<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_30_1631224</id>
	<title>L0phtCrack (v6) Rises Again</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1243705560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>FyreWyr writes <i>"<a href="http://www.l0phtcrack.com/">L0phtCrack</a> &mdash; now 12 years old &mdash; used to be a security 'tool of choice' for black hats, pen-testers, and security auditors alike &mdash; that is, until it was sold by L0pht to @stake, then Symantec, to be released and subsequently dropped as LC 5. As an IT security consultant, I used this tool to regularly expose vulnerabilities or recover data when there were few other options available. Eventually, I let it go as tech evolved away. Now, after being returned to its original developers, version 6 was <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/27/l0phtcrack\_returns/">released this week with fresh features</a>: support for 64-bit multiprocessors, (current) Unix and Windows operating systems, and <a href="http://www.l0phtcrack.com/learn.html">a number of other features</a>, including enhanced handling of NTLM password hashes and support for rainbow tables. Interested parties, especially consultants, will find this shiny new version sports a hefty price tag. It raises doubts in my mind whether it can effectively compete with open source alternatives that go by similar names, but as I found earlier versions so useful, its re-emergence seems worth the mention."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>FyreWyr writes " L0phtCrack    now 12 years old    used to be a security 'tool of choice ' for black hats , pen-testers , and security auditors alike    that is , until it was sold by L0pht to @ stake , then Symantec , to be released and subsequently dropped as LC 5 .
As an IT security consultant , I used this tool to regularly expose vulnerabilities or recover data when there were few other options available .
Eventually , I let it go as tech evolved away .
Now , after being returned to its original developers , version 6 was released this week with fresh features : support for 64-bit multiprocessors , ( current ) Unix and Windows operating systems , and a number of other features , including enhanced handling of NTLM password hashes and support for rainbow tables .
Interested parties , especially consultants , will find this shiny new version sports a hefty price tag .
It raises doubts in my mind whether it can effectively compete with open source alternatives that go by similar names , but as I found earlier versions so useful , its re-emergence seems worth the mention .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FyreWyr writes "L0phtCrack — now 12 years old — used to be a security 'tool of choice' for black hats, pen-testers, and security auditors alike — that is, until it was sold by L0pht to @stake, then Symantec, to be released and subsequently dropped as LC 5.
As an IT security consultant, I used this tool to regularly expose vulnerabilities or recover data when there were few other options available.
Eventually, I let it go as tech evolved away.
Now, after being returned to its original developers, version 6 was released this week with fresh features: support for 64-bit multiprocessors, (current) Unix and Windows operating systems, and a number of other features, including enhanced handling of NTLM password hashes and support for rainbow tables.
Interested parties, especially consultants, will find this shiny new version sports a hefty price tag.
It raises doubts in my mind whether it can effectively compete with open source alternatives that go by similar names, but as I found earlier versions so useful, its re-emergence seems worth the mention.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152727</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243680060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I totally remember them. Back in the day I and used it to hack spam servers in China. It was an awesome tool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally remember them .
Back in the day I and used it to hack spam servers in China .
It was an awesome tool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally remember them.
Back in the day I and used it to hack spam servers in China.
It was an awesome tool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849</id>
	<title>Missing everything</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243710960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sigh.  Do you...do... IT?  It seems like a "cracker tool" to you?  What the hell are you, the FBI raiding Steve Jackson games 15 years ago because you're too inept to understand the difference between a concept and using it criminally?</p><p>You understand that even tools put to ill use by criminals have legitimate purposes right?  Or are you in the ban sporks because they can be used in spork crimes camp?  &lt;/flame&gt;  You deserved that.</p><p>L0phtcrack--cracks--passwords.  There's nothing inherently wrong with that.  Valid reasons include:<br>
&nbsp; * lack of backups and a need to recover an existing password<br>
&nbsp; * testing employee passwords for compliance with policy and strength requirements with authorization<br>
&nbsp; * being paid to pen-test a system<br>
&nbsp; * Just freakin' wanting to run it at home to see how fast such tools 'really work'<br>
&nbsp; * Discovering passwords used on a compromised system (it may help reveal passwords used in encrypted files with naive rootkits)<br>
&nbsp; * General Proof of concept against poor password implementations--early versions of l0phcrack hit some systems a lot faster than others as I recall</p><p>Can we stop with this namby crap that the tool is somehow used and written by 'bad people' is 'bad' itself?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sigh .
Do you...do... IT ? It seems like a " cracker tool " to you ?
What the hell are you , the FBI raiding Steve Jackson games 15 years ago because you 're too inept to understand the difference between a concept and using it criminally ? You understand that even tools put to ill use by criminals have legitimate purposes right ?
