Sponsored Links

Phorm, is that really you?

For the last couple of months I have been following the B.T./Phorm project with great interest. Having my surfing habits snooped upon is vulgar to say the least. When the regulator issued an edict stating that it must contain an opt in clause rather than opt out I felt more than a little happy. Only a limited few would agree to sign up, and that should have killed it off. The whole project is no longer commercially viable, the profit margin will not cover the cost of programming, hardware, software installation, and those secret trials. The costs must be in the millions. I was intrigued as to why the project was still alive and kicking so I started digging.

When BT and Phorm decided to get into bed together and start this project they decided to do it without the rest of Britain knowing. Their secrecy extended to carrying out trials on unsuspecting individuals. Once those trials became public knowledge it became apparent that those trials were not only illegal, but the law that was broken was a criminal one, and not civil. That one act should have resulted in criminal prosecutions. The Home Office under extreme pressure issued a statement that included

“In order for interception to be lawful without a warrant, full consent must be obtained”.
Source
http://cryptome.org/ho-phorm.htm

That statement was in direct response to questions about Phorm

As those trials were in secret then nobody could have given consent and as such a criminal act was committed. Many eminent people such as Dr Clayton, computer security researcher at the University of Cambridge very publicly agreed.

Because of the furore regarding the criminality question the European Union commissioner for information society and media made the following statement.

“It is very clear in E.U. directives that unless someone specifically gives authorization (to track consumer activity on the Web) then you don't have the right to do that”.
Source
http://www.easybourse.com/bourse-ac...-wants-uk-government-to-probe-targeted-488767

The Information Commissioner also had a dig and insisted it has to be on an opt in basis, confirming that not only was this problem within his domain, but also that those secret trials infringed those requirements.

At this point things got a little strange. The Information Commissioner having ruled that it had to be opt in, which confirmed that it is in his domain, promptly refused to get involved with those secret trials and passed the buck over to the Home Office.

The Home Office having confirmed that both parties had to agree for it to be legal and along with BT denied those secret trials ever took place.
Source
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/19884/53/

The Home offices have now joined everyone else involved and are refusing to get involved.

At this point a gentleman by the name of Alex Hanff made a formal complaint to the City of London Police. The City of London police said that they would hand it over to their Specialist Crime Unit.

Under pressure from the media Alex Hanff rang the City of London Police and asked to be connected to Specialist Crime Unit. The City of London Police told him that the Specialist Crime Unit does not exist, and that they have no idea where his complaint went.
Source
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16745

At this point it hit me square in the face. This is a cover up, a cover up that encompasses some very powerful people in government departments, commissioner’s offices, police forces and telephone companies. This was a cover up but I couldn’t understand why. The BT/Phorm is nothing more than some repugnant and vulgar chap who having made his name wrecking the world’s computers with rootkit, now wants to collect and collate our surfing habits to spam everyone. There is nothing in there that warrants a cover up on such a massive scale.

I was in bed one night listening to a radio program about how people who use period rail tickets are having their names and journey stored on computer, and it hit me. This isn’t about collecting and collating websites visited for spamming purposes, not with this level of cover up, it’s about collecting and collating individuals surfing habits. To put together a project like that in secret isn’t possible. It’s not possible unless you get the most repugnant, vulgar person you can find and tell the world you’re going to pass on everyone’s personal surfing details to him. From that point all you have to do is set things up in his wake, let him take the crap, and keep your mouth shut. It gets even easier when the vulgar little chap plans to do most of the work for you

This isn’t so much about Viagra as about militant websites and who visits them.
 
Thanks & well done.

Well, no-one can say that you you didn't put a lot of effort into writing your interesting report. Thanks & well done!:)
 
Fred2001 said:
Under pressure from the media Alex Hanff rang the City of London Police ...

