Virgin Media Hijack customers browser search options

[Toby Jugg]

After finding my search option redirected to a VM search page, a little investigation found that VM had actually managed to inflict a change on my browsers settings. Note this effected a change to browser settings on my machine.
This view has been effectively confirmed as correct by VM support.
An opt-out option is on the page you end up on, but VM impose the change and expect you to find it and opt out.

This is the latest in the VM/phorm/data rape your customers saga.

http://www.virginmedia.com/myvirginmedia/advancederror/feedback.php

[htpntg2005]

im not supprised, i was using opendns in my router (altho this has been turned off last month due to net speeds ) and well i have not had those pages appear yet.

so all those that hate it use open dns to save yourself the hassle, its also great thing that protects you and family you can config parental controls and restrictions. we use opendns at work also which filters out social networking sites etc...

[moaningmags]

I saw this earlier and as a result checked out my registry and browser and nothing there mentioning a ryanvm (might have it wrong but had it correct when I checked) entry.

I also tried browsing to see if I got the adavanced DNS search thing and I did, still without any changes to registry or browser, so I went to the page you've linked to and opted out.

Is it a security weakness in certain browsers that's allowing it to be so easily compromised?

[Jon T]

Not a change to your browsers settings. It's a change in how Virgin handle DNS lookups or rather DNS lookups that aren't successfull. As far as I can tell, and I haven't proved this. Use the opendns service you won't get this.

[Tech_Boy]

Over react much?
Ok, so VM have introduced this change, you can opt out via the link that you posted.
Reading through the info, it says that it only kicks in when you misstype a url, not on any sort of search (or browser settings) as it works via DNS.
So calm down & opt out.
Thanks for the link tho.

[moaningmags]

Does it really matter?
Doesn't OpenDNS do the same thing or something similar?

[webcrawler2050]

It's just them sending you too a VM Page when a DNS Results aint found..

[htpntg2005]

Does it really matter?
Doesn't OpenDNS do the same thing or something similar?

instead of using virginmedias DNS tables it uses its own one, and you can customise it (block sites etc..) and also very good for the family (especially when you got the little ones) when you don't want them to go on any offensive websites. (bit like using a parental control program)

[iFrankie]

iv opted out just because i never use the address bar i do my stuff on google lol

[webcrawler2050]

Can a mod change the title? It's a bit like being in Eastenders here sometimes! :D

[Mick Fisher]

I opted out as I object to VM making even more money out of me. I already pay full price for my BB via my subscription.

In any case such "value added services" should be OPT IN not opt out.

Still no one expects slime ball companies who stealthily steal and no doubt sell our click stream data to play by the rules.

[BenMcr]

I opted out as I object to VM making even more money out of me. I already pay full price for my BB via my subscription.And by Virgin making money out this, then its a way of keeping your subscription price down.

Still no one expects slime ball companies who stealthily steal and no doubt sell our click stream data to play by the rules.And what exactly do you mean by stealthily steal? As far as I can see Virgin have been quite upfront about this

[webcrawler2050]

Still no one expects slime ball companies who stealthily steal and no doubt sell our click stream data to play by the rules.

Just what is the issue? It's not like, they installed a KeyLogger and are logging all of your strokes and taking screenshots and storing them on a remote server are they?

Jasus, talk about over acting. You need to seriously think about what your saying here chap..

[Rimmer100]

Just looked at the OpenDNS site and they frequently suggest that you will get faster DNS lookups. Can anyone confirm that, as it seems unlikely that a lookup from OpenDNS in San Francisco (if the geolocation was right) 10 hops away is going to be faster than the virgin server sitting 5 hops away (194.84.4.100) and significantly closer.

(I know this wasn't the original point of this thread, just wondering if anyone is getting faster)

As to the original point, I rarely get addresses wrong, otherwise I would be googling anyway.

[moaningmags]

I have google as my home page and as my default search engine and just about everytime I open my browser I either go to a site from my favourites or I google it.

[Traduk]

Just looked at the OpenDNS site and they frequently suggest that you will get faster DNS lookups. Can anyone confirm that, as it seems unlikely that a lookup from OpenDNS in San Francisco (if the geolocation was right) 10 hops away is going to be faster than the virgin server sitting 5 hops away (194.84.4.100) and significantly closer.

(I know this wasn't the original point of this thread, just wondering if anyone is getting faster)

As to the original point, I rarely get addresses wrong, otherwise I would be googling anyway.

In my experience it is significantly faster and infinitely more reliable.

For latency to be a factor one would have to look at the relative efficiency of each set of devices. It would appear that OpenDNS is faster by virtue of efficiency to a degree that overcomes latency.

VM's DNS servers often looked like a bottleneck during busy periods and although I shall not be using them it would be interesting to see if they are slower now that they are a nice little earner with extra work to get done.

[APS]

Just looked at the OpenDNS site and they frequently suggest that you will get faster DNS lookups. Can anyone confirm that, as it seems unlikely that a lookup from OpenDNS in San Francisco (if the geolocation was right) 10 hops away is going to be faster than the virgin server sitting 5 hops away (194.84.4.100) and significantly closer.



OpenDNS have servers all over the place, including one location in London. I use them at home and at work and speed has never been an issue, in fact I originally switched during a bad patch of reliability for Virgins servers.

However they do make their money of redirecting failed DNS requests in exactly the same way as Virgin so if that is a concern to you they are not an alternative.

[Traduk]

OpenDNS have servers all over the place, including one location in London. I use them at home and at work and speed has never been an issue, in fact I originally switched during a bad patch of reliability for Virgins servers.

However they do make their money of redirecting failed DNS requests in exactly the same way as Virgin so if that is a concern to you they are not an alternative.

OpenDNS making money off my choice to use them is of no concern to me whatsoever. They provide an excellent service at zero cost to me.

What I object to in principle is paying a high price for a product just to find that some form of extra financial exploitation has been implemented.

I was all for the old principle of advert supported software for free against the full paid product as advert free, but when someone tries a variation of both to enhance their bottom line I see it as exploitation.

[BenMcr]

I was all for the old principle of advert supported software for free against the full paid product as advert free, but when someone tries a variation of both to enhance their bottom line I see it as exploitation.How is this any different than adverts in subscription channels such as Sky One, Living or the Sky Premium channels - for instance.

At least with this you can opt out if you want

[Traduk]

How is this any different than adverts in subscription channels such as Sky One, Living or the Sky Premium channels - for instance.

At least with this you can opt out if you want

In principle it doesn't but with subscription channels, we can choose whether or not to subscribe. If our enjoyment of those services is frustrated by the imposition of adverts then for many they are dumped and the primary plus secondary revenues are lost to the provider.

When exploitation is implemented within a core element of a paid for service it is a catch all on part of a service without which, for most the service will not work.

I suspect the opt out will be implemented by very few as although there is a notification on the VM website I would guess that few ever go there to trawl through something so boring.

As has been pointed out by another within this thread, the response is an apparent over-reaction but until VM completely disassociate themselves from the click through (phorm) type exploitation there is underlying suspicion as to their future path. This is IMO a partial but minuscule step in that direction and further reduces my trust in VM.

[Sir John Luke]

As has been pointed out by another within this thread, the response is an apparent over-reaction but until VM completely disassociate themselves from the click through (phorm) type exploitation there is underlying suspicion as to their future path. This is IMO a partial but minuscule step in that direction and further reduces my trust in VM.

Agree this is the main concern, rather than the browser hijack itself.

[dev]

Agree this is the main concern, rather than the browser hijack itself.

There is no browser hijack, nothing is changed on your PC.

As others have said, this is no different to what OpenDNS are doing, while I don't agree with not reporting DNS failures, if it means better funding for VM's network without costing me anything then where is the harm?

[Sir John Luke]

Sorry, wrong terminology. More correctly, DNS Hijacking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking

In particular

"The concern with DNS hijacking has to do with this hijacking of the NXDOMAIN response. Internet applications rely on the NXDOMAIN response to describe the condition where the DNS has no entry for the specified host. If one were to query the invalid domain name (fakeexample.com), one should get a NXDOMAIN response - informing the application that the name is invalid and taking the appropriate action (for example, displaying an error). However, if the domain name is queried on one of these non-compliant ISPs, one would receive an IP address belonging to the ISP. In a Web browser, this behavior can be annoying or offensive as connections to this IP address display the Web page of the provider, sometimes with advertising, instead of a proper error message. However, other applications that reply on the NXDOMAIN error will instead try to connect to this IP address, potentially exposing sensitive information like logins."

[Milambar]

Reported to el-reg, and a few other places, see if they wanna take the story and run.

VM have NOT been upfront about it. I wasn't even aware of it till I read this thread. No email or letter from VM informing me about it, along with instructions on how to opt-out, which they should have done, especially considering they decided to opt-everybody-in by default.

Only a webpage that isn't checked very often.

Oh, and I just switched to OpenDNS, although I have issues with OpenDNS, I have even bigger issues with a company that implements a DNS hijacking, without even having the manners to send me an email that they were implementing it.

[Dai]

Oh, and I just switched to OpenDNS, although I have issues with OpenDNS, I have even bigger issues with a company that implements a DNS hijacking, without even having the manners to send me an email that they were implementing it.

I run Treewalk local DNS service. No issues with that and the addition of the Confetch plugin adds a lot of blocking/filtering options.

http://treewalkdns.com/

[BenMcr]

VM have NOT been upfront about it. I wasn't even aware of it till I read this thread. No email or letter from VM informing me about it, along with instructions on how to opt-out, which they should have done, especially considering they decided to opt-everybody-in by default.There is a 'What is this page' link at the very top every time it comes up

Only a webpage that isn't checked very often.There is a 'What is this page' at the top everytime you encounter the VM page with the opt out link

[webcrawler2050]

Reported to el-reg, and a few other places, see if they wanna take the story and run.

VM have NOT been upfront about it. I wasn't even aware of it till I read this thread. No email or letter from VM informing me about it, along with instructions on how to opt-out, which they should have done, especially considering they decided to opt-everybody-in by default.

Only a webpage that isn't checked very often.

Oh, and I just switched to OpenDNS, although I have issues with OpenDNS, I have even bigger issues with a company that implements a DNS hijacking, without even having the manners to send me an email that they were implementing it.

hahahahahaha - you are a right plonker!

[Bonglet]

Thats where vm fail, every added service must be OPT IN did vm just ignore the phorm scandal with a oohhh yeah we will still opt all of our muppet customers in (the way we get treat nowadays) give them as little as they know about it the better for us more monies.

Some vm staffers might be better off telling them to quickly go and change it before a few go and complain to the ico or offcom, they have already stated that anything that changes or has the likeleyhood to change communications (i.e blacklisting non partner websites or searches - Function creep standard) must be opt in.