Or are you in the ban sporks because they can be used in spork crimes camp ?
You deserved that.L0phtcrack--cracks--passwords .
There 's nothing inherently wrong with that .
Valid reasons include :   * lack of backups and a need to recover an existing password   * testing employee passwords for compliance with policy and strength requirements with authorization   * being paid to pen-test a system   * Just freakin ' wanting to run it at home to see how fast such tools 'really work '   * Discovering passwords used on a compromised system ( it may help reveal passwords used in encrypted files with naive rootkits )   * General Proof of concept against poor password implementations--early versions of l0phcrack hit some systems a lot faster than others as I recallCan we stop with this namby crap that the tool is somehow used and written by 'bad people ' is 'bad ' itself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sigh.
Do you...do... IT?  It seems like a "cracker tool" to you?
What the hell are you, the FBI raiding Steve Jackson games 15 years ago because you're too inept to understand the difference between a concept and using it criminally?You understand that even tools put to ill use by criminals have legitimate purposes right?
Or are you in the ban sporks because they can be used in spork crimes camp?
You deserved that.L0phtcrack--cracks--passwords.
There's nothing inherently wrong with that.
Valid reasons include:
  * lack of backups and a need to recover an existing password
  * testing employee passwords for compliance with policy and strength requirements with authorization
  * being paid to pen-test a system
  * Just freakin' wanting to run it at home to see how fast such tools 'really work'
  * Discovering passwords used on a compromised system (it may help reveal passwords used in encrypted files with naive rootkits)
  * General Proof of concept against poor password implementations--early versions of l0phcrack hit some systems a lot faster than others as I recallCan we stop with this namby crap that the tool is somehow used and written by 'bad people' is 'bad' itself?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727</id>
	<title>Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Meshach</author>
	<datestamp>1243710000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This just seems like a cracker tool - to gain passwords.  Or am I missing something (since Symantec owns it I probably am)?.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This just seems like a cracker tool - to gain passwords .
Or am I missing something ( since Symantec owns it I probably am ) ? .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This just seems like a cracker tool - to gain passwords.
Or am I missing something (since Symantec owns it I probably am)?.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28155555</id>
	<title>Re:still?</title>
	<author>Allador</author>
	<datestamp>1243704660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ignore the idiot AC who responded to you.  Password storage has nothing to do with Kerberos.  The two things are related, but orthogonal.</p><p>Windows still uses NTLM without a salt in the current versions.</p><p>There is a way to encrypt the SAM with a symmetric cipher, which requires that a floppy or USB key must be physically present for the SAM to be accessed.  It's not widely used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignore the idiot AC who responded to you .
Password storage has nothing to do with Kerberos .
The two things are related , but orthogonal.Windows still uses NTLM without a salt in the current versions.There is a way to encrypt the SAM with a symmetric cipher , which requires that a floppy or USB key must be physically present for the SAM to be accessed .
It 's not widely used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignore the idiot AC who responded to you.
Password storage has nothing to do with Kerberos.
The two things are related, but orthogonal.Windows still uses NTLM without a salt in the current versions.There is a way to encrypt the SAM with a symmetric cipher, which requires that a floppy or USB key must be physically present for the SAM to be accessed.
It's not widely used.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153457</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150749</id>
	<title>Good old Symantec</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243710120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Putting the "no" in innovation, again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Putting the " no " in innovation , again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Putting the "no" in innovation, again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151055</id>
	<title>Re:Missing everything</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1243713060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>L0phtcrack--cracks--passwords. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Valid reasons include:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; * lack of backups and a need to recover an existing password</p></div></blockquote><p>Log in as Administrator (or root on *nix) and change the password. No recovery necessary.</p><blockquote><div><p>  * testing employee passwords for compliance with policy and strength requirements with authorization</p></div></blockquote><p>Implement password policies which are supported through technical measures (group policies or any number of *nix equivalents) and require that everyone change passwords at next login.</p><p>Unfortunately I have only one client who will willingly accept strict password policies, but it's a finance company. Even for clients in the medical industry I have to practically shout HIPAA<br>to get them to even consider accepting requiring letters and numbers, let alone non-dictionary words and punctuation. People are LAZY, and they just don't care until an exploit is used to get in to the network. A person is smart but people are stupid.</p><blockquote><div><p>  * being paid to pen-test a system</p></div></blockquote><p>So, do  you need to purchase a per-site "license?" In that case use an open source alternative because so many people are cheap they won't want a proprietary tool unless they can "pirate" it.