Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[BadPhormula]

Originally Posted by Anonymouse

(OT for a bit) Don't worry about it at all, because even if you have a supercomputer, you're not going to break public-key encryption this side of the Sun going nova, at least not until someone proves the Riemann Hypothesis* - and trust me, that ain't gonna happen any time soon because no-one on this planet has the slightest idea as to how to prove it, or even disprove it (it's believed to be true, and mathematicians are praying to God that it is true, because a number of major theorems are based on the assumption that it is!). They can spend as much dosh on it as they like, and waste years of computer time (that's computer-years, not man-years) - the difficulty in breaking encryption is mathematically fundamental.

The only known method of deriving the prime factors is to systematically check all the possibilities, because there is zero correlation between them (that is, neither prime tells you anything about the other) - and there are so many possibilities that the power or speed of the computer is entirely irrelevant. Without a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis, there's no known way to derive a faster method, so there aren't any shortcuts - mathematics doesn't work that way. They really are wasting their time and money; the reason you never hear of public keys being broken is that it simply does not happen. Planting a trojan is cheating and can be prevented in any case by a) decent AV software, b) not using an administrator account so the damn trojan can't install in the first place, and c) being careful - but that is not breaking encryption. I don't know offhand how many 60-digit primes there are, but I recall reading that there are enough to see us through several million years without repeating even once. The computer does not exist that can crack that problem in the time available, i.e. approx. 5,000,000,000 years.

If it could be done, it would have been by now and the news would have been all over the world in less than an hour. Encryption per se is perfectly safe unless some unsung mathematical genius turns up. Bear in mind that it takes over 300 pages of symbolic logic, starting from first principles, just to prove 1 + 1 = 2.


* If you're into recreational mathematics and/or popular science, you've probably heard of it and might even understand it. If not - to borrow from Arthur Dent, don't ask me how it works or I'll start to whimper...

Some clarity regarding encryption, the strengths and weaknesses needs to be disseminated to the wider audience who may have to face the dilemma of using encryption in order to stop their ISPs from stabbing the customer in the back through the use of the deep packet inspection abuse. There are thousands of good resources on encryption but I fear most of them are just too technical or too much information for the general public. Of course there are the 'Dummy' guides, but still too much information.



Expanded picture of book [ LINK ]

I think the entire problem/solution needs to fit on one A4 sheet and from this summary point the interested reader can jump to the next level which would expand the ideas from the summary sheet. The expanded ideas and explanations could lead to further expansion which would lead to further... etc etc

Here is a quick summary

[ * ] Good implementations of encryption are safe (not even the secret service super spooks can break it). One of the weakness in encryption schemes are bad implementations [ Bruce Schneier of Counterpane is a good reference point to explain bad implementation of crypto schemes :: unfortunately Counterpane security has been bought out by a backstabbing unethical company 'British Telecom' BT].

[ * ] The established encryption schemes are not broken they are bypassed
using other methods.

[ * ] Use pass phrases which cannot be guessed at or subject to a dictionary attack. Don't post your password where other people can see them... i.e. a postit note on the side of your monitor or in top draw of your desk. (A good place to keep your passwords is on a locked PDA or in a locked filing cabinet)

[ * ] Generate new private keys and pass phrases on a regular basis, this will ensure the likelyhood of being compromised is reduced to zero.

[Frank Rizzo]

Too much troll feeding going on. Ignore it and let's get back to what we do best...

Sarah Arnott in the Independent today - her piece on BT and Phorm trials not quite right is it?

Is this the same Sarah Arnott who wrote this:

We can not afford an identity crisis

and this:

Speaking up for technology concerns

Did anyone ever find out if Kent's sister does indeed work for a national newspaper?

Is it his sister in-law, or has she married and not using the Ertrugul name?

Who is Irene? Is she part of the picture?

Where is the PIA?

What's happening at EU Privacy Hearing?

[HamsterWheel]

please give us your pro phorm argument

I already have with the autoblog post.

Another huge benefit is that ISPs need more money to crank up the internet speeds to cope with the huge demands being made on it by BBC iplayer etc.
They currently do not make enough out of broadband to invest in this. The extra dosh generated by Phorm will enable them to invest in more capacity, whilst not increasing broadband charges. Maybe even reducing them.
This I see as a benefit to users. The ISPs seem to think so too.
And it will benefit websites who will be able to target their viewers and get greater revenues.
So I do think there are a lot of benefits.
I appreciate that you lot have privacy concerns, but I just don't think they are valid.
If they are valid, you lot will certainly figure out a way to whinge, and Phorm will be tweaked. It will not go away though.

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Yup - I'll be happy to opt in.

Why ?

Take this site - www.autoblog.com One I look at frequently. The ads are always for women's dresses, so a waste of time sticking them in front of me and the site would make a lot more dosh if it served up targeted ads. So it could invest in more content.

That's what the next phase of the internet is all about - monetising good content. Phorm enables this to happen.

No, that is not what the 'next phase' of the internet is about. The 'next phase' of the internet is faster infrastructure and wider choices of connectivity, including through mobile and other 'non-PC' network enabled devices.

The internet is all about connecting the widest possible network in the simplest, most robust possible way. Always has been, always will be. "monetizing" it is simply what one particular set of internet users would like to get out of that network.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that the rest of the users of that network share your agenda, or that they will tolerate your attempts to alter the architecture of the network to ensure your agenda is served.

The internet does not need you. You need it - so please behave in a manner acceptable to the rest of us.