[Dephormation]

This is a lousy step by Virgin.

Among the problems it will cause... It will break features such as address bar search in Internet Explorer, and prevent other applications correctly discovering and reporting DNS lookup errors.

Its symptomatic of a communications company that has completely lost the plot... lost the capacity to comprehend the basic requirement for security, integrity and privacy in telecommunications services.

I'm so glad I left them.

[webcrawler2050]

I am sorry but am I missing something here..

I don't see the big deal?

[Milambar]

Then yes, you're missing something.

[webcrawler2050]

Then yes, you're missing something.

No, I don't think so - I think it's just "people" over dramatsing such a petty situation..

[musicbravo]

As stated before OpenDNS does the same thing and VM do offer an opt-out on the redirected page. There is no real issue.

When signing up for anything these days there is an opt out. So if your in danger of having a major panic attack or worse over this then opt out. I am sure this will help lower your blood pressure, until you realise your milk has gone off, next time you make your cereal. All those extra bacteria in my milk and they didnt even bother to tell me they were there. Heaven forbid!!!

[Dephormation]

If you don't see the big deal, fine, you've got nothing to worry about.

On the other hand, if you value having a choice about address bar search, or prefer NXDOMAIN errors to be returned properly without DNS hijacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking#cite_note-6), or consider that you have paid Virgin to provide you with a IETF/RFC compliant DNS service... then Virgin Media has suddently become a very poor choice of ISP.

If this is a 'service' people want, then Virgin should offer it to them as an opt in, not impose it.

Virgin have no business imposing supposedly 'value added services' without consent. (European directives makes that explicit).

[webcrawler2050]

If you don't see the big deal, fine, you've got nothing to worry about.

On the other hand, if you value having a choice about address bar search, or prefer NXDOMAIN errors to be returned properly without DNS hijacks, or consider that you have paid Virgin to provide you with a IETF/RFC compliant DNS service... then Virgin Media has suddently become a very poor choice of ISP.

If this is a 'service' people want, then Virgin should offer it to them as an opt in choice, not impose it.

Virgin have no business imposing supposedly 'value added services' without consent. (European directives makes that explicit).

Plenty of other ISP's do this. Talk talk "impose" a search bar etc etc BT install 16 million things on behalf on "BT Yahoo" So seriously, is all this childish behaviour worth it?

[Ben B]

I suppose it's nicer than getting "The Page Cannot Be Displayed" I don't get the Virgin one mine just goes to Google if i mistype something....

[Dephormation]

It seems advancedsearch.virginmedia.com isn't a Virgin host at all.

Its a firm called Skye by Nominum, a California based 'network monetization' business.

See here (http://www.robtex.com/dns/advancedsearch.virginmedia.com.html) and here (http://www.robtex.com/ip/81.200.64.50.html).

---------- Post added at 15:18 ---------- Previous post was at 15:15 ----------

I suppose it's nicer than getting "The Page Cannot Be Displayed" I don't get the Virgin one mine just goes to Google if i mistype something....

That's probably because you've chosen Google as your search engine provider.

Now, when you key something into the address bar, you'll probably find yourself looking at a Virgin Media page provided by Skye-Nominum instead... unless you opt out of DNS hijacking.

The feature is called 'Search from the Address Bar' or Autosearch in IE (you'll find it in the Advanced Options dialog box).

[jamiefrost]

You do have a choice, opt out! The worst case for you would be 1 yes 1 redircted DNS response. You see it the first time and then you opt out.

Strictly speaking then the only resonse you should get from your browser, is a domain not know response until you ask you browser, toolbar etc do allow a search functionality. Which for most people they probably would have a clue about.

So for most people this would mean going to a search engine and typing it and then searching.

JJ

---------- Post added at 15:22 ---------- Previous post was at 15:19 ----------

Now, when you key something into the address bar, you'll probably find yourself looking at a Virgin Media page provided by Skye-Nominum instead... unless you opt out of DNS hijacking.

The feature is called 'Search from the Address Bar' or Autosearch in IE (you'll find it in the Advanced Options dialog box).


Why is OK for Google, Microsoft etc to do this automatically but not Virgin

JJ

[Dephormation]

Why is OK for Google, Microsoft etc to do this automatically but not Virgin

JJ

Mainly, because I choose to use Google, or choose to use Microsoft, or indeed choose to use .

I have no quibble with Virgin offering a search service, and/or browser software, provided that I have a choice to use it (and my choice is respected).

It is not fine for them to [I]impose their search service, or software, over my existing choice because they want to strip some traffic away from [insert my favourite search engine/software provider here].

See the difference?

[Traduk]

I am sorry but am I missing something here..

I don't see the big deal?

In your tag I see web design. Doesn't it bother you that this hi-jack breaks RFC protocols and can open up users to "cross site scripting attacks".

IMO this is just another of VM's lack of integrity when the long standing potential evaluation of Phorm (which was packaged as anti Phishing= safety) is stealthily replaced by something that is thought to be inherently unsafe and open to abuse.

Looked at in isolation this is no big deal but if attitudes have been poisoned by VM's past money grubbing practices I would rather they were upfront and honest and charged what gives them a reasonable return without resorting to underhand methods.

The ongoing contempt that VM displays toward their customer base defies logic. The recent free upgrade from 2 to 10Meg which coincidentally was just going up by £2 per month must have posed a few questions. I presume the transfer was free but tough luck that the free transfer was to a level that was subject to an imminent price increase.

[Sir John Luke]

The key thing is that it should be OPT-IN!

[jamiefrost]

The recent free upgrade from 2 to 10Meg which coincidentally was just going up by £2 per month must have posed a few questions. I presume the transfer was free but tough luck that the free transfer was to a level that was subject to an imminent price increase.

Or alternatively they don't upgrade anyone and both the 2Mb and 10Mb tariffs would have gone up by £2.

Still don't see the lack of integrity, they have provide some functionality that will be of help to a lot of users. With an easy way to not use it.

JJ

[Ben B]

The key thing is that it should be OPT-IN!

But then how would people know about it?!

[Sir John Luke]

How do people know about any other VM services?

Oh, and here's an interesting article I found

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/04/isps-error-page/

[jamiefrost]

Mainly, because I choose to use Google, or choose to use Microsoft, or indeed choose to use .

I have no quibble with Virgin offering a search service, and/or browser software, provided that I have a choice to use it (and my choice is respected).

It is not fine for them to [I]impose their search service, or software, over my existing choice because they want to strip some traffic away from [insert my favourite search engine/software provider here].

See the difference?

Do google and Microsoft etc automatically acvtivate this search functionality, beacuse I don't remember telling the google toolbar to automatically give me a response including a search option.

For Virgin to be wrong so are Google, Microsoft etc until you explicitly ask for the functionality to be turn on. Whcih for most people will not happen.

My resonse seeing the google search appear the first time was 'that's a good idea, don't to manually search for the web address'


Is it really that bad to have 1 DNS response redirected.

JJ

---------- Post added at 15:49 ---------- Previous post was at 15:44 ----------

How do people know about any other VM services?

Are you seriously suggesting that people should look for automated DNS response options the same way they look for what TV, BB and phone supplier to use.

That would be a great ad 'Mistyped your favorite web address, don't worry Virgin Media have the answer'.

People are not going to look for options, again why is OK for other compaies to do but not VM?

JJ

[Sirius]

This is the usual lets make a mountain out of a mole hill, Whats up nothing better to do today kids :rolleyes:

Just done it on purpose and opted out, There that's not hard is it

[Dephormation]

Do google and Microsoft etc automatically acvtivate this search functionality, beacuse I don't remember telling the google toolbar to automatically give me a response including a search option.

For Virgin to be wrong so are Google, Microsoft etc until you explicitly ask for the functionality to be turn on. Whcih for most people will not happen.

My resonse seeing the google search appear the first time was 'that's a good idea, don't to manually search for the web address'

Is it really that bad to have 1 DNS response redirected.

JJ

If you installed the Google toolbar, I'd guess that's because you chose to download and install it? And the reason you kept it was because you though 'that's a good idea'.

If you have a Microsoft OS, presumably that's because you bought a machine that had Microsoft OS installed? You had other choices.

I don't think many Virgin customers were aware (until today) that their DNS requests were going to be hijacked. It certainly didn't get much publicity. If you're still with Virgin tomorrow, I suppose you might argue those people had made a decision to stay with Virgin despite this change to their terms of service.

Is it really that bad? For me, yes. It demonstrates that Virgin are a lousy choice of ISP (but then, I've already 'opted out', or should I say 'opted in' to a decent provider who doesn't do things like that).

(<<< see).

For you, perhaps you see it differently.

[Traduk]

Or alternatively they don't upgrade anyone and both the 2Mb and 10Mb tariffs would have gone up by £2.

Still don't see the lack of integrity, they have provide some functionality that will be of help to a lot of users. With an easy way to not use it.

JJ

They obviously wanted XXX100,000's more 2 quids a month and judged that resistance would be mitigated by a speed increase. Bean counters probably assessed that churn could a devastating development if one part happened without the other as ADSL providers can easily under-cut a 2Meg supply on price.

Integrity in my book is being transparently upfront and honest in a manner that is designed to pro actively inform. They have my e-mail and contact me when they have something to sell but leave me and millions of others to find out by my own actions what they would rather I didn't question.

It should be OPT-IN and all users informed of this wonderful new helpful add-on via e-mail and then allowed to die on the vine as it most likely would.

[Sirius]

If you installed the Google toolbar, I'd guess that's because you chose to download and install it? And the reason you kept it was because you though 'that's a good idea'.

If you have a Microsoft OS, presumably that's because you bought a machine that had Microsoft OS installed? You had other choices.

I don't think many Virgin customers were aware (until today) that their DNS requests were going to be hijacked. It certainly didn't get much publicity. If you're still with Virgin tomorrow, I suppose you might argue those people had made a decision to stay with Virgin despite this change to their terms of service.

Is it really that bad? For me, yes. It demonstrates that Virgin are a lousy choice of ISP (but then, I've already 'opted out', or should I say 'opted in' to a decent provider who doesn't do things like that).

(<<< see).

For you, perhaps you see it differently.

Then if you are not a customer why make such a big fuss about it, Again nothing better to do today ????

[jamiefrost]

But I never asked google or microsoft to mess around with my DNS response either so whats the difference? The goggle toolbar provides a search button on the response page I didn't explicitly ask them to do that, just a usefull by product of installing the toolbar. If I didn't want I could remove it(opt out).

Just the same as Virgin, see it the first time then opt out.

Yes I did chose to install the toolbar just the same as I chose Virgin Media to supply my BB and DNS queries.

