Internet Business to Exploit Surfing Habits of Millions

Phorm still haven't explained who authorised them to conduct covert trials of their system on tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of BT customers in 2006 and 2007... and the thousands of businesses and organisations those people interacted with.

Phorm isn't opt in. All your traffic passes through Phorm's equipment regardless of your wishes. As a user, if you don't want to participate, you must perpetually retain an 'opt out' cookie on all web apps, on all user accounts, on all computers in your home/busiiness.

Nor have Phorm explained how they will obtain consent from the people and businesses who operate web sites, for the interception of their communications, and the duplication/processing/sale of their intellectual property. What Phorm are doing is simply industrial espionage.

Fortunately for users there is an easy way to avoid Phorm, close your ISP account and find a Phorm free ISP.

this is nonsense, Phorm/Webwise is NOT a new product, it is a widely distrusted DEEP PACKET INSPECTION system that is being touted by an unscrupulous marketeer (Kent Entgrul). The system has already found BT & the UK Gov in trouble with the EU due to a mass illegal breach of customer privacy. They want to track ALL your internet usage, they say that they will not keep your Personally Identifying Information, but this is NONSENCE, you cannot close Pandoras box.

This press release should be considered the desperate actions of a failing Malware business trying to pump their toxic stock. Avoid at all costs unless losing money and friends is your business.

I'm curious as to why so many companies think that surfing the net is synonymous with shopping? For most people, it most certainly is not. Having somebody intercepting me while I use Facebook IS invading my privacy. Having somebody intercepting my daughter while she researches for her school homework IS invading my privacy. The are NO assurances that you won't be serving her unsuitable ads while you track her behaviour.

How convenient to be so economical with the truth. You forget to say that ALL your surfing communication will be intercepted whether you opt out or not. You forget to say that I can choose whether or not to use gmail, google or whatever.

You forget to say that the only way I can choose not to have my surfing intercepted by an ISP running Webwise is to change my ISP for that is what I shall do.

If I connected my PC to someone else's PC & altered their Browser Contents or Application & it kept on crashing or misbehaving or getting malware in it, I would get done for Computer Hacking!

This however is exact what this "Illegal Proxy" did to me in 2006 7 2007 & on a few occasions in 2008!

I say "illegal proxy" because any Proxy used for "value Added services" should be visible to the Web User, a transparent proxy is only meant to function according to the Internet Specs if it DOES NOT ALTER data!

I can see this is mere regurgitated Phorm spin. If you research a bit more deeply, Tudor, you'll discover that you can't actually opt out. I use the net for academic research that is crucial to my professional work, and don't wish to have any commercial intrusion. Simple as that.
However, if I chose to block Phorm's iniquitous Webwise malware by an appropriate entry in my HOSTS file, then my access to the internet is barred. Totally.

The UK govt must step in and allow citizens true freedom of choice, not mealy-mouthed Kent Ertugrul's version. It's a disgrace that this Govt is failing to support us.

Well, up until today, I had viewed softpedia as trustworthy and a good source to try new software from, due to the stance against adware and spyware being bundled with downloads.

However, since after reading the above piece you are obviously viewing spyware embedded at the ISP level as something good (ever heard of research and objective reporting?) then your standards obviously aren't that high, and join the list of sell outs in my opinion.

Shame on you.

Look at the product phorm are offering, look at the reports done by people like Dr Richard Clayton, then justify the stance taken in the article above.

You sound like you have lapped up the phorm pr talk and not even bothered to do your own research, which is hardly what I would expect from you.

You are spouting phorms line for them, about how people don't have to be tracked, about how the search engines are big and bad, yet with phorm it sits between a customers connection (whether opted in or out with the current models proposed, making the opt out mean you don't receive adverts, with a promise from the ex root kit and spyware vendor that they won't peek) and the internet and forges cookies and uses multiple redirects. Search engines are optional, and can be scraped from elsewhere to prevent anything like that, phorm is there regardless.

Maybe before you publish a pr piece for them, you should find out who they are. Remember 121Media?

Is this an advert for Phorm, shouldn't it have some sort of disclaimer otherwise it may be mistaken for news or comment.

This article was not intended and is not a commercial for this service.
I am as opposed to having my online activity as any of you. I am sorry if they way I wrote it gave you the wrong impression.

Bad Softpedai, naughty Softpedia, must do research and not repeat fairy tales.

Not an objective article, more of a PR spin for Phorm.
Strange that over the past few days any adverse news from the media in regard to Phorm has been removed/withdrawn. This smacks of a desperate known malware purveyor trying to hide just how illegal his DPI kit really is.

I`ve been collecting links from the removed/withdrawn media sites and have added this one for forwarding to the EU.