Wikipedia Opts Out Of Phorm 98
ais523 writes "Wikipedia (and other websites run by Wikimedia) have requested to opt-out from Phorm; according to the email they sent, they 'consider the scanning and profiling of our visitors' behavior by a third party to be an infringement on their privacy.'"
Another reader points to this post on techblog.wikimedia.org which includes a confirmation from Phorm that those sites will be excluded.
The official post (Score:5, Informative)
Wikimedia Tech Blog post [wikimedia.org].
(This would have happened sooner, but Brion was snowed under.)
That email may not work... (Score:2, Informative)
It might be ignored as we (in the UK) don't spell "legitimize" with a "z" - it's legitimise here :)
WTF is Phorm? (Score:5, Informative)
For those of you, like me, that read TFA and the article linked from TFA and still don't know what Phorm is other than it's something that some UK ISPs are implementing and there appear to be privacy concerns, Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
In short, it's system for doing targeted advertising by deep-packet inspection.
stealing advertising revenue (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Mental disconnect (Score:3, Informative)
Phorm gets to know who else read that webpage. And any other HTTP-only webpage.
Re:Mental disconnect (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Mental disconnect (Score:4, Informative)
El Reg has been covering Phorm and its existing and planned abuses for some time:
http://search.theregister.co.uk/?q=phorm [theregister.co.uk]
unfortunately one of the Phorm directors is also in tight with the UK gov in an internet policy group
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/15/kip_meek_berr/ [theregister.co.uk]
and they have been hard to dislodge over there, although Brussels (EU) has also taken notice
(see parent)
so far, they seem to have been treated with suspicion and hostility over here in the USA by everyone AFAICT, which is probably a good thing
I'm just sayin'
Re:That email may not work... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, "-ize" is absolutely not an Americanism - it is in fact correct spelling in either British or American English, whereas "-ise" is correct only in less formal British English.
It is sad that very few of us British seem to understand our language properly; almost no one here realizes that it is actually more conservative in British English to use -ize and not -ise. For example, go and look at an older copy of the Oxford English dictionary or the Times and you will see all those words spelled "-ize". I believe that even the newer editions of the OED, despite now listing the "-ise" forms, state that "-ize" is the preferred form.
To further complicate matters, the only words to which this rule can can apply are those which derive from Greek (and thus contain the Greek suffix "-ize" - this is the rationale for it being the more correct variant). So for example "enterprize" and "capsise" are always just wrong in either British or American English.
Re:The official post (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Screw opt-out, the RIGHT solution is HTTPS! (Score:3, Informative)
And if DNSSEC was properly implemented across the board then we wouldn't even NEED to be wary of self-signed certificates to begin with.
If you can trust that the DNS pointed you to the right site, then you are as safe as you are using SSL.
Re:WTF is Phorm? (Score:4, Informative)
You can find the dissertation here: https://nodpi.org/documents/phorm_paper.pdf [nodpi.org]
You can find the leaked report here: https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Image:BT_Report.pdf [wikileaks.org]
And you can catch up on the entire scandal on our blog here: https://nodpi.org/ [nodpi.org]
Hope that clarifies things for those who are not aware of who/what Phorm/WebWise are/is.
Alexander Hanff