Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Phorm: Warning To TalkTalk, Virgin & BT Customers

djellison said:
The people in this country need to realise that to get a good ISP, you need to spend more cash.

I was with Plusnet, on a medium package, and the service was crap. It was slow, it was cheap. I left.

Now I'm with Vivaciti - I pay £28 a month. I get regular download speeds of 500-600-700 kb/sec, upload speeds of 60kb/sec - and they're sure as hell not selling my browsing pattern to advertising companies. If you're paying less than half that, you're going to get someone guilty of the 'up-to 8 meg' con, with poor service, crap customer support etc.

I'm sure you can luck-out and get good service for a low price somewhere - but with internet services, hosting, servers etc etc - you get what you pay for. Pay peanuts, get monkeys.
Click to expand...

I half agree. You certainly do get what you pay for, however, in this day and age you shouldn't have to pay almost £30 a month just for a good internet service.
 
I agree with that. It would be nice if it were less. BUT - all the evidence, reviews and discussion on the subject suggests that's where we are right now. The <£15 ISPs rarely deliver a fast, reliable, non traffice shaped, genuinely unlimited, privacy invasion free service. It would be fantastic if that were a different story, but it isn't.

Japan, for example, makes every ISP in the UK look like a bloody circus.

Doug
 
djellison said:
Japan, for example, makes every ISP in the UK look like a bloody circus.
Click to expand...

Never a truer word spoken. We lag behind the rest of the world, and then charge a premium for the "good" services, which still look poor compared to the likes of America and Japan. A lot of it depends on where you live in this country as well though.
 
I thought this thread was about Phorm but you have converted it into a bragging session about ISP's. (hows about the 100mb beta im on comming up soon?)

Fact of the matter is, i'm already with Virgin and they have decided to adopt it, what will you do if and when Vivaciti decide to adopt it? change ISP's again? always playing cat and mouse?

Always running and not stopping to fight it?

Good point about Japan tho, i was in Norway a few years back and they've had 100mb standard for years, we are so very behind,
 
Carnivor said:
, what will you do if and when Vivaciti decide to adopt it? change ISP's again? always playing cat and mouse?

Always running and not stopping to fight it?
Click to expand...

You can't fight a coporate decision any other way than taking your business elsewhere.

If my ISP were to have an opt-out Phorm implementation, I would leave immediately. A company that does that is not one I want to be giving my money to. If they had an Opt-in, I would probably stay (and not opt in, obviously).

There are other good ISP's out there, I'd have an afternoon of downtime ( while I was at work anyway) - and find someone else. No skin off my nose.


Doug
 
It says on the Phorm website that anyone can opt-out at webwise.com, which luckily says that the service is not available in my area, so no being tracked for me :)
 
Picture 2.png

Awesome!
:D
 
EvanLugh said:
I doubt it, but considering they're already breaking EU law - don't worry.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, there is that law that stopps even the ISPs themselves from looking at what we do, so im sure some dodgy advertising company, the CEO of which used to own a company that was involved in rootkits, wont get away with it.
 
BT secretly intercepted and profiled the web browsing of 18,000 of its broadband customers in 2006 using advertising technology provided by 121Media, the alleged spyware company that changed its name to Phorm last year.

BT Retail ran the "stealth" pilot without customer consent between 23 September and 6 October 2006. The technology was approved, pending a further trial*.

Documents seen by The Register show that the companies used the secret profiles to target advertising at broadband customers when they visited certain popular websites.

Phorm had purchased commercial space on these websites, although their URLs are not included in the documents. The groups targeted included people interested in finance (for an Egg credit card campaign), weight loss (a Weight Watchers campaign), and jobs (a Monster.com campaign).

The technical report drawn up by BT in the wake of the 2006 trial states: "The validation was made within BT's live broadband environment and involved a user base of approximately 18,000 customers, with a maximum of 10,000 online concurrently.
Click to expand...
BT are some cheeky bastids.
 
I have been following the Phorm story for a while. A few comments on here have said it is legal, they can do they what they want.

Actually they can't. Currently, discussions are under way as to who they have to get permission off to implement this and how many laws they could be breaking, (even though the Home Office have supposedly given advice on this):

- They definately have to ask us as customers, (And BT have said they will do this in by changing their T&C's*)
- They are likely to have to get permission off the owners of the web sites as they will be profiling inbound traffic

The opt-out is also interesting. Opting out will not stop your web usage being profiled, it will merely stop the targeted ads appearing. All the data will still pass through Phorm's servers.

