Phorm Secretly Used By American ISPs As Well
from the totally-transparent? dept
Looks like Phorm may be facing another headache as The Register has found out that it was quietly used by some American ISPs, as well. Earlier stories had suggested that Phorm, which tracks your web surfing at the ISP level and customizes ads based on your clickstream data, was only testing the service in Europe, while competitor NebuAd was focused on the US. Phorm is facing some legal inquiries in Europe, while NebuAd is laying people off as Congress is investigating the legality of the service.
But the most bizarre aspect of this is Phorm's claim that its tests with US ISPs was "transparent." If that's the case, it's odd that no one had pointed it out before. That would suggest that it wasn't nearly as transparent as Phorm claims. In fact, it suggests the opposite.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
So which ISP?
Anyone know which ISP(s)?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"Nonetheless, the Phorm spokesman says the company's stateside trials were in not secret. "The services were transparent to users and information such as how to opt out, who provided the service and the privacy policy was easily accessible," he told us. "For example, each ad had a link that allowed users to find more information on opting out and the service. This was a level of disclosure ahead of its time."
If it was 'transparent' how would users even know to opt out? Kind of a 'questionable' statement there.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Transparent means it's difficult to see.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Cox Communications Perhaps?
Wouldn't surprise me. All of a sudden, my dynamic IP has gone to a static IP. I have wondered why, and I'm inclined to think that this idea should be on the list of reasons.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
We didn't obfuscate it
By "Transparent" I think he means "We didn't lie about it yet."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comastic?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
hosts file
Hosts file FTW. No more ads from which ever sites you want to block. They won't show up or they will display "Page not found". ISP loses.
C:WINDOWSSYSTEM32DRIVERSETChosts
127.0.0.1 doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 pagead.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 adserver.securityfocus.com
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Yeah, I suppose from the 'strictest' sense, the transparent and opt-out *can* work together, but in the sense of honesty and a customer friendly standpoint, it doesn't fly.
It's like fine print on the back of a contract.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: hosts file
Firefox + AdBlock is way easier.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Different take on
Maybe it isn't that the testing process was transparent (i.e. they were disclosing their actions), but that the tests themselves were transparent to end-users (i.e. undetectable)...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment