Just had a Facebook message from a friend of mine - he attended and spoke at a meeting regarding Phorm last night in London.

Latest news on the BBC (with a quote from my friend)

Speaking at the meeting, IT specialist Alexander Hanff said Phorm infringed people’s human rights with respect to privacy.

“What Phorm is trying to do is to turn people into products - a global warehouse selling pieces of us to the highest bidders,” he said

Apparently he’s also been on C4 news today and may be doing something for BBC’s Click show next week.

This has gained some publicity but I wonder just how much the ‘person in the street’ really understands about what Phorm and their ilk are doing? Just what the implications are? Security online seems to be a big issue but there are problems getting the message across.

I feel that the majority of people who use computers and the internet are only peripherally aware of security issues that they need to consider. There’s information out there, there’s been the scare stories about institutions and government losing data, yet how many ordinary folk realise that care needs to be taken on a personal level?
But who is going to ensure that this information is disseminated correctly, widely and simply? Should the ISP provider put a leaflet in its ‘welcome’ pack when a new customer signs up? Should it be the responsibility of the government - erm, maybe not seeing their track record. Or should it be left up to the individual to ensure their own safety online?

But I digress; with regard to Phorm I feel that data transmitted over the internet, whether it be a search , a blog, an email, whatever, should be private like the snail mail. Companies can (and unfortunately will) spam people with adverts but they should not be allowed to take information transmitted to target people with their insiduous ads. Just because the information can be accessed does not mean it is morally or ethically right to do so.