RIPA and Data Protection are all being quoted.

I'm with BT and I think it stinks, I don't want them profiling my data even if they 'can't' tell it's me.

Personally, I think this is dangerous and a precedent needs to be set now. This is being taken up by some MP's and I have emailed mine to encourage him to support it.

What has come out today about BT testing it on 18k customers without them knowing is interesting and that in itself could land them in hot water. I do believe people will walk away if this is implemented.

Some might say this is good because you will get ads relevant to you. I think the point is, I should be able to say 'Yes I want you to look at what I'm doing and target stuff to me and I'm happy for you to look at what I'm doing', not 'We are going to target stuff to you and even if you don't want us to we are still going to see where you're going'

Lots more information on the TheRegister.co.uk and the BBC are hold of it now - A PR nightmare unfolding right in front of us.


*By changing the T&C's you can terminate the contract, even if you are only half-way through your contract so you can walk away.

- D
 
dwright1974 said:
I have been following the Phorm story for a while. A few comments on here have said it is legal, they can do they what they want.

Actually they can't. Currently, discussions are under way as to who they have to get permission off to implement this and how many laws they could be breaking, (even though the Home Office have supposedly given advice on this)
Click to expand...
Let's say that what they are doing is illegal, then where are the class action lawsuits, what are the police doing, who's going to prosecute them? The potential illegality of BT's actions didn't seem to bother them when making the decision to carry out the technical test, and nor did it stop it and other ISPs from signing deals with Phorm.

I don't think BT, Tiscali or Virgin customers can just sit around and wait for the law to take its course, because it doesn't seem like anything is happening. The best thing that they can do is to vote with their feet and leave.

My point is this. It's all very well establishing that what BT did was illegal, but until action is taken by the authorities to punish BT or to stop what they are doing, then calling their actions illegal doesn't really mean much. Besides, BT, Virgin, Tiscali and Phorm don't seem to have changed their position, even after the furore, so it would seem that the only thing that would stop them is if enough customers would leave.
 
stomer said:
Let's say that what they are doing is illegal, then where are the class action lawsuits, what are the police doing, who's going to prosecute them? The potentially illegality of BT's actions didn't seem to bother them when making the decision to carry out the technical test, and nor did it stop it and other ISPs from signing deals with Phorm.

I don't think BT, Tiscali or Virgin customers can just sit around and wait for the law to take its course, because it doesn't seem like anything is happening. The best thing that they can do is to vote with their feet and leave.

My point is this. It's all very well establishing that what BT did was illegal, but until action is taken by the authorities to punish BT or to stop what they are doing, then calling their actions illegal doesn't really mean much. Besides, BT, Virgin, Tiscali and Phorm don't seem to have changed their position, even after the furore, so it would seem that the only thing that would stop them is if enough customers would leave.
Click to expand...

Exactly, theres no point in laws that are not inforced anyway.

If the whole thing goes ahed I will seriously think about switching ISPs as I do not want a spyware and rootkit company looking at whatever I do on the internet, with only a cookie to stop them (whos to they there system wont ignore their "deactavation" cookie and look my my internet data anyway?)
 
Good news,

"Phorm warned about web data rules


The Information Commissioner said users must choose to join Phorm
Ad-targeting system Phorm must be "opt in" when it is rolled out, says the Information Commissioner Office (ICO)
European data protection laws demand that users must choose to enrol in the controversial system, said the ICO in an amended statement.
The decision could be a blow to Phorm which before now has said it would operate on an "opt out" basis."

quoted from the below artical!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7339263.stm
 
Europe starts legal action against UK over internet snooping

The European Commission has today started legal action against the Government over its failure to protect the privacy of British internet users.

The case was sparked by BT’s covert use of the controversial user-tracking technology Phorm on customers using its internet service in 2006 and 2007.

Phorm, a UK-based company founded in 2004, monitors users’ favourite sites and searches, and uses the information to deliver individually targeted advertising.

One of its most outspoken opponents is Sir Tim Berners-Lee, generally credited with inventing the web.

