Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral
  1. just a reminder that the NoDPI BT Protest is happening this wednesday as reported. please make the time to inform and ask your friends to do their part to help in any way they can, to assist the fellow end users coming to potentially your part of the london woods to make this stand with you for Everyones privacy rights,and help make this a very productive day. and perhaps you might Even get to meet Baroness Miller (scheduled to speak at 1:15pm)and perhaps other members of the house of lords in person. and as a prelude to that ,you can also hear Alexander talking to Steve about the Phorm/Webwise Interception for profit, as he's taking part in Steve Gibson's Security Now! podcast Tonight (Tuesday,7pm our time). You can all watch the podcast on TWiT Live - Live Netcasts from TWiT with Leo Laporte and Friends as it is being recorded, and there is even a chat application embedded into the web page so you can engage the presenters as the show is being recorded. Hope to see many of you in there. Incidentally, Security Now! has 110 000 active listeners, so this is a good opportunity to increase your public awareness of how this wiretap on the other side of your Broadband wire potentially effects you and your familys online lives directly. https://nodpi.org/2008/05/30/protest-at-the-barbican/ "Protest at the Barbican! On July 16th 2008 outside the Barbican in London UK, a demonstration will be held to protest against the use of Deep Packet Inspection for the purpose of behavioural advertising (more specifically Phorm). The protest has been timed to coincide with BT’s annual general meeting and will be held outside that AGM. BT have announced an agreement with Phorm to deploy Deep Packet Inspection technology which has been reported as illegal by key privacy advocates, academics, peers in the House of Lords and Politicians in the UK and EU government. BT also carried out covert trials of this technology in 2006/2007 effecting over 120 000 of their customers, without first obtaining the consent required by law. It is planned that there will be several key speakers at the event and a website will be set up in the next week on www.nodpi.org with more information. Confirmed Guest Speakers Jason from UK Free Software Network will be giving a speech from the perspective of an ISP who have decided not to sign up with Phorm. More Information For more information please send an email to no2dpi at googlemail dot com or see the following links: Phorm opponents to picket BT shareholders | The Register The Phorm files | The Register "Home Office guidance misleading" says FIPR Author: Alexander Hanff
  2. HI Alexander. yes, this place was great for the old Bank charges legal points and lots of small claims charges and Data Protection Act CRA actions were talked about and actioned thanks to BankFodder and the other great people here OC. However in the mean time, while we have learned a lot in regards using the SC courts and so on , it doesnt seem like the old Guard are reading this Board much these days. even though everyone taking part in that fight Obviously all have BT,VM.CPW Phorm signed ISPs, but nothing much even being mentioned here about the Interception for Profit othe rthan this one thread and i find that odd. it seem almost impossible to gather the same kind of CAG BC community collective when it comes to Phorm and DPI used for unlawful profit matters. and i cant seem to get BankFodder's attention the few times iv tryed Here to garner the legal minds to collect and work to every single Uk ISP users benefit as they did for the Bank charges and thats a shame. thanks to Cable forum for collecting the webs most informative Anti Phorm/DPI thread,all is not lost, but i feel there are masses of well informed bank charges end users here that are so far untapped for the Phorm fight we may have to take to the courts sometime soon.
  3. the flyer is slighty revised with links now and heres the fact sheet. print a few of them off, and pass them to all your friends, tell them to do the same and help get the facts out. http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Factsheet.pdf http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer.pdf remember that the Phorm blocker's are only a fig leaf... they will Not, and can Not stop this Data collection Once the DPI devices are active On the Other side Of your Broadband Wire. Always Remember That Any Personal Information which is passed in a non https way (adding your email to a form, adding a product to a cart, writing a web based email) could also be passed to the Phorm system and tie back to your cookie meaning your UID (Unique IDentifier for a specific User of a computer system ) now has a name, perhaps even a real address attached. It is then conceivable that if unscrupulous employees of BT/Phorm or other ISP installed DPI For Profit companies (the CRA Experian for Instance) wanted to, they could collate and extract that individual data and other sources for profit. This is something that no-one has the ability to opt out of if the Phorm system is implemented, because you can only opt out of the behavioral ad system, and so not see any ads, however YOUR data stream is still passing through the Deep Packet inspection/Interception Device and being collected and processed etc. Cable Forum - View Single Post - Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 592 - Cable Forum Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff If anyone is interested I am currently writing a new article summarising the last 4 months. The first 5 pages are available as a pdf here: http://www.paladine.org.uk/phorm.pdf I am about to take a quick break from writing and setup a gallery page on NoDPI for all these anti Phorm images, please let me know if I miss any. Alexander Hanff. Say NO! to Deep Packet Inspection
  4. heres an Esential guide to Phorm and how it effects you http://www.inphormationdesk.org/Phorm_Flyer_V0.pdf
  5. go and digg this protest event to help get the word out,and if your in London go to it and take your friends if you value your rights. make the effort and make a stand. Digg - "No DPI" web site launches with Phorm Protest Event "No DPI" web site launches with Phorm Protest Event nodpi.org — Alexander Hanff, fierce Phorm opponent, has launched a new web site to further the campaign against the use of Deep Packet Inspection for the purpose of behavioural profiling. The site launched today with the announcement of a Protest Rally at BT's annual shareholder's meeting on July 16th. Significant press and media coverage expected." Digg - ICO Rubber Stamp Corporate Law Breaking! " ICO Rubber Stamp Corporate Law Breaking! nodpi.org — In a letter from the Information Commissioner's Office sent to one of the victims of the 2007 covert trials of Phorm by BT, it has been admitted that the trials did breach Regulation 6 of Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003. however, ICO have stated they will not be taking action against BT despite this breach."
  6. dave its been a while since your 24th April 2008 post. did you send that letter to the Information Commissioners Office and what reply if any did you get?... i see there is still very little traffic on this ISP/Phorm thread, and thats a shame, seeing as it will be the legal aproach more than anything that may turn the tide on all this illegal interception. :wavey: :grin: at bluecar1
  7. handy for getting out of your 12 month contract with this Phorm IP interception though do you have direct link for that price/timeline information? place it here please.
  8. after many CF re-submitting of RIPA petitions on the downing street website, and being rejected every time with such replys as “duplication” were its clearly not,and this laughable latest one “Outside the remit or powers of the Prime Minister and Government” OF1979 had enough and posted at a new place http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33628733-virgin-media-phorm-webwise-adverts-updated-page-172.html#post34523181 heres the petition http://www.petitiononline.com/BTRipa/petition.html “To: UK Prime Minister We, the hereby undersigned, petition the United Kingdom Prime Minister to ask the Home Office to launch an investigation into British Telecom and Phorm criminal breach of section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) during secret trials in 2006 and 2007. BT have recently admitted to carrying out secret trials of Phorms technology in 2006 and 2007 without their users consent or permission. Many experts, including the Foundation for Information Policy Research and also the Open Rights Group, contend that these trials constituted illegal interception and as such were a criminal breach of RIPA. We ask that the Prime Minister require the Home Office and police to launch an investigation into these criminal breaches which constitute a large scale intrusion of online-privacy. Sincerely, The Undersigned ” pass the word please
  9. people might be wise to keep track of this too, now were was that Data Protection Act for stopping the CRA's from collecting and procesing your data ?, need to update it perhaps. to reiterate surlyBonds thread first, we might be needing it real soon. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24013-defaults-proposed-method-removal.html Experian to track net users - Times Online " April 6, 2008 Experian to track net users James Ashton EXPERIAN, the credit checking company, is braving mounting concerns over internet privacy with plans to launch a service that will track broad-band users’ activity so they can be targeted with advertising. Through Hitwise, the web-site company it acquired for £120m a year ago, Experian has held talks with internet service providers to sell its monitoring technology. Observers expect it to compete in part with Phorm, an AIM-listed company that has stirred controversy after being recruited by BT, TalkTalk and Virgin Media to track their 10m customers’ behaviour so they can be sent advertising messages on the websites they are looking at. However, the key difference is that Hitwise, which describes itself as an “online competitive intelligence service...” incase your reading this later and the threads gone quiet, you can always hope the Cable forum users are still fighting your ISP data corner OC. Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 168 - Cable Forum is it just me or have all the CAG fighters gone home, surlyBonds , i salute you were did Bankfodder go ?, he was such a fighter once , and i thank you for that, and keeping this Message board going as a good reference archive at least.
  10. Light Blue Touchpaper » Blog Archive » The Phorm “Webwise” System " Much of the information was already known, albeit perhaps not all minutiae. However, there were a number of new things that were disclosed. Phorm explained the process by which an initial web request is redirected three times (using HTTP 307 responses) within their system so that they can inspect cookies to determine if the user has opted out of their system, so that they can set a unique identifier for the user (or collect it if it already exists), and finally to add a cookie that they forge to appear to come from someone else’s website. A number of very well-informed people on the UKCrypto mailing list have suggested that the last of these actions may be illegal under the Fraud Act 2006 and/or the Computer Misuse Act 1990." " Overall, I learnt nothing about the Phorm system that caused me to change my view that the system performs illegal interception as defined by s1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000."
  11. popper:for anyone that preferes to use a 3rd party player such as VLC directly on your other OS heres a working direct mms URL mms://wm-acl.bbc.co.uk/wms/news/media_acl/mps/fix/news/business/video/163000/bb/163377_16x9_bb.wmv lol, you were spying on your customers...... mms://wm-acl.bbc.co.uk/wms/news/media_acl/mps/fix/news/business/video/163000/bb/163376_16x9_bb.wmv from Elreg " Bootnote Friends tell us BT will get a grilling on Channel 4 News today." so keep your eyes open cant find the clips if they exist yet? Concerns over data pimping deal Last Modified: 04 Mar 2008 By: Channel 4 News http://www.channel4.com/news/article...g+deal/1703547 update and video clip Channel 4 - News - BT 'spies' on customers "Stephen Mainwaring from Weston Super Mare is one very angry BT customer. Last year, after noticing strange goings-on on his computer he contacted his internet service provider BT, who told him ....." ""Frankly that was disgraceful by BT to have done it, it would be huge diminution of our rights as individuals if this whole system is allowed to go ahead without us all being given the opportunity to opt in or out" - Don Foster, Lib Dem Culture Spokesman " " "The act of anonymising the surfing history of someone is in itself processing personal data. And someone is doing that, whether it's ISP or Phorm, so there's a good argument that that is a breach of the Data Protection Act." - Mike Conradi, Technology Lawyer " ....
  12. Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 144 - Cable Forum CaptJamieHunter Dark Lord Of The Bork Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 65 Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] OK, here is the final version. Please feel free to use as a base for letters to educate MPs, MEPs, regulatory bodies, businesspeople and anyone with influence about what Phorm really is and how they and BT have acted. Dear Mr Davis, I should like to bring to your attention a number of worrying recent developments in the field of internet privacy and of the failure of the Office of the Information Commissioner to investigate what appear to be two clear breaches of the Data Protection Act and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act by a major communications provider working with an advertising company. You may already be aware that three major internet service providers (ISPs) have signed agreements with a company known as Phorm to sell to them the internet browsing data of their users as part of a "targeted advertising" scheme. Computer news site The Register has uncovered a number of disturbing facts about Phorm including its previous involvement in spyware under a different name. Phorm prefer to spin this fact saying they were involved in adware. A cursory look at http://blogs.zdnet.com/Spyware/index.php?p=820, http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/peopleonpage.shtml and http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/apropos.shtml suggests differently, however. Phorm make a number of claims about their "product" being "a gold standard in user privacy" but despite being present on The Register, CableForum and a number of weblogs they have failed to openly and honestly answer detailed technical questions and concerns put in the public domain. The technology which causes greatest concern is that of Deep Packet Inspection and its use by this advertising company. This unit is installed by Phorm - the ISP has no access to it so cannot test, check or verify anything about the unit - and it inspects every packet of data which passes through it. Everyone who works at home, be they home workers, members of Parliament, judges, would find their data being subjected to the kind of inspection only intended for law enforcement activities and which normally would only ever be available to a judge following due legal process but here will be available to a company with a very questionable history. Confidential Crown material worked on by yourself or your Right Honourable colleagues, critically confidential business, personal or even security information could well be tapped under such a scheme. A simple analogy is your daily post. Imagine if every piece of post was opened, read, its contents noted and then resealed before being given to you. But you don't know who the person reading your post is. You don't know where that information could reappear or how it could be used. You don't know how many confidences will be betrayed. Every piece of post. Letters from constituents, Parliamentary colleagues, business colleagues, friends, family, others raising issues with you as I am. That is what Phorm is about. Financial gain from your personal activities and information. You will understand now why I refer to the growing belief that Phorm is illegal under RIPA. Government advisors The Foundation for Information Policy Research has published an open letter to Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, stating this belief. This letter is at http://www.fipr.org/080317icoletter.html Soon after this open letter appeared The Guardian newspaper recently rejected Phorm, saying that their "decision was in no small part down to the conversations we had internally about how this product sits with the values of our company." As polite yet devastating a put down as I have ever seen. More recently The Register obtained proof that BT not only secretly tested this "product" in June 2007 but lied to cover up this fact. Customers were given various excuses for their concerns, but no customer was told the truth. The report is at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/17/bt_phorm_lies/ This issue took an even more serious turn when The Register revealed that it had seen documentary evidence confirming that "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." This in addition to the secret 2007 tests. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 makes intercepting internet traffic without a warrant or consent an offence. It seems to me that illegally intercepting 18,000 customers' internet traffic is in breach of that legislation. As was the first secret test. I contend that BT must also be in breach of the Data Protection Act as the data was collected without customers' consent. Please read the full report at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...rm_2006_trial/ BT claimed that there was nothing illegal about the trials but refused to answer a number of direct questions asked by The Register about Stratis Scleparis, the BT Retail CTO who became Phorm CTO after the first successful secret trial. BT preferred to hide behind a bland statement and refused to apologise to customers or acknowledge anything illegal took place. The report is at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...orm_interview/ A number of people have already complained to the ICO but had little back in response. Today I and others became aware that despite these facts coming to light, the ICO have said that there is definitely no official investigation by ICO with regards to Phorm. Neither is there any investigation with regards to the BT secret trials of 2006 and 2007. I am led to believe the ICO are claiming that RIPA falls under the remit of the Home Office. The ICO seem unwilling to accept there should be an investigation into the activities of BT and Phorm. I should also add that the ICO were also extremely reluctant to divulge this information to a colleague and refused permission to quote them. This cannot be acceptable from a public servant organisation. This cannot be acceptable from the organisation created to "protect personal information" "provide information to individuals and organisations" and "take appropriate action when the law is broken." If the ICO cannot or will not take responsibility for an investigation, why is this the case? Who has the legislative power to investigate this breach of 18,000 customers' privacy? A major telcommunications company in the UK has betrayed the trust placed in it by its users. It and its accomplice, Phorm, should surely be brought to book for this flagrant violation of privacy legislation. Is this really going to be allowed to pass by unchallenged? One cannot help but wonder if the lack of action by the government and ICO is influenced in any way by the presence of former Labour minister Patricia Hewitt on the board of BT. I am sure you appreciate that I and many others cannot understand why BT and Phorm are being allowed to breach internet users' privacy with complete disregard for their customers or the law. I urge you to take up this issue with your colleagues in both Houses, the House Of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology and the House Of Lords Science and Technology Committee. Thank you for your time. If I may be of any further assistance to you please do not hesitate to get in touch. Yours sincerely ----------------------------- You need to mention ICO's obligation to enforce the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations with regards the BT secret trials. Whereas ICO might be able to say that RIPA falls under the remit of Home Office they cannot sidestep Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations as I outlined in my previous post. Feel free to cite the relevant parts directly from the beginning of that very long post I made. Alexander Hanff -------------------- Deep packet inspection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  13. Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 146 - Cable Forum " just browsing for legal ruling like you do and this turned up , the lost RIPA appeal of Stanford's http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room...20Stanford.htm Stanford Loses Criminal Appeal 3 February 2006 Stanford Loses Criminal Appeal Cliff Stanford, the Internet pioneer has recently had his appeal to quash his criminal conviction for intercepting emails denied. Stanford pleaded guilty last year to intercepting emails from his former company Redbus Interhouse – he argued in his appeal that the trial judge had misunderstood the law. Stanford was the founder of the ISP Demon Internet in 1992 but sold it to Scottish Telecom for £66 million in 1998. It is reported that Stanford made £30 million from the acquisition. Shortly afterwards Stanford was a co-founder of the co-location and data centre company Redbus Interhouse. However, Stanford resigned from the company in 2002 after disagreeing with the Chairman Jonathan Porter. In 2003 allegation started to be made as to whether Stanford was involved in the interception of email between Porter and his month Dame Shirley Porter. Stanford and another man were later charged under the Computer Misuse Act and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 with a trial date set for September 2005. However, both men pleaded guilty to the offence shortly before the case went to trial. Peters & Peters solicitors for Stanford were reported to have released the following statement: "Mr Stanford pleaded guilty to this offence following what we regard as an erroneous interpretation of a very complex new statute. The Judge’s ruling gave Mr Stanford no option other than to change his plea to one of guilty." Apparently, the legal team for Stanford intended to establish his innocence on appeal. However, this has had a severe drawback. He lost. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 provides a defence to an individual who intercept a communication in the course of its transmission from a private telecommunication system, if they can establish: a) that they are entitled to control the operation of the system; or b) they have the express or implied consent of such a person to make the interception. Stanford relied on the position that he had gained access to the emails through a company employee. The employee apparently was given access to usernames and passwords on the email server. Therefore, Stanford argued, he was entitled to access the emails as “a person with a right to control the operation or the use of the system”. Geoffrey Rivlin QC, the trial judge had a different view. He pointed out that “right to control” did not mean that someone had a right to access or operate the system, but that the Act required that person to of had a right to authorise or to forbid the operation. [that mean YOU users as the owner of the data] Stanford appealed the judge’s decision. However, the Court of Appeal upheld Rivlin’s view. It pointed out that the purpose of the law was to protect privacy. Therefore Stanford’s sentence of 6 months imprisonment (suspended for two years) and a fine of £20,000 with £7000 prosecution costs were upheld. Daniel Doherty __________________ Share what you know. Learn what you don't. Data Protection Public Register http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/Search.asp?EC=1
  14. If you are a customer of BT Retail (or of any other BT divisions e.g. BT Business) , Virgin Media or Carphone Warehouse Talk Talk, or any other company that thinks to profile your data for advertising , then you might like to write to them quoting the very clear The Data Protection Act 1998 section 11: 11 Right to prevent processing for purposes of direct marketing (1) An individual is entitled at any time by notice in writing to a data controller to require the data controller at the end of such period as is reasonable in the circumstances to cease, or not to begin, processing for the purposes of direct marketing personal data in respect of which he is the data subject. (2) If the court is satisfied, on the application of any person who has given a notice under subsection (1), that the data controller has failed to comply with the notice, the court may order him to take such steps for complying with the notice as the court thinks fit. (3) In this section "direct marketing" means the communication (by whatever means) of any advertising or marketing material which is directed to particular individuals.
  • Create New...