM

...
You can find an archive of the discussion on Cryptome, but as it went out on the ukcrypto mailing list (if I'm reading the headers right), it's hardly secret.
The conclusion:
"

notice no mention of word 'explicit' from the
"20. Targeted online advertising services should be provided with the
explicit consent of ISPs' users ...."

[Stuart C]

Originally Posted by Ravenheart

Oooh this could prove interesting

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03...rm_av_vendors/

Top security firm: Phorm is adware
Home Office advice suggests RIPA worries for webmasters

From the article above

It seems Virgin Media boss Neil Berkett could be gearing up to take the same stance on its deal with Phorm as Carphone Warehouse boss Charles Dunstone.

In an email to a customer seen by The Register, he said he will look again at his firm's plans to implement the service. Asked if he planned to require customers to explicitly opt-in to the ad targeting network, Berkett wrote this morning: "I am reviewing this again this evening."

So, VM may be changing their stance.

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by Ravenheart

Oooh this could prove interesting

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03...rm_av_vendors/

Top security firm: Phorm is adware
Home Office advice suggests RIPA worries for webmasters

This development has the potential of serious credibility implications for Phorm and any ISP implementing their processes.

What goes around comes around and Kent may have to face the people who give more than a passing thought to his past.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by mertle

Thats still pretty general though its still not personal advert profiling. What I think we might see targeting adverts in the interactive, VOD side by linked by your viewing habits of that box. Watch alot sport get sports adverts etc.

They could even link the broadband personal profiler and use it during VOD/interactive. Although that would be crazy but when was this idea had any logic.

We likely to be pounded if more and one user uses the pc with others adverts. IT according to phorm is our fault not having multi accounts.

So I think they could combine if they do move into TV too.

You are not thinking of the truly big picture, once you have quad play with VM they know your browsing habits, viewing habits, home and mobile phone calling habits and can target even more effectively. With VOD style viewing they will be able to inject the right adverts into those 30 second blocks for the right viewer.

[Shin Gouki]

"Targeted online advertising services should be provided with the explicit consent of ISPs' users or by the acceptance of the ISP terms and conditions."

So in other words the ISP's will just change their T & C's and if you don't accept them all you can do is leave.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

From the article above


So, VM may be changing their stance.

Oh i bloody well hope so. I would hate to see VirginMedia self destruct

[isf]

Originally Posted by popper

Home Office on Phorm: it's legal if users consent

An analysis by the Home Office of Phorm's proposed system suggests that it's legal - as long as users give their consent

That's one interpretation. Another is that it would be unlawful interception if an ISP were to pass data from an opt-out subscriber to Phorm's profiler.

Originally Posted by Charles Arthur (Guardian)

I'm leaning towards the phrase "server-side adware" for what Phorm's doing. Does anyone else have a better phrase?

Sure,

• illegal wiretapping
• unlawful interception of communications

Originally Posted by Shin Gouki

So in other words the ISP's will just change their T & C's and if you don't accept them all you can do is leave.

Surely RIPA was no more intended to permit that than to restrict "legitimate business activity"?

[Florence]

Well seems the other side are now starting to let people know who will not be sharing a bed with Phorm.. http://www.antiphormleague.com/isp.php

For me I have lost my trust in VM knowing how they also change T&C without informing us I can see me taking BT up on the offer of BT line with half price line fitting for an 18month contract then off to Aquiss. MD of Aquiss has replied to every email I have sent him.

[lucevans]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7291637.stm

Now that's more like, BBC !

[Morden]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

No, all Phorm is doing is datamining that data that as you note takes plenty of space into something useable and smaller.

Not that much space, government, university and private companies networks do this as a matter of fact. Space is cheap why install gigs when you can get terrabytes relatively cheap for a SAN.

I only use about a gig a week at most, usually far less about 30 meg a day in logs at home monitoring everything, which if I wanted to could be backed up to dvd.
And its not that hard to datamine a sniffer, especially if you have one which already gives a graphical display. You dont need phorm for that and as I said Virgin already do this sort of stuff without phorm and for emails its a legal requirement by HM Gov to store them and has been since at least 2000.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by Morden

Not that much space, government, university and private companies networks do this as a matter of fact. Space is cheap why install gigs when you can get terrabytes relatively cheap for a SAN.

I only use about a gig a wek at home moitoring everything, which if I wanted to could be backed up to dvd.
And its not that hard to datamine a sniffer, especially if you have one which already gives a graphical display. You dont need phorm for that and as I said Virgin already do this sort of stuff without phorm and for emails its a legal requirement by HM Gov to store them and has been since at least 2000.

The point is I have a contract with Virgin Media. I do not have have a contract with Phorm, nor do I want one. That being the case, I should not have to accept that they will profile everything that I do online if I explicitly forbid them from doing so. Furthermore, I don't trust Phorm not to use my data if I opt-out and I have no way of verifying that they are not.
What Phorm intend to do is far more intrusive than what companies like Google currently do for two reasons: (1) It's being done at the network level so is much more difficult to circumvent, and (2) It is applied indiscriminately to everything I look at so I can't avoid it by steering clear of specific sites.
Add to that the fact that the government must go through due legal process before they can access my data (something I don't have a problem with, by the way) and also the fact that (even now) I trust Virgin Media much more than I trust Phorm, and morally, at least, this scheme doesn't have a leg to stand on.