...they've done something reasonable - big hand for the Wikians

... the phorm bots just loved that e-mail when they opened their inbox this morning.

Well done wiki. Come on Facebook.

...has The Reg?

Isn't this our anti-phorm answer? Don't we just encourage EVERYBODY to have their domains excluded? We can start petitions with leading sites (starting with the tech ones like ElReg and then move to the traffic monsters like BBC, etc) to convince them to apply to be excluded from Phorm to the point that their service has such low coverage that it becomes pointless?

I've looked around the Phorm website to exclude my own sites and can't see an obvious "exclude my website from your illegal service" option. Where's the link?

It would be good if the BBC and other news and media organisations could also do the same. Organisations such as yourself for example.. HINT HINT!

That is all.

that is all

So who will be next?

I hope TheRegister has opted out?

And how about El Reg?

It only costs an email...

Submit our URLs to be excluded. If everyone submits their favorite domain via an automated system then very quickly it will become unmanagable... and once it is discovered Phorm ignore the request, then the time in courts will come.

Of course it goes without saying that all El-Reg domains will be excluded. Perhaps someone should register the 'freefromphorm.net' and 'freefromphorm.com' addresses - and offer services like webmail and proxy browser sessions.

Has The Register aka Situation Publishing ban Phorm?

If not that bad Phorm!

...if someone were to, say, over a period of time (say one message per second, until finished), send one email to them, for every domain name registered on the internet? That would give them some work to think about, huh? ;)

(and because they are dodgy types, you wouldn't trust them with your *real* email address or details, only a made-up one (unique per email?), sent from a spoofed IP address via an open relay (purely, to protect yourself from them, of course... ;) ))

Just a thought.

We have the same issue here as people opting out have: We still have to take their word for it that our traffic goes nowhere near their insidious L7 inspection boxes. Make no mistake, this is what we want, a verifiable opt-out which means our traffic goes nowhere near that cesspool of privacy fail. We (and the Phorm-stricken punters) just aren't getting what we want.

And what's this "request" bollocks? DEMAND, not request. I ORDER you shits, with whom I have no contractual relationship whatsoever and an expectation of privacy with regards to my personal communications, not to route MY traffic anywhere NEAR your layer 7 spyware crap. That, and ONLY that is good enough.

Website owners may implement any of the following methods:

1. HTTPS: No HTTPS traffic passes through the system or is profiled

2. Standard HTTP password-protection : Pages protected using standard HTTP password protection, as defined by RFC 1945, will not be profiled

3. robots.txt: The Webwise system will observe the rules that a website sets for major search engines using the robots.txt method. If the website's robots.txt file is set such that "*" (any robot) is not permitted to crawl it, then Webwise will not profile its pages.

Alternatively, you may request specifically that your website is not scanned by Webwise. To request that your website not be scanned by Webwise, please email:

website-exclusion{at}webwise.com.

especially when there's no indication that YOU have done the same yet...

They obviously know what would happen if they made it that easy!

Send them a legal letter telling them you'll sue. Don't legitimise their activity by following an opt-out policy.

Icon: PHorms legal advisor.

....so I'll leave it to my old friend, the Laughing Dog.

Take it away.....

ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!

ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!

ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!

ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!

ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!ARF!

Details for stopping Phorm can be found here:

http://www2.bt.com/static/i/btretail/webwise/help.html#how-do-i-prevent-webwise-from-scanning-my-site

I think the bit about using robots.txt is interesting. They are essentially saying, "If we can't spider, then nor can anybody else."

If Google and Microsoft opt out Phorm will be nerfed. My homepage is Google, as are many of my customers and or MSN. If Phorm isn't opted out of a customers PC, just by profiling their home pages they'll be breaking the agreement, and whilst Phorm/BT may have British politicians in their pockets, they will be crushed by Google and MS. Hopefully.

The news just gets better and better. Smiley for hope.

That is a big loss of a potential data source to phorm, sure it makes them a LOT less appealing to advertisers.

I have just sent removal requests and advised all of my customers to do the same. After checking, I've managed to get 50....yes FIVE OH, removal requests sent.

I'm doing my part....are you?

Phorm is gunning for you. Either they want to grab your visitors data (all of your visitors keystrokes as well as the pages they are visiting) or pressure you into advertising with them otherwise "You'll be left out."

Go to HTTPS pages now. With up to date procedures your customers won't notice. If you do a site layout change and introduce new products after the change which a Phorm sign up targets that would suggest they have scraped your site anyway. Class action suit time.

As a shopper I want choice and the ability to do comparison shopping. I want a site which loads fast. I don't want some re-branded malware company snooping my data (which if I buy will include my bank or credit account details) which will be passed on to who-knows-who and sent to who-knows-where.

I am not Phorm's customer. You are. Unless you tell them to get lost.

Thumbs up as i welcome Wikpedia's ban.

When they are trying to sell this service to advertisers they obviously need to convince them that the targetting is accurate. However the traffic they see will only be identified by the source IP which will be the address of the firewall between the private network and the interenet. So at my house there will be three completelty different people with differing interests. If they hit my wife with adverts for cycling gear it will be wasted, or how about me with Thomas the Tank engine, or my son with card making stuff? That probably means that two thirds of their targetted ads will hit the wrong target. And if that wasn't bad enough how about those browsing from a corporate network? How long before potential advertisers figure out that their "targetted" advertising is more scattergun advertising?

The there's the whole issue of all commercial sites who don't advertise with Phorm opting out, which of course they will because they don't want Phorm hitting their clients with adverts for the competition.

Have they got anything that is, or could be, patented? If not and their service gets the legal green light then no doubt the big boys (OK, google) will step in and undercut them and they'll be out of business in no time.

The more you look at this the more you realise their business model is flawed at all levels.

Someone draws some packet sniffer data, so it becomes possible to signature these assholes and fence them off completely.

They'll get bored pretty quickly if they have to keep avoiding blacklists every day.