JJ

[Dephormation]

Then if you are not a customer why make such a big fuss about it

I've got every sympathy with people who were surprised by this change in their existing service. The reason for commenting is Virgins attempt to misrepresent this money making DNS hijack as a feature.

For people who understand it for what it is, and still choose to use Virgin, I'm not all concerned. Good luck.

[jamiefrost]

It should be OPT-IN and all users informed of this wonderful new helpful add-on via e-mail and then allowed to die on the vine as it most likely would.


Does this then hold true for all areas for example should virgin have left customers on 512kb internet connections until they they ask for a free upgrade. Personally I'd rather get the free upgrade without having to ask for it.

Most users getting an email about search options in a DNS query response wouldn't have a clue about what Virgin were talking about.

For the majority of users couldn't care less, for those who do notice either they aren't bother or they opt out.

JJ

[webcrawler2050]

Does this then hold true for all areas for example should virgin have left customers on 512kb internet connections until they they ask for a free upgrade. Personally I'd rather get the free upgrade without having to ask for it.

Most users getting an email about search options in a DNS query response wouldn't have a clue about what Virgin were talking about.

For the majority of users couldn't care less, for those who do notice either they aren't bother or they opt out.

JJ

Seriously, who cares?

[Ben B]

Seriously, who cares?

The OP should add a poll to see who does :D

[Dephormation]

But I never asked google or microsoft to mess around with my DNS response either so whats the difference? The goggle toolbar provides a search button on the response page I didn't explicitly ask them to do that, just a usefull by product of installing the toolbar. If I didn't want I could remove it(opt out).

Just the same as Virgin, see it the first time then opt out.

Yes I did chose to install the toolbar just the same as I chose Virgin Media to supply my BB and DNS queries.

JJ

Key point: Google and Microsoft are not doing anything to your DNS response. DNS hijack affects the way every application on your machine interacts with DNS.

From tomorrow, if you're still with Virgin... good luck to you. I guess there is an argument for saying you have made an informed choice (despite a change in the terms of service) to continue.

But others who don't should have the facility to cancel their contract (given the apparent change to the contract that now requires you to opt out of DNS hijacking).

[webcrawler2050]

The OP should add a poll to see who does :D

Yep - he will probably get more a "response" :D

---------- Post added at 16:15 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

From tomorrow, if you're still with Virgin... good luck to you. I guess there is an argument for saying you have made an informed choice (despite a change in the terms of service) to continue.

ACTUALLY: it doesn't interfear with your DNS - Plonker..

It simply, directs you to a "VM" Branded" page, when you get a 404 - it's very simple to edit....

[Ben B]

It's not DNS hijacking, it's "Oops, the DNS server can't find the website you typed, here's a search page to help you " there aint anything malicious about it.

[Sirius]

From tomorrow, if you're still with Virgin... good luck to you. I guess there is an argument for saying you have made an informed choice (despite a change in the terms of service) to continue.

.

I will be. Wait no i better phone up and cancel my broadband so i can jump on a crappy slow adsl connection, There now don't i feel better :LOL:

[webcrawler2050]

It's simply a 404....

[Sir John Luke]

It's not DNS hijacking, it's "Oops, the DNS server can't find the website you typed, here's a search page to help you " there aint anything malicious about it.

Since you may have missed it the first time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking

[Ben B]

Since you may have missed it the first time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking

I'm not stupid it just seems that the name is stupid.

[jamiefrost]

Maybe I don't understand, all this does is add some search results to the response page.

Don't understand how Vigin can be hijacking there own DNS servers :D

So virgin have set of DNS servers but they use a set of rogue DNS servers to hijack the original ones and give back the same results!! Very clever, thats a cunning plan if I ever saw one.

JJ

[Sir John Luke]

Maybe I don't understand, all this does is add some search results to the response page.

Don't understand how Vigin can be hijacking there own DNS servers :D

So virgin have set of DNS servers but they use a set of rogue DNS servers to hijack the original ones and give back the same results!! Very clever, thats a cunning plan if I ever saw one.

JJ

Your browser sends a DNS request VIA the VM DNS servers. The response the VM DNS servers receive is NXDOMAIN, as defined by the standards. However, instead of simply passing this response through to your browser, it is 'hijacked' by VM and replaced by the IP address of their ad-server.

[Traduk]

Does this then hold true for all areas for example should virgin have left customers on 512kb internet connections until they they ask for a free upgrade. Personally I'd rather get the free upgrade without having to ask for it.

Most users getting an email about search options in a DNS query response wouldn't have a clue about what Virgin were talking about.

For the majority of users couldn't care less, for those who do notice either they aren't bother or they opt out.

JJ

Virgin are relatively new and back in the days of 512 it was, for me, Cabletel. I have had free upgrades in the past which were at nil cost for a considerable period of time. By the principle that they are now applying they could offer me a free upgrade to 50Meg providing I am prepared to pay the price differential. To me the definition of free is nil cost both to change and for the subsequent cost after the change .

Your opinion of the majority of users has been echoed by disparaging remarks made by VM's CEO. It is that view and the apparent truth in fact that allows exploitation.

A relatively small number of people saw the threat that Phorm had and through protracted and concerted effort frustrated attempts of implementation. This almost certainly doesn't warrant that much attention but shows that VM are still willing to scrape some money out of exploitation which is beyond their remit as a supplier of a service.

[musicbravo]

Hmmmmmm, hello is that retentions i wish to cancel my subscription because you have linked me to a search page instead of telling me the page is unavailable. you have also told me how to stop this happening, this is absurd. I would have preferred to have struggled to disable it on my own terms and kick up a fuss. BTW did you know that analogue will be no more soon and yourselves and the government have forced this change on me so i cant make my own decision about it. As a result of this blatant disregard of my rights as a numpty i want you to waive all disconnection fees, and get me off your services. As a goodwill gesture could you send me a dial-up modem so i can enjoy slow page loads, plenty of time outs and of course obligatory disconnections in peace. :D

sorry just thought i would waste some time concocting a pointless argument to see what it felt like to whine. I got to admit it gave me a buzz briefly, but the realised it wasted nearly 5 minutes of my life.

Apologies if this doesnt make sense, I lost interest in this post halfway through, but ever the optomist i had to continue with it because in my own way i thought it was slightly funny!!! :angel:

[Sir John Luke]

Virgin are relatively new and back in the days of 512 it was, for me, Cabletel. I have had free upgrades in the past which were at nil cost for a considerable period of time. By the principle that they are now applying they could offer me a free upgrade to 50Meg providing I am prepared to pay the price differential. To me the definition of free is nil cost both to change and for the subsequent cost after the change .

Your opinion of the majority of users has been echoed by disparaging remarks made by VM's CEO. It is that view and the apparent truth in fact that allows exploitation.

A relatively small number of people saw the threat that Phorm had and through protracted and concerted effort frustrated attempts of implementation. This almost certainly doesn't warrant that much attention but shows that VM are still willing to scrape some money out of exploitation which is beyond their remit as a supplier of a service.

Exactly. Given VM's attitude to net neutrality, further down the road, the DNS servers could be programmed to intercept queries for (say) google.com and return the address of whatever search engine provides VM with the most revenue. Wedge, thin end of.

[Kymmy]

Now where's that link to the tin foil hat song??

Ah...there it is

http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

[Sirius]

Now where's that link to the tin foil hat song??

Ah...there it is

http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

:LOL:

Was thinking that myself.

[Sir John Luke]

You've persuaded me to repost

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/11/tinfoil_hats_as_government_plot/

[Traduk]

Exactly. Given VM's attitude to net neutrality, further down the road, the DNS servers could be programmed to intercept queries for (say) google.com and return the address of whatever search engine provides VM with the most revenue. Wedge, thin end of.

It looks as though many people are either oblivious to mission creep or have such a short term view that it is inconsequential.

[Sir John Luke]

It looks as though many people are either oblivious to mission creep or have such a short term view that it is inconsequential.

....which is precisely what VM and the like are relying on.

[arcamalpha2004]

But then how would people know about it?!


So its far better to give people the hassle of having to opt out?

Scam, plain and simple, I dont want VM or any company forcing stuff on me then putting the onus on me to opt out.

[Sirius]

So its far better to give people the hassle of having to opt out?

Scam, plain and simple, I dont want VM or any company forcing stuff on me then putting the onus on me to opt out.

Then there is a simple answer for you if its thats much of problem.

[Mick Fisher]

And by Virgin making money out this, then its a way of keeping your subscription price down.
I beg to differ. It is a way for VM to increase their profits.

And what exactly do you mean by stealthily steal? As far as I can see Virgin have been quite upfront about this
Yeah? So why don't they ask me first before auto opting me in. If that is not stealth then I would like to know what is.

If VM had wished to do the right thing they would have followed the recommendations of ICO and made it an opt in service.

---------- Post added at 17:42 ---------- Previous post was at 17:34 ----------

Just what is the issue? It's not like, they installed a KeyLogger and are logging all of your strokes and taking screenshots and storing them on a remote server are they?

Jasus, talk about over acting. You need to seriously think about what your saying here chap..
Ideally access to your advice should be the same as VM's new "value added service". OPT IN not auto opt in.

I don't think anyone would like to be auto subscribed to open dns now would they.

[webcrawler2050]

I beg to differ. It is a way for VM to increase their profits.

Yeah? So why don't they ask me first before auto opting me in. If that is not stealth then I would like to know what is.

If VM had wished to do the right thing they would have followed the recommendations of ICO and made it an opt in service.

---------- Post added at 17:42 ---------- Previous post was at 17:34 ----------


Ideally access to your advice should be the same as VM's new "value added service". OPT IN not auto opt in.

I don't think anyone would like to be auto subscribed to open dns now would they.

Personally, don't care as long as my broad is stable and consitent..

[BenMcr]

I beg to differ. It is a way for VM to increase their profits.Unsurprisingly the two are linked.

VM will want to make a certain amout of profit - they do this either through increasing subscription fees or through other means

Yeah? So why don't they ask me first before auto opting me in. If that is not stealth then I would like to know what is.Yet when VM do offer an opt-in for Value Added servce - like the BB M uplift - everyone complains because they aren't doing it automatically!

If VM had wished to do the right thing they would have followed the recommendations of ICO and made it an opt in service.That was a requirement of PHORM not this redirect. The two are not the same. There is no storing of user information

[Dephormation]

Personally, don't care as long as my broad is stable and consitent..

What's she got to do with it?

[jamiefrost]

Exactly. Given VM's attitude to net neutrality, further down the road, the DNS servers could be programmed to intercept queries for (say) google.com and return the address of whatever search engine provides VM with the most revenue. Wedge, thin end of.