[HamsterWheel]

ChristT - your visions of the internet are laudable, but not what is happening in a world driven by commerce.
That's why half of the innovations on the net have been driven by porn purveyors.
The net has moved on since it was a handful of geeks sending each other formulas between their uni labs.

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

ChristT - your visions of the internet are laudable, but not what is happening in a world driven by commerce.
That's why half of the innovations on the net have been driven by porn purveyors.
The net has moved on since it was a handful of geeks sending each other formulas between their uni labs.

In what sense has it 'moved on'? The technologies that make it work haven't changed. There are more users, doing different things, but the network itself does not need to be 'monetized' to allow these things to happen.

So far as I can see, you are simply trying to justify a business model by associating it with the fundamentals of the network.

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

Too much troll feeding going on. Ignore it and let's get back to what we do best...

Sarah Arnott in the Independent today - her piece on BT and Phorm trials not quite right is it?

Is this the same Sarah Arnott who wrote this:

We can not afford an identity crisis

and this:

Speaking up for technology concerns

Did anyone ever find out if Kent's sister does indeed work for a national newspaper?

Is it his sister in-law, or has she married and not using the Ertrugul name?

She's selectively quoting this from the ICO which basically says nothing more than they've said before - that they'll be monitoring any trial closely (so that they'll have a clearer idea which laws it breaks)

Frank - Kent's sister is married and she works for The Times.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

I appreciate that you lot have privacy concerns, but I just don't think they are valid.
If they are valid, you lot will certainly figure out a way to whinge, and Phorm will be tweaked. It will not go away though.

You are happy to give a company that you don't know , and have no direct contact with (or comeback against) access to your own personal details? Not just the the unimportant stuff (like blogs, forums etc), but the important stuff (webmail, ebanking, tax details etc)?

Whether or not Phorm store this data (and I have seen some evidence to suggest they do store 14 days worth for diagnostic purposes) and whether or not they are a trustworthy company, that data *will* attract hackers (why bother hacking etailer websites for a few thousand credit card details when you can hack Virgin's Phorm server and potentially get 3 million). You are placing your personal data in the hands of a company who in a previous incarnation installed root kits on people's PCs apparently without realising.

Let's alter the argument a bit (because I believe if Phorm is allowed to continue, this *will* happen).

How would you feel if a company started listening in on your Phone calls (for "profiling") and targeting adverts to you?

---------- Post added at 12:50 ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 ----------

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

ChristT - your visions of the internet are laudable, but not what is happening in a world driven by commerce.
That's why half of the innovations on the net have been driven by porn purveyors.
The net has moved on since it was a handful of geeks sending each other formulas between their uni labs.

Which still does not justify spying on users.

[thebarron]

HW - I bought an item yesterday with cash from a well known techy shop. The assistant asked me for my postcode and house number which I refused as he didn't need it for the transaction. Had I given it I expect I would get some junk mail offering me stuff I may or may not want.
I just do not want to be sold too, categorised, tracked, spied on etc.
I understand the technology being used by Phorm, I've been in the business for nearly 35 years ( before PC's coo I'm old) and it is the most intrusive addition to the internet proposed ever. I do not want that to happen and I will do my best to prevent it from happening.
If you have an argument that can convince me otherwise you haven't used it yet.

My main concern is not my personal privacy as I can protect that pretty well myself its all the others that do not have my experience and also the small business website owners (none oix) whose sites data will be profiled to target rival sites products thereby talking revenue from them.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

What's happening at EU Privacy Hearing?

Look out for a Reg Article soon.

[Deko]

how soon.... before end of trading day ?

[Ravenheart]

Hmm Sarah Arnott appears on a lot of Parliament select committee's if you do a Google search on that phrase.

It also seems that Kent's previous incarnation of Phorm, Peopleonpage, was registered through GoDaddy using Domains By Proxy who tell us..

Did you know that for each domain name you register, anyone -
anywhere, anytime - can find out your name, home address, phone
number and email address?

The law requires that the personal information you provide with every
domain you register be made public in the "WHOIS" database. Your
identity becomes instantly available - and vulnerable - to spammers,
scammers, prying eyes and worse.

But now there's a solution: Domains By Proxy®!

Ohhh the irony

[HamsterWheel]

stuartc - phorm does not look at encrypted sites, so I don't have a problem. It also does not monitor passwords etc.
Concerns about hackers are irrelevant - if they can hack into the ISPs computers, where the date will be held, then they can hack into everything anyway.

thebarron - I too would not give such details as I don't want cold callers on the phone.
Phorm though doesn't keep any data for any significant period (argue away !) so does not invade my privacy in the same way.

[vicz]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

stuartc - phorm does not look at encrypted sites, so I don't have a problem. It also does not monitor passwords etc.
Concerns about hackers are irrelevant - if they can hack into the ISPs computers, where the date will be held, then they can hack into everything anyway.

thebarron - I too would not give such details as I don't want cold callers on the phone.
Phorm though doesn't keep any data for any significant period (argue away !) so does not invade my privacy in the same way.

How do you know what phorm does? Only by what Ertugrul tells you. Do you believe what he says? - he doesn't exactly have a reputation for telling the truth, or even being consistent in his lies. If you were half as smart as you think you are you would realise what a risk BT and phorm investors are taking.

[Privacy_Matters]

@HamsterWheel

You know, I disagree with your sentiments on Phorm - but this quote:

"The Rat Race works like a hamster wheel: no matter how fast you run, you still will not get anywhere."

Now thats soo true - I think I'll spend some time reading the rest of your feelings on life, might take a while though - its an 85 page pdf