Fred2001
0
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.
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.