Your right guess I'd better brush up on my prgramming skills and write my own browser application. You never know when microsoft / mozilla / opera / apple will programme there own browsers to intercept web requests as well.
:rolleyes:
JJ

[tdadyslexia]

At least with this you can opt out if you want
I have opted out, but this should be opt in not opt out

[rogerdraig]

Over react much?
Ok, so VM have introduced this change, you can opt out via the link that you posted.
Reading through the info, it says that it only kicks in when you misstype a url, not on any sort of search (or browser settings) as it works via DNS.
So calm down & opt out.
Thanks for the link tho.

the point is they should ask first then you opt in, the slow but steady "opt out" if you don't like it is just to push the idea that that's the way it should be


it isn't you should always be asked first ! it may be a trifling thing this time but next time it may not

[Milambar]

The fact that they opted me in without pre-warning us is what concerns me.

[arcamalpha2004]

Then there is a simple answer for you if its thats much of problem.


Come on, feel bloody free to enlighten me, its not for vm to opt in people without carrying out any kind of fact finding mission to establish if anyone wants it.
Surely they cannot be that desperate for money.

[Mick Fisher]

Come on, feel bloody free to enlighten me, its not for vm to opt in people without carrying out any kind of fact finding mission to establish if anyone wants it.
Surely they cannot be that desperate for money.
One day there will be an alternative, then they will be very desparate and no doubt will rue the days when they thought nothing about abusing their loyal customer base for a few extra pennies to swell the dividends and executive bonuses.

[Ignitionnet]

Ah love threads like these. BenMcr does his moonlighting as VM PR man on the forum, a couple of people say they don't see the issue, others bring out the usual 'tin foil hat' related stuff.

It's a pain in the arse in that it breaks VPNs, and it can be very inconvenient when one is actually looking to see if something resolves, some applications rely on NXDomain being returned. With your 8 years of experience and various bits of paper webcrawler I would have thought you'd appreciate the importance of adhering to standards, especially when applications, quite rightly, make assumptions that these will be adhered to and function in certain ways.

It's a money grab by VM, nothing else. If frustrated a swift opt-out is the way to go. Several ISPs have done it throughout the world, to the huge annoyance of some customers. That said they've every right to be annoyed, in a perfect world we really should be asked before VM set about breaking some applications deploying non-standard configurations.

I seriously doubt there are privacy implications here though, but it is a pain in the backside in that one could waste a not inconsiderable amount of time troubleshooting to eventually find the cause is Virgin's fiddling with DNS.

Mercifully doesn't affect me as I use OpenDNS, opted out from the automagic search naturally but it really could have been handled so much better - some notice would have been nice.

---------- Post added at 02:44 ---------- Previous post was at 02:36 ----------

*Cracks knuckles*

Unsurprisingly the two are linked.

VM will want to make a certain amout of profit - they do this either through increasing subscription fees or through other means

Such as reducing subscription fees for 50Mbit? They make as much profit as the market and their costs permit, not what they 'want to'. They set targets of course, but these are required to be realistic in the context of the operating market. If companies could just decide on their profit and then make it by one means or another they would have total market power. It's an attempt to increase indirect revenues same as everyone else who has deployed this gack because the market won't tolerate price increases and indeed in the case of 50Mbit evidently requires a price reduction.

Yet when VM do offer an opt-in for Value Added servce - like the BB M uplift - everyone complains because they aren't doing it automatically!

Don't be so obtuse. This isn't a value add, it's a money grab. If Phorm were fully deployed on an opt-out basis you'd presumably be criticising people for complaining about that not being opt-in as well. The 2-10 upgrade was purely value add and had no negative implications for customers receiving it, this can. As I said before people working from home on a large number of VPN clients absolutely require that their 'public' DNS gives an NXDomain response so that Windows will fail over to their company-specific internal DNS to resolve internal names.

That was a requirement of PHORM not this redirect. The two are not the same. There is no storing of user information

How exactly do you know what the third party are doing with the information?

Seriously Ben leave the PR to Alex B and Asam A.

[jamiefrost]

For your average user this is a none issue and might actually be of some help.

for those that is does effect they will recongnise whats going and have one (1) request 'hijacked'. Now is that such a big deal.

An opt in option won't work for most users as they won't have a clue what it's about. So it would deprive them of a potentially usefull addition (very minor). If Virgin did manage to explain it to them I expect that most of them wouldn't careless.

As for making money out of this, well suprise suprise fancy wanting to make money.

Then we have people who are extrapolating this into the removal of net neutrality and selling of customer data to the highest bidder.

Compared to the practiaces of companies such as Microsoft or Apple, Virgin are lagging way behind

JJ

[Sirius]

There will be an advert or something along soon and the make a mountain out of a mole hill regulars will get there teeth into that then. One week from now this will have been forgotten

In the mean time the world continues to turn and my Internet continues to work the way it did yesterday. Ok i have had to spend 10 seconds opting out of this but i have to op out of many things each day this is no different and certainly will not make me dump VM and run like a headless chicken to a slow crappy adsl connection.

[jamiefrost]

point is case,

My wife was asking what I was posting, started to exaplain DNS request saw the board look slide across her face, until I got to the point where I told her you got search resukts back if you miss-spelled some thing.

Her response was 'Oh you mean like google'

JJ

[dev]

It's a pain in the arse in that it breaks VPNs, and it can be very inconvenient when one is actually looking to see if something resolves, some applications rely on NXDomain being returned.

How does it exactly break VPNs? From what i can tell, it should make no difference as you should be using the VPN target's DNS servers as there could be differences between internal and external resolution on any domains the company uses.

It's a money grab by VM, nothing else. If frustrated a swift opt-out is the way to go. Several ISPs have done it throughout the world, to the huge annoyance of some customers. That said they've every right to be annoyed, in a perfect world we really should be asked before VM set about breaking some applications deploying non-standard configurations.

You have no evidence what VM will use the money for, do you really think the exec types will go for something like this rather than a simple price increase (something that they would actually understand)?

Mercifully doesn't affect me as I use OpenDNS, opted out from the automagic search naturally but it really could have been handled so much better - some notice would have been nice.

I assume by this you're perfectly happy with OpenDNS doing it as opt-in but not happy that VM are doing it?

[Sirius]

I assume by this you're perfectly happy with OpenDNS doing it as opt-in but not happy that VM are doing it?

The simple answer is that this is VM and therefor a **** storm should be raised for that very reason :rolleyes:. It all boils down to who has the biggest chip on there shoulder about VM, I have not seen Arthur in this yet but i am waiting :LOL:

Its happened now so you a choice.

Opt out and get on with your life.

Go running to a adsl provider with all the hassle that will create and will be more than simply opting out.

Sit there and continue to complain and complain and complain until it jolly well hurts :rolleyes:

Personally i have better things to do with my life than complaining about VM because i have a chip on my shoulder about them.

[Kymmy]

Is this active for everyone? Just that I don't get the redirection at all for failed DNS requests.. Might be the business BB I have even though it's still going though the usual VM DNS servers

[Milambar]

I assume by this you're perfectly happy with OpenDNS doing it as opt-in but not happy that VM are doing it?

The problem is, with services such as OpenDNS, I choose to opt-in. With VM's implementation, they opted me in without my permission (or knowlege until I mistype a url), and I must choose to opt-out.

Also as someone pointed out IF the service is being provided by a 3rd party company, who isn't even in the UK, then there may be some privacy issues.

I don't have a chip on my shoulder about the company. I am satisfied with my broadband and telephone service. Their offshore call centers have a lot to be desired, but once you get someone competent and not a script reader, problems do get fixed. However, I DO object to them sneaking things like this in, and the underhand method of sneaking it in without telling anyone until after the fact, makes me wonder what else they are planning.

[BenMcr]

Is this active for everyone?No it's a staged rollout.

[Sirius]

makes me wonder what else they are planning.

World domination :LOL:

[BenMcr]

Also as someone pointed out IF the service is being provided by a 3rd party company, who isn't even in the UK, then there may be some privacy issues.Well by the looking at the companies client list, if you ARE worried then moving to another ISP might not help.

http://www.nominum.com/customers/index.php

[webcrawler2050]

The problem is, with services such as OpenDNS, I choose to opt-in. With VM's implementation, they opted me in without my permission (or knowlege until I mistype a url), and I must choose to opt-out.

Also as someone pointed out IF the service is being provided by a 3rd party company, who isn't even in the UK, then there may be some privacy issues.

I don't have a chip on my shoulder about the company. I am satisfied with my broadband and telephone service. Their offshore call centers have a lot to be desired, but once you get someone competent and not a script reader, problems do get fixed. However, I DO object to them sneaking things like this in, and the underhand method of sneaking it in without telling anyone until after the fact, makes me wonder what else they are planning.

I think, personally, alot of you are being "over" paranoid about this - it's nothing major, really, just a simple "dns cannot be found" holding page, nothing major really? As i've said before, alot if not all ISP's do it. To list a few, BT, Talk Talk, Tiscali, Namesco etc etc.

[Wayfair]

I am with Milambar with this one, I would much rather opt in to something and not opt out when I get round to noticing something is not quite right.

As far as you saying 'it's nothing major' webcrawler, how many nothing majors do you have to join together to make something major?

Paranoia is not even an issue here, I don't feel the need to get my tin-foil hat out from the bomb proof cupboard under the stairs but surely it's within everyone right to be aware on what is going on around them.

[Ignitionnet]

How does it exactly break VPNs? From what i can tell, it should make no difference as you should be using the VPN target's DNS servers as there could be differences between internal and external resolution on any domains the company uses.

And how is windows supposed to know which DNS to use? VPNs are an additional virtual interface, not an entire new protocol stack that assimilates the entire PC. It binds to the physical interface via DNE in every case I know of, Deterministic Network Enhancer, and the DNS is only used once those further up the DNE stack are used.

You can't use the internal DNS on a VPN all the time, when you disconnect you won't be able to resolve a thing.

Have you actually used VPNs at all dev, given that you made a comment 'from what I can tell'?

You have no evidence what VM will use the money for, do you really think the exec types will go for something like this rather than a simple price increase (something that they would actually understand)?

Nor do I care any more than I care what they do with the subscription charges. I said it was a money grab, I made no guess what was being done with the money but given that I doubt it's going to be all sent to charity it would seem likely it's going to VM's bottom line. If you think the exec types weren't aware of this given its' potential for bad publicity that's simply silly. Of course they were, presented to them as a value add with potential revenues that may be received from it.

I assume by this you're perfectly happy with OpenDNS doing it as opt-in but not happy that VM are doing it?