Why am I not surprised that the British police won't get up off their asses and actually do something unless they are sufficiently embarrassed by media coverage ? :mad:

As for government snooping I wouldn't be surprised at all if they had links to Phorm although perhaps they don't need them since I seem to remember optical "passive taps" being used on the BT network - and who knows what's attached to those ? In the US government snooping makes people very angry, but in the UK the attitude of the populace is, "Let's make a nice cup of tea and ignore it hoping it goes away.". :shrug:
 
Sponsored Links
It could be a cover-up, though my bet is with government and police incompetence; you just can't go wrong with that option :) . Besides, why cover-up government interest/support for Phorm when they're officially about to do something much more agressive under RIPA/Data Retention anyway?
 
Home Office denial, a regulator who refuses to act, a police force refusing to investigate a criminal act, and a government refusing to answer questions from Europe. One or two in isolation i would agree, but not everyone all at once from all corners of power over the same subject.

We have a business project that costs more to set up than will be seen in profit for many years. On top of that we're expected to believe that Britain's biggest company went into a multi million pound partnership with a company without checking credentials of those involved. The dubious past would been flagged up during those checks. I think the intention was to go into partnership with a history, not a company.

Another Echelon is the only answer that i can think of.
 
I agree with Mark, while it could very well be a nasty government plan, its most likely just BT and Phorm being greedy.

Theres a few things which also make me think its not government in addition to that.

First, its that apart from the controversy, the technical side of things has gone far too smoothly to be a government IT project.

Second, is that its far to sensible. Funded by itself (targetted advertising)? The Governments way is to make us pay for it.

Whats far more likely to happen is that the government end up buying the stuff from Phorm, effectively meaning we are paying to snoop on ourselves.
 
Sponsored Links
It sounds to me very much as though Phorm is a govenment internecine agency. The only thing is that the government is about as clued up about data as the dimwits they let loose with memory sticks and CDs.

I doubt they would have had the BT secret service do it.

BT regularly listen into your phone calls, employing huge numbers of agents to spy on you. They do this to make sure that their customers are not abusing their facilities.

I don't know if it's a random user thing or more penetrative. My brother in law told me he does that sort of thing regularly and has done it since they were the GPO.

They have huge data gathering centres in Bletchley/Milkem Keyes. Those are hand in glove with BT.

It is probably why Talk Talk and Virgin were enticed.

The point is that the government would have passed a law to permit it all, rather than allow a third party company to operate it so cack handedly. Except the assurance that what they were doing was legal was boldly stated early on in the affair.

Who gave them that idea I wonder?

So is it a co-operation with a chimpanzee. Something akin to allowing rendition flights to refuel in Britain? Is Phorm a jacket for the NSA?

I think it likely. I think it VERY likely.
 
Whats far more likely to happen is that the government end up buying the stuff from Phorm, effectively meaning we are paying to snoop on ourselves.
exactly, phorms past gives them a head start they are full of technical ppl who sadly make a living of our personal surfing habits without our consent.. now if they designed the system and the government bought the specs or even hired them to implement it then phorm stand to make allot out of the deal while the government near as dammit get their central database.
 
happy cat is happy

exactly, phorms past gives them a head start they are full of technical ppl who sadly make a living of our personal surfing habits without our consent.. now if they designed the system and the government bought the specs or even hired them to implement it then phorm stand to make allot out of the deal while the government near as dammit get their central database.

zeitlos

ohayo-gozaimasu

это жалкий
 
Sponsored Links
Top
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £24.00 - 26.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
NOW UK ISP Logo
NOW £24.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £25.99
145Mbps
Gift: £50 Reward Card
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £17.00
200Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Youfibre UK ISP Logo
Youfibre £23.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Sponsored Links
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (6027)
  2. BT (3639)
  3. Politics (2721)
  4. Business (2440)
  5. Openreach (2405)
  6. Building Digital UK (2330)
  7. Mobile Broadband (2146)
  8. FTTC (2083)
  9. Statistics (1901)
  10. 4G (1816)
  11. Virgin Media (1764)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1582)
  13. Fibre Optic (1467)
  14. Wireless Internet (1462)
  15. 5G (1407)
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules