Posts by FoolD

BT abandons Phorm

A battle is won

@Chronos

This seems very much like a tactical move - avoiding forcing the issue on legality by withdrawing, whilst keeping your options open. Phorm and it's like is not defeated until everyone accepts that *it is already* illegal. Procecutions must be brought unto anyone performing unwarranted DPI on traffic and processing the results for profit.

@Tim Greening-Jackson

Google already 'DPI' my traffic when I use their sites - they must process them in order to respond to my search/send my email and as such have implicit approval. If it were unavoidable for my packets to go through google servers whilst using the internet for day-to-day tasks (like it is with an ISP) then there would be cause for concern.

ISPs need to be reminded that they don't own the TCP/IP traffic - they mearly route it.

ContactPoint goes live despite security fears

Re: Alex Osmond

No-one is saying nothing needs doing - just that this is not the correct solution.

The majority of complaints on here relate to there being no good cause (and plenty of concerns over) the details of *all* children being on this database. I'm certain, where it's justified, no-one is seriously saying departments shouldn't have a methods of sharing data better. However, data should only be kept when & for as long is is justified and, considering the sensitivity of such cases, restricted to people - at least remotely - active in the children concerned. Things lacking from this system.

As it stands the whole scheme reeks of an en-masse data-grab, pushed through against objections, and that has nothing to do with protecting children - however, it is *almost* amusing to see the "think of the children" lot being hoisted by their own pitard in response to this.

Maybe common sense is back on the rise ... we can but hope.

Intel playing virtual silly buggers

Intel's problem ?

As microsoft's own Virtual PC 2007 runs fine on windows 7 (even additions works well) it is surprising that XP mode *requires* VT support on the CPU. One would assume it must be a new feature such as USB support (to allow direct printing presumably) not in VPC 2007 that needs it.

Whatever the reason it would seem more sensible to allow a cut-down XP Mode to work on hardware with no VT support (just as VPC 2007 does) but without those features that require it, which makes this a microsoft problem / solution. Stopping the install completely seems rather lazy on microsoft's part.

On the other hand, given the way the WDM memory footprint 'enhancment' over Vista only works if you have DX10 hardware & WDDM 1.1 drivers, it seems microsoft aren't interested in fixing core problems (ie. removing the read-back dependency in WDM) - they would rather throw new hardware at problems to solve them. So not much new there, really.

Blaming Intel is to follow microsoft's lead in ignoring the core issues; Microsoft's coding requires a non-standard feature of modern CPU's, compounded by Intel's patchy support for said feature. Which could/should be fixed ?

Home Office to keep innocent DNA samples

Re: Not strictly "innocent"

So the justification for undermining the fundamental principle of Innocent until Proven Guilty comes down to cost !? That pretty much sums up UK PLC doesn't it. Everything is target driven - cost / efficiency.

The side-effect of having to letting "criminals" go because its too expensive to send them to trial does not justify everyone else losing their basic human rights and innocent people being treated like criminals.

How about fixing the problem and not try to work around the side-effects of it; remove the target-driven systems that don't work and invest in systems that do.

The many are getting tired of suffering because of the few, and the government's inability to see the difference.

Phorm boss blogs from a dark, dark place

Conspiracy?

Surprise! The Register - a place where IT professionals (the people most able to fully comprehend the systems behind Phorm's DPI) commonly visit and post is against this technology.

Duh - that may be because they understand the technology and can see through Phorm's PR/spin to see the privacy violations and scope for mission-creep - or even outright mis-use - inherent within.

There is no conspiracy; any sane person who understands what they propose is against it.

/coat - maybe it's time for Kent to get his.

Darling banks on offshoring to save UK plc

Utter Folly

Surely even this maniac can see the folly of sending tax-earned £'s abroad instead of keeping it in the country, especially at this time? It would even be better just to fire 50% of the workforce and pay them less money as dole .. at least they would be spending it in the UK economy (although as others have said, better savings could easily be made elsewhere...)

This 'government' shows its incompetence/willful neglect once more - how much longer before even their own MPs have no confidence in them ?

Home Office promises better personal data guards

Missing the Point ?

So it's ok to store personal data on removable/portable media and lose it .. .so long as it's encrypted !?

I would consider putting my personal data on a removable or portable device in the first place the real neglect.

Encryption will not stop data being retrieved by a determined cracker for long - especially as it wouldn't be hard to locate the encryption keys by social, rather than brue force, attacks - given these are government bodies we're talking about.

"We lost 2 keys and 4 laptops this week but we won't report it or be punished for it because they're safely encrypted"

Unforntunately this attitude will ensure more data is lost and we will never even know about it.

BNP leaked list claims first victims

Missing the Point ?

Whether or not somebody should be expelled from the police for being a member of *any* political party is debatable - personally I think the police should be politically neutral so the simplest fix is to disallow police officers from being active members of *any* political orgranisation. Of course, if it is enforced for one party it has to be for all parties - like labour or conservatives - or else it becomes just another tool to enforce the policies of the powerful. I would hope any inquirey would cover all parties.

The same should go for any other public body - including military, judges and magistrates.

What I haven't heard is any outrage about the leaking of so much personal information - and the fact that the police aren't even going to investigate it. Surely data protection laws must have broken by the leak. I find it hard to beleive that if any other political(ly correct) organisation (eg. SNP, LIB DEMs, Labour) had their member's details leaked that it would be taken so lightly. This implies actual (anti-BNP) political motivations at work within the police force - the very thing other officers may lose their jobs for the possibility of.