Yes perfectly happy. I had a choice to use OpenDNS and when you sign up it informs you what it will be doing to your service and gives you the option to opt out. I can't remember getting that option when my router took the DHCP lease from VM with those addresses on it.

---------- Post added at 15:56 ---------- Previous post was at 15:55 ----------

Is this active for everyone? Just that I don't get the redirection at all for failed DNS requests.. Might be the business BB I have even though it's still going though the usual VM DNS servers

Although all VM customers now, in theory, receive the same DNS addresses these are different servers, with the server one uses selected by Anycasting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anycast).

---------- Post added at 16:00 ---------- Previous post was at 15:56 ----------

I think, personally, alot of you are being "over" paranoid about this - it's nothing major, really, just a simple "dns cannot be found" holding page, nothing major really? As i've said before, alot if not all ISP's do it. To list a few, BT, Talk Talk, Tiscali, Namesco etc etc.

As per http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34854400-post84.html I'm not paranoid it's just irritating in that it breaks some things. Regardless of whomever else does it it doesn't justify someone else doing it, and that it's outsourced gives some nice ammo to the more paranoid :(

[BenMcr]

Just a question but does this actually affect all lookups or just those on the HTTP protocol (if there is a difference)

If you ping a non-existant domain what happens?

[Ignitionnet]

Just a question but does this actually affect all lookups or just those on the HTTP protocol (if there is a difference)

If you ping a non-existant domain what happens?

The VM DNS will respond with the address of the search page. There is no way to determine if a lookup is for HTTP or another protocol, so you'll be pinging the server farm hosting the search page. Tech support may have some fun with that one ;)

[Toto]

Not wanting to quote anyone in particular, but to all those who bang on about Internet standards as being the be-all that ends-all (?), who of you, or us, have security measures in to protect their PC's/Networks that breach fundamental RFC's? Probably everyone who is concerned about their security, and most of those against this mechanism quote a potential security issue.

Me puts hand up.

Granted this DNS hijack should probably have been opt in rather than opt out, but as has already been pointed out we are at liberty to say no, once and for all.

"Mission creep", "erosion of privacy", "breaking internet standards", "money grabbing ISP's" are all terms we love to bandy about like sweets flying out of a pinata.

We talk about Internet standards in terms of "must", "do" or "should" as if it really matters, or it supports an argument. Well that's fine in one way, but surely the same argument has to be applied to other things reliant on the same standards that we don't appear to mind, can we have it both ways?

VM have provided many with a reliable Broadband service, reasonably consistent speeds near to the advertised package, and a host of other bits n pieces such as security software, email, and other services such as V Stuff(ed) and that new music thingy coming out this year.

So, they want to make a few pence of each link me may click on if we get a page error, assuming we haven't opted-out. I don't have a problem with it. Security breaches from said service? XSS perhaps - get a good browser with some decent add ons such as no-script - cracking utility in my opinion.

[Ignitionnet]

Not wanting to quote anyone in particular, but to all those who bang on about Internet standards as being the be-all that ends-all (?), who of you, or us, have security measures in to protect their PC's/Networks that breach fundamental RFC's? Probably everyone who is concerned about their security, and most of those against this mechanism quote a potential security issue.

No idea, my router responds normally to ICMP as a node should :)

In my defence I didn't talk about it being a privacy or a security matter, just a pain in the backside that breaks things.

[Sirius]

No idea, my router responds normally to ICMP as a node should :)

In my defence I didn't talk about it being a privacy or a security matter, just a pain in the backside that breaks things.

However some here seem to think the bloody world is about to end because of this :rolleyes:

[Mick Fisher]

A journey of a 1000 miles is accomplished 1 step at a time.

Who is best placed to decide when a step is a step too far.

The treader or the trodden on.

Just a thought. :)

[Hugh]

Next up, someone will quote Pastor Neimoller....;)

[Ignitionnet]

However some here seem to think the bloody world is about to end because of this :rolleyes:

Quite - that's half the frustration the way it's been done has given more fuel to those fires that were born out of Phorm. :rolleyes:

Hey I'm a poet and I.... :D

[BenMcr]

Reported to el-reg, and a few other places, see if they wanna take the story and run.
Not quite in the way you were expecting I bet ;)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/17/dzuiba_virgin_media_opendns/

[Kymmy]

That report just says the same thing as the first few pages of posts.. i.e...you have an opt out, if you don't like it then use the opt out..

:rolleyes:

[webcrawler2050]

Not quite in the way you were expecting I bet ;)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/17/dzuiba_virgin_media_opendns/

:O jesus

[Ignitionnet]

The comments are quite funny. The author is someone who makes his money through search type stuff so hardly surprising he's a patronising ass about it all.

[punky]

Does anyone know where the settings are stored?

On Firefox it goes to Google. I found the URL setting in about:config but removing it leads to a chrome error.

On IE it goes to Google but through a Dell link (I have a Dell laptop)

I've tried googling but nothing really comes up.

[webcrawler2050]

Does anyone know where the settings are stored?

On Firefox it goes to Google. I found the URL setting in about:config but removing it leads to a chrome error.

On IE it goes to Google but through a Dell link (I have a Dell laptop)

I've tried googling but nothing really comes up.

I believe it's a setting in the registry.

[rogerdraig]

the "opt out" if you don't like it misses the point it should be opt in

and though some seem to think its not going to lead to it being used for other things they are being naive

this and other companies think if they keep on doing it it will be seen as the norm and no one ( important ) complains so it must be the right way

[Mick Fisher]

the "opt out" if you don't like it misses the point it should be opt in

and though some seem to think its not going to lead to it being used for other things they are being naive

this and other companies think if they keep on doing it it will be seen as the norm and no one ( important ) complains so it must be the right way
Well said, I totally agree.

[Jon T]

There isn't a setting on your PC that controls the search page, it's a re-direct triggered by an unsuccessful lookup from the Virgin DNS servers. Instead of returning a "cannot find the record" type of reply, therefore triggering a 404 error on your PC, virgin tell your browser to go the the virgin search page. It's all done via the DNS servers, nothing local on your PC at all.

[The Installer]

If you don't like it then just use Open DNS problem solved.

Google it if you want to findout more about it ;)

[Hugh]

If you don't like it then just use Open DNS problem solved.

Google it if you want to findout more about it ;)
Which, as has been said before, does exactly the same thing - just that you are choosing to do it, rather than take the opt-out option with VM.

[token]

Which, as has been said before, does exactly the same thing - just that you are choosing to do it, rather than take the opt-out option with VM.

And you're putting yourself further away from the DNS server, both hop and latency wise but also from a supportability point of view...

[Traduk]

And you're putting yourself further away from the DNS server, both hop and latency wise but also from a supportability point of view...

OpenDNS has 9 DNS servers one of which is located in London so hops and latency is not the problem that you may think.

Supportability is another non issue because in the eternity I have used the service there has not been a single issue that has affected me. I used them after trying all manner of on PC type software DNS's because VM's DNS servers were so unreliable.

VM's DNS servers are still comparatively slow as I saw when my 20Meg was transferred to the 50Meg connections (for a few days). The allocated DNS servers on the 50Meg group connections were the same old visible hesitation that has been a problem with VM for years.

[dev]

OpenDNS has 9 DNS servers one of which is located in London so hops and latency is not the problem that you may think.

While true, however the IP addresses OpenDNS uses are registered to the US thus breaking anyone that returns an IP address closer to your location, eg Google, but then OpenDNS fake the results for Google anyway so not the best example.

[token]

VM's DNS servers are still comparatively slow as I saw when my 20Meg was transferred to the 50Meg connections (for a few days). The allocated DNS servers on the 50Meg group connections were the same old visible hesitation that has been a problem with VM for years.

Funny you saying Virgin's DNS servers are slow - I did a few quick digs against their DNS servers, and I can't get a response for what I assume must be cached lookups in more than 10ms. OpenDNS don't respond in less than 50ms ever.

[Traduk]

Funny you saying Virgin's DNS servers are slow - I did a few quick digs against their DNS servers, and I can't get a response for what I assume must be cached lookups in more than 10ms. OpenDNS don't respond in less than 50ms ever.

With VM its the age old story... when its good, its very very good but when its bad its awful. A snapshot in time doesn't prove much for me as I use the service for hours each day. Over the span of a few days the use of VM's DNS servers always led me to wondering what had gone wrong and if wasn't the usual packet loss it was I suspect queuing for DNS responses.

Personally I couldn't care less about how good bad or indifferent VM's DNS servers are because I can choose not to use them or disable the hijack that they are going to implement.

What bothers me is the fact that they are obviously actively looking at revenue adding and I suppose that it is ironic that when I used the words "mission creep" earlier it took relatively little time for someone to find a fairly current missive from VM which puts Phorm and the likes back in the frame, albeit they are still undecided.

This DNS hijack is a pathetic little problem but is "opt-out" and may well set a precedent for something like Phorm when from in-house statistics VM will be able to state massive percentages that chose not to opt-out. If that argument opens the doors to Phorm then the services that VM provide and I do actually enjoy them (most of the time) will be dumped. It is the threat of Phorm etc that is and will stop me from upgrading to 50Meg because if my opt-out is via the exit door then I will not allow a new contract.

[Hugh]

Isn't there a difference between "hijack" and "redirect", as they appear to be being used interchangeably in this thread.

I have never heard on the news that terrorists have redirected a plane to Cuba. ;)

[PhilThomas]

Think of all that money from the Ads ...... and to think that Virgin will plough all this back into providing us with a better, cheaper service and not give a single penny to the shareholders ..... wow what a great company.

Their main reason for introducing this is "to help us get to where we want to go on the internet", this in itself is admirable, but to use all the revenue generated to reduce their prices and provide us with a more efficient service, deserves an award from Alan Sugar.

....... if anyone seriously believes any of this carp, we might as well all give up now :rolleyes:

[Hugh]

Mmmmm, businesses looking for new ways to make a profit - barstewards! ;)

[MeGMeG]

Actually this really ****ed me off as I pay enough to Virgin as it is. I phoned them up (dial 150 from virgin line) told them I was ****ed off and they told me they flicked a switch on their stystems to turn this so called "feature" off... after a restart I no longer see the virginmedia PPC search screen :)

---------- Post added at 15:29 ---------- Previous post was at 15:23 ----------

Actually this really ****ed me off as I pay enough to Virgin as it is. I phoned them up (dial 150 from virgin line) told them I was ****ed off and they told me they flicked a switch on their stystems to turn this so called "feature" off... after a restart I no longer see the virginmedia PPC search screen :)

Oh... If they said to me we will reduce your monthly bill if we can feed adverts to your browser I would then have said "sure, no problem"... But this is not the case so I'd advise anyone who is cheesed of by this "feature" to call virgin media and tell them to turn off the feature on your account!

[Sirius]

they told me they flicked a switch on their stystems to turn this so called "feature" off...

:LOL:

[Ignitionnet]

:LOL:

Obviously they aren't giving the customer service people computers anymore. Like the old, old telephone exchanges they have collections of wires to link together and switches to flick.

[Hugh]

Obviously they aren't giving the customer service people computers anymore. Like the old, old telephone exchanges they have collections of wires to link together and switches to flick.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2009/08/16.jpg

:LOL:

[Ignitionnet]

Bingo!

[Toto]

LOL, I didn't know VM's systems were THAT complicated ;)

[Stephen]

Its a simple redirect VM didn't hijack anything. I tested this a couple of months ago and I can see it useful for people that mistype things. Maybe older people or less computer literate people.

[MeGMeG]

Its a simple redirect VM didn't hijack anything. I tested this a couple of months ago and I can see it useful for people that mistype things. Maybe older people or less computer literate people.

No. They are using their DNS servers. Phone virgin media up and ask them "why am I seeing a virgin search screen in my browser when I misstype youporn.com".

[Sir John Luke]

Its a simple redirect VM didn't hijack anything. I tested this a couple of months ago and I can see it useful for people that mistype things. Maybe older people or less computer literate people.
No, the DNS lookup returns 'Not found'. Instead of returning this response unchanged to the the user, it is hijacked by VM and replaced with the IP of their search page.

[Ben B]

No, the DNS lookup returns 'Not found'. Instead of returning this response unchanged to the the user, it is hijacked by VM and replaced with the IP of their search page.

Redirected

[Jon T]

No. They are using their DNS servers. Phone virgin media up and ask them "why am I seeing a virgin search screen in my browser when I misstype youporn.com".

They aren't hijacking anything. If you type type a URL in wrong you normally would get a failed lookup from the dns servers, instead of this happening, they are forwarding the results on to a search engine on your behalf.

BTW, no need to phone up, earlier in the thread this url was posted: https://my.virginmedia.com/advancederrorsearch/settings

Thing is, there are certain family/friends of mine that would welcome this service on their ISP, mainly as their IT literacy is best described as "limited".

[PhilThomas]

Obviously they aren't giving the customer service people computers anymore. Like the old, old telephone exchanges they have collections of wires to link together and switches to flick.

They have upgraded now ....... this is the new Hi Tech kit, with switches :D

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2009/08/15.jpg

[Sir John Luke]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URL_redirection

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking

[Ignitionnet]

Its a simple redirect VM didn't hijack anything. I tested this a couple of months ago and I can see it useful for people that mistype things. Maybe older people or less computer literate people.

That's what it was called before VM did it, it's what it will be called when other ISPs do it.

Is it somewhat emotive? Perhaps, but just because VM are doing it it neither exempts it from this description nor is a cause of it. Nothing personal to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking

Redirected

Hijacked - there is no facility in DNS to redirect. If a domain doesn't exist you should respond with an NXDomain, end of.

They aren't hijacking anything. If you type type a URL in wrong you normally would get a failed lookup from the dns servers, instead of this happening, they are forwarding the results on to a search engine on your behalf.

See above and indeed below. Given that I believe you guys both work in IT That neither of you appear to recognise a DNS hijack when you see one is a bit confusing. Might be useful but it's still a hijack of a server higher up the DNS hierarchy's NXDomain response.

[Stephen]

No, the DNS lookup returns 'Not found'. Instead of returning this response unchanged to the the user, it is hijacked by VM and replaced with the IP of their search page.
If its VM's own DNS servers providing the search response its not hijacking! Its a redirect, simples

As I said I was part of the testing for this and its easy enough to opt in or out of.

For some people it will be better than getting the page not found message, as it will give them a list of possible sites they might have meant.

Never worked properly for me all the time, something to do with the setup of my router.

[MeGMeG]

Thing is, there are certain family/friends of mine that would welcome this service on their ISP, mainly as their IT literacy is best described as "limited".

Agreed, but I don't like it...

[Ignitionnet]

If its VM's own DNS servers providing the search response its not hijacking! Its a redirect, simples

Do you know how DNS works?

VM query a server higher up the chain, then change the NXDomain response for their own result, that's hijacking the query and replacing the NXDomain response from a server higher up the DNS hierarchy with their own. Simples.

EDIT: Technically it's no different from you connecting to a website and me intercepting your request and giving you my own responses. I'd call that a hijacked session. If Virgin run web proxies and change things around again that would be considered as hijacking of web sessions. You must understand that Virgin's DNS is not the be all and end all of DNS in the entire world, they are getting information from elsewhere and changing it.

[MeGMeG]

For some people it will be better than getting the page not found message, as it will give them a list of possible sites they might have meant.

Totally agree, but I hate it! I like to see "Server not found".

[Sir John Luke]

For some people it will be better than getting the page not found message, as it will give them a list of possible sites they might have meant.



So why isn't it opt-in? .. and since many will have already set up something similar with a provider of THEIR choice, what right do VM have to override this?

[Stephen]

So why isn't it opt-in? .. and since many will have already set up something similar with a provider of THEIR choice, what right do VM have to override this?
When I was testing it, the service was opt in.

[MeGMeG]

So why isn't it opt-in? .. and since many will have already set up something similar with a provider of THEIR choice, what right do VM have to override this?

Yep... I'm with you on that one too... Unless they were going to reduce my monthly bill and let customers know about it before they did it... I had no emails from Virgin Media telling me about this, no letters, nothing... Rude people they are...

---------- Post added at 19:00 ---------- Previous post was at 18:56 ----------

BTW, no need to phone up, earlier in the thread this url was posted: https://my.virginmedia.com/advancederrorsearch/settings

Thought there would be such a link, I did not read the whole thread sorry. However I like to vent my frustration or anger through my voice, you get all the emotion and passion that way...

[arcamalpha2004]

When I was testing it, the service was opt in.

So who was the suckhole who decided to make it opt out ?
No doubt they were given a nice gold plated VM pen for the suggestion.

[Sir John Luke]

I doubt that VM ever had the slightest intention of making it 'opt-in' when it went live.

[Jon T]

Thought there would be such a link, I did not read the whole thread sorry. However I like to vent my frustration or anger through my voice, you get all the emotion and passion that way...

No need to apologise, it wasn't meant in a "read the whole *&^%$£ thread" way.:)

to BBings, Yes, technically it's a hijack and I agree. However the word hijack is by default a malicious term. I don't believe that Virgin are doing anything malicious(yet), indeed as i've posted, i think this could help certain groups of people.

[Sir John Luke]

i think this could help certain groups of people.

No doubt, but to labour the point, it should be OPT-IN

[Jon T]

No doubt, but to labour the point, it should be OPT-IN

agreed

[Ignitionnet]

to BBings, Yes, technically it's a hijack and I agree. However the word hijack is by default a malicious term. I don't believe that Virgin are doing anything malicious(yet), indeed as i've posted, i think this could help certain groups of people.

Understood, but there are many terms which are 'by default' malicious, doesn't make them any less accurate even if the immediate perception might be inaccurate.

They aren't malicious but Virgin's DNS resolvers rather than caching and relaying the response they are getting from DNS servers are hijacking that communication between you and these servers and replacing it with their own entries.

It's like saying that a trojan horse isn't a trojan horse if it doesn't do anything more malicious than change your Internet Explorer title bar because the name 'Trojan Horse' suggests maliciousness not mischief.

Again this is nothing personal against Virgin, I hope that the claims that it isn't hijacking aren't anything personal for them :)

[jamiefrost]

Your average user would most likely find this helpfull and would have a clue about DNS requests to begin with. For those's where this represents the end of the world you have one (1) DNS request 'hijacked'. Is this really such a big deal?

[webcrawler2050]

Actually this really ****ed me off as I pay enough to Virgin as it is. I phoned them up (dial 150 from virgin line) told them I was ****ed off and they told me they flicked a switch on their stystems to turn this so called "feature" off... after a restart I no longer see the virginmedia PPC search screen :)

---------- Post added at 15:29 ---------- Previous post was at 15:23 ----------



Oh... If they said to me we will reduce your monthly bill if we can feed adverts to your browser I would then have said "sure, no problem"... But this is not the case so I'd advise anyone who is cheesed of by this "feature" to call virgin media and tell them to turn off the feature on your account!

Agreed, prices are already "decent" and for a company that is battling the likes of BT - I would welcome any "other" profitable revenue VM could find, if it ment VM is to kept safe and have extra cash to put into their network and maybe, bring down the STM idea. :)

[Mick Fisher]

Agreed, prices are already "decent" and for a company that is battling the likes of BT - I would welcome any "other" profitable revenue VM could find, if it ment VM is to kept safe and have extra cash to put into their network and maybe, bring down the STM idea. :)
You must be labouring under the misapprehension that VM provide services with the primary intension of benefiting their subscribers. :)

I think you can be absolutely sure that the beneficiaries of any cost cutting/revenue raising ideas, further or otherwise, activated by VM will not be the Subscribers or even non executive Staff for that matter.

[PhilThomas]

No doubt, but to labour the point, it should be OPT-IN

Quite right

[tdadyslexia]

No doubt, but to labour the point, it should be OPT-IN
I agree with you 100%

[nfs6600]

thought nothing about abusing their loyal customer base

Well clearly you don't fall under that bracket of loyal. Your constantly complaining about the company yet I can't help but see you have the service. Please, leave and goto ADSL. see what service you get then and complain about that

[Mick Fisher]

Well clearly you don't fall under that bracket of loyal. Your constantly complaining about the company yet I can't help but see you have the service. Please, leave and goto ADSL. see what service you get then and complain about that
Keep it on topic can't you.
This thread is about a VM browser hijack.
If you want to make a personal attack on me I suggest you start a new thread it's bad form to hijack someone elses.
Oh! And do try to be more original. The phraseology you are using has been absolutely done to death over the years. :p:

[FairyFairy]

Gordon Bennett!! I wondered what was going on this morning when Virgin Media advanced search came up and I couldn't get into my favourite sites.

But .... checking on here ... told me what to do !!

Thanks again.

I agree - it should be an Opt In ... rather than you're in ... find out how to get out!!!!

[Tarantella]

Right then can someone put me right on this. I've trawled through the techspeak garblese on that VM webpage and read through this thread so three straight question:-


1)Is Virginmedia redirecting data generated by me sitting at my computer to a third party without specifially asking for my consent?

2)Is Nominum a company capable of restricting access to certain websites that it or VM or any other 3rd party (such as the government) consider should be banned.

3)Is Nominum a company capable of logging ip addresses of people attempting to access websites that might be banned in future?

[Toto]

Right then can someone put me right on this. I've trawled through the techspeak garblese on that VM webpage and read through this thread so three straight question:-


1)Is Virginmedia redirecting data generated by me sitting at my computer to a third party without specifially asking for my consent?

2)Is Nominum a company capable of restricting access to certain websites that it or VM or any other 3rd party (such as the government) consider should be banned.

3)Is Nominum a company capable of logging ip addresses of people attempting to access websites that might be banned in future?

No, no.....and no.

[Tarantella]

No, no.....and no.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Mockapetris

[Ignitionnet]

1)Is Virginmedia redirecting data generated by me sitting at my computer to a third party without specifially asking for my consent?

2)Is Nominum a company capable of restricting access to certain websites that it or VM or any other 3rd party (such as the government) consider should be banned.

3)Is Nominum a company capable of logging ip addresses of people attempting to access websites that might be banned in future?

1) Yes - when you attempt to go to an invalid domain what you actually typed is being sent to Nominum's search engine.
2) No - if a site's address is valid it will be dealt with purely by VM's own systems.
3) No - see 2)

The potential is there for it to happen, but not under the current system. VM would have to turn all of their DNS over to Nominum.

[Toto]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Mockapetris

Thanks.

[TheDon]

No doubt, but to labour the point, it should be OPT-IN

The problem with having something like this as opt-in is that the very people it will benefit will NEVER know about it.

It's far easier to have it opt-out as the vast majority of people aren't tech aware enough to know what it is, what it does, or how they could enable it, and if you sent them letters explaining it they'd pass it off as tech gobbledeegook and ignore it.

Instead you stick it as opt-out, with the page explaining very easily how to disable it and what it is, and then the people that don't want it get to see it all of once and can disable it 5 seconds later.

The people that are so against it they'd disable it are far far outweighed by those that would benefit from it, so having it opt-in is by far the best idea as then the people it's actually designed to benefit will get the benefit from it.

[Mick Fisher]

The problem with having something like this as opt-in is that the very people it will benefit will NEVER know about it.

It's far easier to have it opt-out as the vast majority of people aren't tech aware enough to know what it is, what it does, or how they could enable it, and if you sent them letters explaining it they'd pass it off as tech gobbledeegook and ignore it.

Instead you stick it as opt-out, with the page explaining very easily how to disable it and what it is, and then the people that don't want it get to see it all of once and can disable it 5 seconds later.

The people that are so against it they'd disable it are far far outweighed by those that would benefit from it, so having it opt-in is by far the best idea as then the people it's actually designed to benefit will get the benefit from it.
Apart from VM just who else will benefit.

It's illegal to sign a form on someone elses behalf unless you have their specific permission therefore why should it be legal for VM to opt me into something I never heard of.

[Traduk]

The Don,

When you start going down the path of for the common good of the technical challenged users, exploitation follows.

The idea of looking after the vast unsophisticated masses in the form of some variation of a "walled garden" approach to internet is a failed business model.

This little irritation of hijacking failed DNS searches is very likely to be just an opening gambit to eventually impose Phorm or something comparable. It is no accident that when the DNS hijack became a imminent reality that a press release popped up that put Phorm etc. back in the frame.

VM could easily use the apparent easy acceptance of DNS hijacking on an opt-in basis as an argument for something altogether much less acceptable. I can see the argument already going along the lines of "the vast percentage of users remained opted-in" which could be used as leverage to do pretty much as they liked.

I subscribe to the school of thought "give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile" with VM as in many areas of advertising etc. they spin the truth in to something highly questionable. I want them to give me what I pay for and not mess with it in any way so as to exploit my usage for their enhanced profit. If they cannot come up with a pricing model which gives both them and me an acceptable deal without underhand dealings then they will lose my part of the deal.

[blaklite]

The phrase "Thin end of the wedge" springs to mind.

But like so much in todays society most people just smile and bend over when the "wedge" is being smartly rammed up their backside.

'Smack, thank you sir, may I have another?'

[homealone]

Of course, spelling your search enquiries properly will prevent all this hassle ;)

[TheDon]

Apart from VM just who else will benefit.

It's illegal to sign a form on someone elses behalf unless you have their specific permission therefore why should it be legal for VM to opt me into something I never heard of.

Who else will benefit? People that throw a fit whenever they see an error message. Which is a huge majority of casual net browsers. Browser errors are not user friendly, if you don't understand them and why you're seeing them they can be confusing, so it's easier for a lot of people to have them replaced with something far more useful.

As for the "thin end of the wedge" argument, I'm a proponent of the wait and see approach, where you judge on not what COULD happen, but what actually is happening. Far too many people throw their toys out the pram based on remote possibilities rather than on what's actually happening. If we spent our lives worrying about what could happen then when would we get time for anything else?

[Milambar]

Traduk actually said what I was thinking, but didn't say out of fear of looking paranoid. Thanks Traduk :)

[Mick Fisher]

Who else will benefit? People that throw a fit whenever they see an error message. Which is a huge majority of casual net browsers. Browser errors are not user friendly, if you don't understand them and why you're seeing them they can be confusing, so it's easier for a lot of people to have them replaced with something far more useful.
Do you take me for a fool.
Why can you not see that there is nothing benevolent about this at all. It is merely a ruse to get eyeballs staring at a page of adverts to line the pockets of VM.

No more no less.

You can paint it any colour you want but it still smells.

[TheDon]

Do you take me for a fool.
Why can you not see that there is nothing benevolent about this at all. It is merely a ruse to get eyeballs staring at a page of adverts to line the pockets of VM.

No more no less.

You can paint it any colour you want but it still smells.

And the entire reason they offer internet access is to line their own pockets as well, that you actually benefit from them doing so clearly doesn't matter.

Best just cancel all your services! Don't want to be giving them money afterall!

[Traduk]

Who else will benefit? People that throw a fit whenever they see an error message. Which is a huge majority of casual net browsers. Browser errors are not user friendly, if you don't understand them and why you're seeing them they can be confusing, so it's easier for a lot of people to have them replaced with something far more useful.

As for the "thin end of the wedge" argument, I'm a proponent of the wait and see approach, where you judge on not what COULD happen, but what actually is happening. Far too many people throw their toys out the pram based on remote possibilities rather than on what's actually happening. If we spent our lives worrying about what could happen then when would we get time for anything else?

Your argument appears to be based on apparent paranoid speculation on the part of others?. Perhaps you are not aware of the long standing speculation as to which side of the fence VM will actually take regarding Phorm etc. The unknown of their eventual choice has been hanging around for the best part of two years during which time they have said nothing, then said no way and recently maybe.

There is nothing remote, possibility wise, regarding the ongoing assessment of third party advertising add-ons and I suspect that given half a chance they would impose it ASAP. My toys will get thrown out of the pram when and if they implement Phorm or something comparable but in preparation I am doing no more than maintaining a watching brief and avoiding any contractual obligations.

The "wait and see" approach especially in the face of a known prospective change would strike me as apathy. VM will weigh up what they can do against possible churn and my fear is that the DNS hijack which is no big deal may embolden them to the point whereby they make a critical error in judgement.

I actually want VM to thrive and carry on giving me the services I enjoy. If Phorm is implemented it may be that churn will finish them off for all customers. Their SEC filings show ongoing cash raising just to help pay interest on existing debt. One major trip and\or slip and they could be history which does nobody any good.

[Mick Fisher]

And the entire reason they offer internet access is to line their own pockets as well, that you actually benefit from them doing so clearly doesn't matter.

Best just cancel all your services! Don't want to be giving them money afterall!
By your falling back on such well worn rhetoric I take it you have run out of coherent argument to promote the obvious moral shortcomings of VM's dubious, behind the scenes activities.

[BenMcr]

If anyone is interested some additional FAQs have been posted (sorry if it's already been linked to)

http://www.virginmedia.com/myvirginmedia/advancederror/feedback.php#add_faqs

Covers most of the issues raised on this thread I think (including VPN technical stuff)

[rogerdraig]

yep it tries to get every one used to the you have to opt out idea that all companies want the norm to be ;)


just because they dont use data doesnt alter the point that they could and they should have given the option first

or are they going to stat fitting BB in house just so the customer can see what they didnt know they would want but with the option to opt out once they see it there ;)

which they fitted by the way by using the duplicated front door key they had but that ist a problem as they didnt at this point action the option they had to search your house nor did they let any of their parters in to see what you get up to either and the posibilty they could later isnt a proble as they ssy they wont in future action that option either a

any one tell i am in a sarcastic mood tonight lol

oh any one whose read the FAQ will understand the above :p

[Mick Fisher]

Ve vill opt you into our money making schemes because you are all too stoopid to understand vat is good for you.

By Order oF Virgin Media.

Zeig Heil.

:rolleyes:

[Zee]

thanks a lot... finally been able to switch this crap off, 100% of the time it didn't work properly.

[craigj2k12]

thanks a lot... finally been able to switch this crap off, 100% of the time it didn't work properly.

this thread was from 2009 :erm:

[Hugh]

this thread was from 2009 :erm:It took him a while to work it out....:D

[Maggy]

Plus Zee had to locate the thread in archives so probably knew it was an old thread.;)

[craigj2k12]

probably came from a google search, however when doing this, i always check the date first ;)

[Chrysalis]

I expect this is the same as opendns redirect system that is used for failed lookups. So anyone not using VM's dns servers wouldnt be affected anyway.

[Maggy]

probably came from a google search, however when doing this, i always check the date first ;)

Doesn't matter he got the help he needed.;)

[tdadyslexia]

Note You will need to opt out again if you replace your modem, will apply to all computers on your internet connection.

To opt out go to:
https://my.virginmedia.com/advancederrorsearch/settings

I have just got a new modem from NTL / Virgin Media

I forgot all about NTL's url hijacking. :mad:

[carlwaring]

Way to resurrect a dead thread :rolleyes:

[Sirius]

Note You will need to opt out again if you replace your modem, will apply to all computers on your internet connection.

To opt out go to:
https://my.virginmedia.com/advancederrorsearch/settings

I have just got a new modem from NTL / Virgin Media

I forgot all about NTL's url hijacking. :mad:

I check mine once a month to to make sure i have not been opted back in :tu:

Its good to remind users about the ability to turn it off. To be honest it should be an OPT IN service instead of a OPT OUT service because it makes money for the supplier.

[Maggy]

Way to resurrect a dead thread :rolleyes:

Nothing wrong with that provided you have something new to add..besides pointing out it's an old thread.;)

[jempalmer]

I was unaware of this until the thread was reopened. I checked and it seems that I am opted out. How often should one check? Presumably I'll be redirected to an ad laden page if it changes?