The European Commission has been concerned about the way Phorm was secretly tested in the United Kingdom. Last year, the Government backed Phorm after a complaint by Brussels.

But today Viviane Reding, the European Union's Commissioner for Information Society and Media, announced the first stage of legal action, saying that the Government had failed to implement European laws that protect internet users.

"Technologies such as internet behavioural advertising can be useful for businesses and consumers but they must be used in a way that complies with EU rules,” the Commissioner said. “These rules are there to protect the privacy of citizens and must be rigorously enforced by all member states.”

BT has already admitted that it conducted trials of Phorm without users’ consent in 2006 and 2007. A further, invitation-only, trial was conducted last year.

Ms Reding’s statement continued: “I call on the UK authorities to change their national laws and ensure that national authorities are duly empowered and have proper sanctions at their disposal to enforce EU legislation on the confidentiality of communications.”

Ms Reding’s contention is that UK laws must be tightened to protect consumers and comply with the ePrivacy Directive, which the UK Government signed up to in 2002. It came into force at the end of October 2003.

After receiving "hundreds of complaints" from UK citizens over the Phorm trials, EC officials wrote to Whitehall asking whether UK law adequately protected personal data.

"Following an analysis of the answers received, the commission has concerns that there are structural problems in the way the UK has implemented EU rules ensuring the confidentiality of communications,” the Commission said.

Although UK law makes it an offence to unlawfully intercept communications, the scope of this offence is limited to "intentional" interception only.

"Moreover, according to this law, interception is also considered to be lawful when the interceptor has 'reasonable grounds for believing' that consent to interception has been given.”

City of London police refused last year to act over BT and Phorm's trials, insisting that BT’s customers had given their "implied consent" and that the companies had a lack of criminal intent.

The British Government “should have fined these companies,” an EC spokesman said today.

The Commission has now given the Government two months to respond to today’s “infringement proceeding” - the first stage of a legal process which could end up in the European Court of Justice for an alleged breach of the directive.

The directive states that user consent must be “freely given, specific, and informed”, and it requires EU member states to impose sanctions in the event of breaches of the rules.

The Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, which along with the Home Office received the Commission’s infringement notice today, said it would respond within the two-month time frame.

If no satisfactory reply is received by the Commission within two months, it may decide to issue a “reasoned opinion”, the next stage of the infringement process.

Brussels is also concerned that the UK has no regulatory body charged with controlling interceptions of communications by private companies. The UK’s Information Commissioner does not any power to enforce the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which governs interception, and the Office of the Surveillance Commissioners is mandated only to investigate interceptions by public authorities.

Ms Reding reinforced her stern message to the British Government in her weekly video message, delivered via the European Commission’s website.

“Privacy is a particular value for us Europeans; a value reflected in European laws for many years,” she said.

“However, in spite of the many advantages of technological development, there is an undeniable risk that privacy is being lost to the brave new world of intrusive technologies. On the global information highways, personal information is increasingly becoming ‘the new currency’. And I believe that Europeans… must have the right to control how their personal information is used.”

“European privacy rules are crystal clear,” she said. “A person's information can only be used with their prior consent. We cannot give up this basic principle, and have all our exchanges monitored, surveyed and stored, in exchange for a promise of ‘more relevant’ advertisements! I will not shy away from taking action where an EU country falls short of this duty.”

Phorm has already been investigated by the police and the Government over privacy concerns. It has attracted interest from UK internet service providers including BT, Virgin Media and TalkTalk, although no company has yet fully introduced the system.

Sir Tim spoke out passionately against Phorm at a meeting in the House of Commons in March this year. "It is very important that when we click, we click without a thought that a third party knows what we're clicking on," he said. "'What is at stake is the integrity of the internet as a communications medium. It's important there should be no snooping on the internet."
Click to expand...

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk...article6091811.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1


Once more it's the meddling EU who protect us from our own government.
 
Phorm shares fall as BT opts out

Shares in the online ad firm Phorm have fallen by more than 40% after BT said it had no immediate plans to use the service that tracks online behaviour.

Phorm serves up adverts related to a user's web browsing history, which it monitors by taking a copy of the places they go and search terms they look for.

However, it came in for considerable criticism from privacy groups and prompted an EU investigation.

The firm's shares were down 43.16% at 270p at 13:13 BST.
Click to expand...
BBC.

Good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back