The BNP are a legal political party and their member's rights to privacy should be enforced by law like any others - like it or not.

BT's third Phorm trial starts tomorrow

A 3rd illegal trial - brave or stupid ?

As many have noted, with the opt-in being cookie based the consent is irrelevent - data is still intercepted, just not 'processed', even if opt-ed out. This means that this 3rd trial still intercepts traffic without consent - a clear creach of EU privacy laws, if not UK ones. In fact now things will be worse as the data of users who *explicitly* do not to give consent (by clicking no) is still intercepted, just not profiled.

BT are opening themselves up for even more legal problems by rushing this trial before the non-cookie based system is active (where traffic not opt-ed in would not go through the profilers).

One wonders why the rush to push the trial through now - maybe afraid of future EU policy changes or are they just simply running out of cash ?

Pirate icon cos they like taking what doesn't belong to them too.

BT's secret Phorm trials: UK.gov responds

Head in Sand

from the article: "Future developments involving Phorm will be closely scrutinised and monitored by the enforcement authorities."

This admits the previous trials were dodgy - or else why else would future developments need monitoring. The whole response is typical spin - and not even very good spin at that - avoiding all the crucial issues.

The EU commisioner should see right through this B$, assuming the undisclosed text isn't an invite to the 'data party'.

OpenGL 3.1 promise follows gamer revolt

@Mark

Indeed OpenGL 3.0 does attempt to do this - and still no-one is happy.

Games developers don't want the 'dross' of all the CAD functionality and the CAD developers won't be happy when their 'depreciated' functions are dropped (as that means hardware-accelerated driver support for those functions will probably disappear).

By forking into two completely separate API's that are both small enough for driver / hardware vendors to support and develop hardware-accelerated you should make both camps happy.

If alternative platforms are to flourish they will need the support and development of both the games industry and professional CAD packages. I don't see that happening without libraries like OpenGL.

Trying to please everyone rarely works

The problem is there are two camps that use OpenGL - both with fundamentally

different needs.

The game developers want access to the latest hardware technology and don't mind re-vamping their rendering engine often to get it. The graphics are often what sells a game and so to get that 'wow' factor game developers need access to the latest feaures asap - they want a stripped down 'lean and mean' OpenGL so that GPU drivers can support new features easier and more quickly. The fact that in 5 years time these current features will be obsolete and newer drivers will have dropped support for them - meaning the game will no longer work - does not bother them.

The CAD developers 1st and foremost want a stable platform that just works, and will continue to be working in 5 years time - the life of a CAD project can be much longer than that, so the original software used *must* still work (often unpatched) even on new hardware with new drivers. Speed is important, but not the main objective - CAD developers spend most of their time developing the user interface and making the CAD functionality better / correct. They want a graphics API that is extensible but rarely loses core functionality.

I'm sure Microsoft and others opposed to the cross platform and 'open' nature of OpenGL are laughing their socks off at the current situation of trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no-one.

As I see it, the only way both camps will be happy is if OpenGL is forked into two separate libraries - a fast evolving 'gaming' library and a more sedantary 'CAD' library, both of which could be kept small enough for both GPU driver writers and hardware to support, fully accellerated. Most GPU manufacturers already have separate product lines (and often drivers) for gaming / CAD apps so there really shouldn't be any problems having separate OpenGL's.

Home Office defends 'dangerously misleading' Phorm thumbs-up

@Alex

It isn't necessarily any easier with Phorm, but at the moment the powers that be require a reason to do so, under RIPA. With Phorm it becomes the rule rather than the exception - everything is monitored all the time (even if 'opted out').

Also, the way Phorm actively intercepts your traffic it is possible for them (or anybody with access) to modify and/or even block traffic - not possible with most 'passive' types of monitoring.

Re: Silliness

No-one is denying the Government already has the ability to spy on us. The question is do they already have this level of active, rather than passive, interception.

I have nothing to hide - but being uneasy about such technology getting into the wrong hands does not make someone crazy, it makes them sensible. The fact that a company of questionable morals already has control of it is, quite frankly, the really scary bit.

Re: Stop me if i'm wrong...

I rather think (after reading the Phorm pdf, linked to by AC above) it's more a case of the government are allowing this to go ahead and *if* the profiling is indeed found to be illegal they will simply 'tweak' the offending bits of the law so it isn't anymore.

Make no mistakes - the Government want this technology. They may already have the ability to remotely mirror/monitor and even block (at DNS level) web traffic but they will be drooling over the possibilities of exploiting Phorm's technology - to do this more directly (and maybe even more discreetly, page by page) at the ISP level.

The opt-in/out of receiving targeted Ads is irrelevant - they will have the ability to not only monitor all traffic but also to modify/block it at the gateway (whether opted in or out of Ads and irrespective of using alternate DNS lookups like OpenDNS or even direct IP).

This is what makes the technology so dangerous and also so worrying.

BT: 'We did not let anyone down over Phorm... it was not illegal'

C4 Coverage

Whilst the channel 4 news coverage did raise some "spyware" points imo it failed in that it severely played down the severity of BT's law breaking;

The 'reporter' only cited that BT may have broken data protection laws - which after the recent gov blunders most normal people will just think "not again" and dismiss it. The reporter didn't state the more important fact that BT may have breached peoples basic human rights - the right to privacy, protected in law by RIPA.

After all the fuss over eaves dropping one conversion between a prisoner and an MP (do I hear cries of "oh the humanity") I thought the press might make more of a fuss over 10,000 people's basic rights being violated with no consent or recourse - not even an apology.