[tdadyslexia]

I check mine once a month to to make sure i have not been opted back in :tu:

I think that is a good idea.

Its good to remind users about the ability to turn it off. To be honest it should be an OPT IN service instead of a OPT OUT service because it makes money for the supplier.
Yes it should be an OPT IN service, and yes it is good to remind users about the ability to turn it off.

See link above to opt out of NTL / Virgin Media's hijacking.

I now have the link Bookmarked.

[qasdfdsaq]

If you don't use VM DNS you never come across this problem anyway :)

[Sirius]

Nothing wrong with that provided you have something new to add..besides pointing out it's an old thread.;)

Agreed.

[Chrysalis]

opendns do the same.

[AdamD]

opendns do the same.

Was that always the case? I remember using it years ago, but I can't remember them ever throwing up a search page, at least, not until recently.

Personally, I use Google's DNS IP's (8.8.8.8/8.8.4.4)

[Stuart]

opendns do the same.

They do, but in fairness, most people don't pay OpenDNS for their service and they've got to make money somewhere. OpenDNS also offers quite an extensive filtering system that should you opt in to using it, does a good job of blocking various sites people may not want to see.

I believe the objection here is that people DO pay VM for a service, and VM are doing this as well. VM don't (AFAIK) offer the option of filtering though.

[qasdfdsaq]

Google's DNS service is free and does not do this, nor is there even a paid-for option.

[Stuart]

Google's DNS service is free and does not do this, nor is there even a paid-for option.

Fair enough. However, Google do have other sources of income. I was just making the point the OpenDNS does it for income to survive, so your point about Google's lack of a paid for option is largely irrelevant.

[carlwaring]

And I think "hijack" is a very pejorative/subjective term anyway. If I can't get to the right page for some reason, isn't it a good thing to have some help/suggestions rather than just a useless blank page?

[Milambar]

No, because it breaks numerous protocols, and established technoliogies that rely on getting a proper NXDOMAIN error back (what you are calling a blank page).

[carlwaring]

Not that that matters to most non-tech people who probably neither know nor care. (Just like me.)

[Milambar]

The old "doesn't affect me, so it doesn't matter, therefore theres nothing wrong with it" attitude, I see.

Well, if you get burgled, it wouldn't affect me, so it doesn't matter, therefore theres nothing wrong with it!

OK, its a bad analogy I know, but the only one I can think of with this migraine. I'm sure you will realise what I'm trying to say however.

[qasdfdsaq]

Well, if you get burgled, it wouldn't affect me, so it doesn't matter, therefore theres nothing wrong with it!

OK, its a bad analogy I know, but the only one I can think of with this migraine. I'm sure you will realise what I'm trying to say however.
Actually a pretty good analogy.

He gets burgled, doesn't affect us, we don't care and there's no need for any police.

[carlwaring]

The old "doesn't affect me, so it doesn't matter, therefore theres nothing wrong with it" attitude, I see.
So exactly what is "wrong" with it then, how does it affect me?

Well, if you get burgled, it wouldn't affect me, so it doesn't matter, therefore theres nothing wrong with it!
Well my getting burgled certainly won't affect you, no.

OK, its a bad analogy I know..
Indeed.

I'm sure you will realise what I'm trying to say however.
No I don't. But I am happy to wait until your migraine has passed before you answer the questions I posed, above.

Actually a pretty good analogy.
No, it really isn't.

He gets burgled, doesn't affect us, we don't care...
That's fair enough; though I think I would care that you had been a victim of crime even though I wasn't directly affected :)

...and there's no need for any police.
Unfortunately, this is where the analogy falls down. There is a need for the police to solve my burglary; even though you remain un-affected by it.

Still doesn't explain why I should be worried that VM want to offer me some help and suggestions as to what I may have been looking for.

[passingbat]

Way to resurrect a dead thread :rolleyes:

It's helped me; I knew nothing about it until I read this thread just now. Now switched off.

[carlwaring]

Why?

[Sirius]

Actually a pretty good analogy.

He gets burgled, doesn't affect us, we don't care and there's no need for any police.

I object to the hijacking on the grounds you are opted in automatically to something that makes money for the people who automatically opted you in.

[carlwaring]

I suppose that's a fair point.

But anyway, how often do you actually mis-type a URL so you see this screen and then click on one of the links? It happens to me very rarely so they're certainly not making anything through me :)

And I certainly don't begrudge VM another revenue stream if it helps them improve my services ;)

[qasdfdsaq]

No, it really isn't.

Yes, it really is.

[carlwaring]

How the heck is a burglary (that of course does not actually directly affect anyone but the person burgled) a good analogy for this? :confused: It makes absolutely NO sense!

[passingbat]

Why?



Innocent as I'm sure it is, I object to VM changing my PC settings without informing me first and giving me the option. The default should be OFF

[BenMcr]

Innocent as I'm sure it is, I object to VM changing my PC settings without informing me first and giving me the option. The default should be OFFTechnically they aren't going anywhere near your PC - it's all on Virgin's end

[carlwaring]

Innocent as I'm sure it is, I object to VM changing my PC settings without informing me first and giving me the option. The default should be OFF
And as a point of principle it's fair enough, but it's not really doing any harm is it?

---------- Post added at 16:53 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ----------

Technically they aren't going anywhere near your PC - it's all on Virgin's end
Another, very relevant, point :)

[Peter_]

Innocent as I'm sure it is, I object to VM changing my PC settings without informing me first and giving me the option. The default should be OFF
No setting are altered on your pc if you use google for instance this does not happen as it is set only on the Virgin Media home page.

[Toto]

I was unaware of this until the thread was reopened. I checked and it seems that I am opted out. How often should one check? Presumably I'll be redirected to an ad laden page if it changes?

It's modem dependant, if you change modem, you are opted back in, so when you try a URL that should return NXDOMAIN, you'll be prompted with the VM "did you mean this?" search page. HTH

[carlwaring]

Which, surely, is actually more helpful? And, AFAIK, Google do a similar thing with search terms :)

[Hugh]

I think people would like the option, rather than it being a default (if it is).

[Sirius]

I think people would like the option, rather than it being a default (if it is).


It's opt out not opt in as standard.

[carlwaring]

I had it come up out of the blue when I tried to access my banks website recently. There was nothing wrong with the URL and it accessed correctly once I disabled VM's interferance.
Sorry but I just don't believe that.

I'd rather see the raw server error...
If the URL was correct then there would have been no server error for VM's system to intercept.

...than VM's assumption of what I'm trying to access as for me it's likely to me of more use.
So you'd rather not know what was wrong? :confused:

[Sirius]

I already pay vm for my broadband, why should they then be allowed to make money from my search redirects when I was initially not told it was turned on ??. So glad I now know how to turn off the hijacking? I have never agreed with any system that automaticaly opts you in where there is a financial gain

[cookie_365]

I remember turning this off in the past, it now seems to have turned itself back on overnight.

This page (http://www.virginmedia.com/myvirginmedia/advancederror/) claims you can turn it off by going to the advanced search settings page (https://my.virginmedia.com/advancederrorsearch/settings) but all I get with that is a 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable error.

Not impressed.

[BenMcr]

The options page is working for me on my VM broadband connectiopn

[carlwaring]

I wish they'd concentrate on making the network run fast and reliable....
Erm... they are doing :rolleyes:

[ferretuk]

The options page is working for me on my VM broadband connectiopn

Not working in Hitchin at 15:50 30/6

http://www.pwatson.org/virgin.png

[tdadyslexia]

@ferretuk, It's working here in Middlesbrough.

Is it still not working for you?

[ferretuk]

Working now...

[Paul]

Sorry but I just don't believe that.


If the URL was correct then there would have been no server error for VM's system to intercept.

Nobody cares what you believe Carl.

This post seems like nothing more than being argumentative for the sake of it (again). This is what we call trolling.

So here is your last warning : Stop trolling threads.

If you dont, I will kick you off Cable Forum (assuming Mick doesnt do it first).

Just so its perfectly clear, this isnt a debate, there is no right of appeal, or any other conversation to be entered into.
You will do as requested, or your account will be terminated. We have had more than enough of your arguing, trolling and general mindless posting.

[carlwaring]

I have just spent the last five minutes deliberately mis-spelling/mis-typing URLs into Google's address bar and have yet to be presented with the VM 'advanced search system' (or whatever it's called.) I recently upgraded to 30mb and so got a new router and have no opted-out.

So my question is this....

I had it come up out of the blue when I tried to access my banks website recently. There was nothing wrong with the URL and it accessed correctly once I disabled VM's interferance.

If I can't deliberately trigger it by entering wrong URLs yet heero_yuy can seemingly trigger it by entering a correct URL, something is obviously wrong somewhere.

ETA:
Okay. I just got it by typing in www.hafilax-online.co.uk instead of the obvious. Interestingly, it didn't offer me the correct URL :D

[qasdfdsaq]

If I can't deliberately trigger it, what am I doing wrong by entering wrong URLs yet heero_yuy can trigger it by entering a correct URL, one of us is obviously wrong. So who is?
Resisting the obvious temptation to simply blame you it could quite easily be neither.

There are plenty of legitimate explanations for such behaviour, such as a particular VM DNS server in one area having a transient network issue that prevents it reaching the DNS server of the site in question; the same thing could happen at the other end.

The only thing that's wrong is your attitude of if you don't know about it then there is no alternative explanation.

[Sirius]

Resisting the obvious temptation to simply blame you it could quite easily be neither.

There are plenty of legitimate explanations for such behaviour, such as a particular VM DNS server in one area having a transient network issue that prevents it reaching the DNS server of the site in question; the same thing could happen at the other end.

The only thing that's wrong is your attitude of if you don't know about it then there is no alternative explanation.


I can trigger it just by going to the link and selecting that i wish to have my dns hijacked, Then all i need do is misspell a URL and bingo there it is. However i have no intention of leaving it hijacked

[carlwaring]

The only thing that's wrong is your attitude of if you don't know about it then there is no alternative explanation.
Thank you for taking the time to explain it for me.

I realise I can sometimes be a little blunt but that's just how I am. I do try not to be and no offence is ever intended.

[jempalmer]

Thank you for taking the time to explain it for me.

I realise I can sometimes be a little blunt but that's just how I am. I do try not to be and no offence is ever intended.

And that's why we have such a huge affection for you Carl. We love you really, despite your blunt approach. Incidentally, why have you not replied to my heart felt PM? I feel somewhat hurt :p:.

[carlwaring]

Incidentally, why have you not replied to my heart felt PM? I feel somewhat hurt :p:.
The one from last week? Thought I had! (Just checked. I replied to the first; not the second :blush:)