</p><blockquote><div><p>  * Just freakin' wanting to run it at home to see how fast such tools 'really work'</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh, for the same reason that people will download "pirated" copies of Photoshop, Illustrator, AutoCAD, Maya, and so forth. Just for bragging rights. Gotcha. Open source is not a solution in those cases.</p><blockquote><div><p>  * Discovering passwords used on a compromised system (it may help reveal passwords used in encrypted files with naive rootkits)</p></div></blockquote><p>Now, THERE is an interesting use, but even in that case won't the superior open source solutions work? L0phtcrack was a steaming pile even back in the day, only way-back-when there was no open source solution unless you rolled your own. Now there is a plethora of open source solutions that are more capable and since you have the source on hand, you can tailor them yourself using bash, vbscript, C++, and so forth.</p><blockquote><div><p>  * General Proof of concept against poor password implementations--early versions of l0phcrack hit some systems a lot faster than others as I recall</p></div></blockquote><p>An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure. It may result in fewer billable hours in the short term but it's nice to not get calls at 6:00am or 12:00am from clients. Implement password policies for clients who will accept it, and work HARD at educated the ones who won't until they at \_least\_ accept mixing letters and numbers in passwords.</p><p>Now, as far as [written by 'bad people' is 'bad'] is concerned, Symantec does have a long history of turning gold into poop. In L0phtcrack's case, it would be a matter of turning copper or <i>maybe</i> silver into poop, and then charging platinum pricing for it. If there is any company where I'd agree that software has become bloated, it is the antivirus companies - especially symantec and mcafee. Their released products are so loaded with subtle advertising for other products that it's disgusting, and the drain on system performance is inexcusable. It's a sad state of affairs when an alpha OSS product like Moon Secure that hasn't seen an update in over a year is superior, or when a Computer Associates product works better than yours.</p><p>Symantec was once one of the best, if not THE best software utilities producer out there. Remember the original Norton(Symantec) Antivirus which barely impacted performance even on a lowly 386? Remember the original Norton Utilities which you used to repair countless FATs and MBRs that were eaten by the Smartdrive cache or Win3x, but since the move to the NT family (WinNT, Win2K, WinXP, Win2K3, Vista, etc.) became nothing more than a gimmick application with little real utility? Remember Norton Desktop, which gave us a desktop/folder metaphor on Windows 4-5 years before the Windows Explorer desktop was released, and performed very, very well, and their products were void of advertisements for their other products? I miss Symantec of yesteryear. No, I wouldn't trust l0phtcrack to do the job when there are OSS alternatives, or even proprietary alternatives from small startups. Anyone who has been a user of (Norton)Symantec Antivirus or Utilities in the early days and experienced the horror of any versions from the last eight years would likely agree.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>L0phtcrack--cracks--passwords .
There 's nothing inherently wrong with that .
Valid reasons include :     * lack of backups and a need to recover an existing passwordLog in as Administrator ( or root on * nix ) and change the password .
No recovery necessary .
* testing employee passwords for compliance with policy and strength requirements with authorizationImplement password policies which are supported through technical measures ( group policies or any number of * nix equivalents ) and require that everyone change passwords at next login.Unfortunately I have only one client who will willingly accept strict password policies , but it 's a finance company .
Even for clients in the medical industry I have to practically shout HIPAAto get them to even consider accepting requiring letters and numbers , let alone non-dictionary words and punctuation .
People are LAZY , and they just do n't care until an exploit is used to get in to the network .
A person is smart but people are stupid .
* being paid to pen-test a systemSo , do you need to purchase a per-site " license ?
" In that case use an open source alternative because so many people are cheap they wo n't want a proprietary tool unless they can " pirate " it .
* Just freakin ' wanting to run it at home to see how fast such tools 'really work'Oh , for the same reason that people will download " pirated " copies of Photoshop , Illustrator , AutoCAD , Maya , and so forth .
Just for bragging rights .
Gotcha. Open source is not a solution in those cases .
* Discovering passwords used on a compromised system ( it may help reveal passwords used in encrypted files with naive rootkits ) Now , THERE is an interesting use , but even in that case wo n't the superior open source solutions work ?
L0phtcrack was a steaming pile even back in the day , only way-back-when there was no open source solution unless you rolled your own .
Now there is a plethora of open source solutions that are more capable and since you have the source on hand , you can tailor them yourself using bash , vbscript , C + + , and so forth .
* General Proof of concept against poor password implementations--early versions of l0phcrack hit some systems a lot faster than others as I recallAn ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure .
It may result in fewer billable hours in the short term but it 's nice to not get calls at 6 : 00am or 12 : 00am from clients .
Implement password policies for clients who will accept it , and work HARD at educated the ones who wo n't until they at \ _least \ _ accept mixing letters and numbers in passwords.Now , as far as [ written by 'bad people ' is 'bad ' ] is concerned , Symantec does have a long history of turning gold into poop .
In L0phtcrack 's case , it would be a matter of turning copper or maybe silver into poop , and then charging platinum pricing for it .
If there is any company where I 'd agree that software has become bloated , it is the antivirus companies - especially symantec and mcafee .
Their released products are so loaded with subtle advertising for other products that it 's disgusting , and the drain on system performance is inexcusable .
It 's a sad state of affairs when an alpha OSS product like Moon Secure that has n't seen an update in over a year is superior , or when a Computer Associates product works better than yours.Symantec was once one of the best , if not THE best software utilities producer out there .
Remember the original Norton ( Symantec ) Antivirus which barely impacted performance even on a lowly 386 ?
Remember the original Norton Utilities which you used to repair countless FATs and MBRs that were eaten by the Smartdrive cache or Win3x , but since the move to the NT family ( WinNT , Win2K , WinXP , Win2K3 , Vista , etc .
) became nothing more than a gimmick application with little real utility ?
Remember Norton Desktop , which gave us a desktop/folder metaphor on Windows 4-5 years before the Windows Explorer desktop was released , and performed very , very well , and their products were void of advertisements for their other products ?
I miss Symantec of yesteryear .
No , I would n't trust l0phtcrack to do the job when there are OSS alternatives , or even proprietary alternatives from small startups .
Anyone who has been a user of ( Norton ) Symantec Antivirus or Utilities in the early days and experienced the horror of any versions from the last eight years would likely agree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>L0phtcrack--cracks--passwords.
There's nothing inherently wrong with that.
Valid reasons include:
    * lack of backups and a need to recover an existing passwordLog in as Administrator (or root on *nix) and change the password.
No recovery necessary.
* testing employee passwords for compliance with policy and strength requirements with authorizationImplement password policies which are supported through technical measures (group policies or any number of *nix equivalents) and require that everyone change passwords at next login.Unfortunately I have only one client who will willingly accept strict password policies, but it's a finance company.
Even for clients in the medical industry I have to practically shout HIPAAto get them to even consider accepting requiring letters and numbers, let alone non-dictionary words and punctuation.
People are LAZY, and they just don't care until an exploit is used to get in to the network.
A person is smart but people are stupid.
* being paid to pen-test a systemSo, do  you need to purchase a per-site "license?
" In that case use an open source alternative because so many people are cheap they won't want a proprietary tool unless they can "pirate" it.
* Just freakin' wanting to run it at home to see how fast such tools 'really work'Oh, for the same reason that people will download "pirated" copies of Photoshop, Illustrator, AutoCAD, Maya, and so forth.
Just for bragging rights.
Gotcha. Open source is not a solution in those cases.
* Discovering passwords used on a compromised system (it may help reveal passwords used in encrypted files with naive rootkits)Now, THERE is an interesting use, but even in that case won't the superior open source solutions work?
L0phtcrack was a steaming pile even back in the day, only way-back-when there was no open source solution unless you rolled your own.
Now there is a plethora of open source solutions that are more capable and since you have the source on hand, you can tailor them yourself using bash, vbscript, C++, and so forth.
* General Proof of concept against poor password implementations--early versions of l0phcrack hit some systems a lot faster than others as I recallAn ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure.
It may result in fewer billable hours in the short term but it's nice to not get calls at 6:00am or 12:00am from clients.
Implement password policies for clients who will accept it, and work HARD at educated the ones who won't until they at \_least\_ accept mixing letters and numbers in passwords.Now, as far as [written by 'bad people' is 'bad'] is concerned, Symantec does have a long history of turning gold into poop.
In L0phtcrack's case, it would be a matter of turning copper or maybe silver into poop, and then charging platinum pricing for it.
If there is any company where I'd agree that software has become bloated, it is the antivirus companies - especially symantec and mcafee.
Their released products are so loaded with subtle advertising for other products that it's disgusting, and the drain on system performance is inexcusable.
It's a sad state of affairs when an alpha OSS product like Moon Secure that hasn't seen an update in over a year is superior, or when a Computer Associates product works better than yours.Symantec was once one of the best, if not THE best software utilities producer out there.
Remember the original Norton(Symantec) Antivirus which barely impacted performance even on a lowly 386?
Remember the original Norton Utilities which you used to repair countless FATs and MBRs that were eaten by the Smartdrive cache or Win3x, but since the move to the NT family (WinNT, Win2K, WinXP, Win2K3, Vista, etc.
) became nothing more than a gimmick application with little real utility?
Remember Norton Desktop, which gave us a desktop/folder metaphor on Windows 4-5 years before the Windows Explorer desktop was released, and performed very, very well, and their products were void of advertisements for their other products?
I miss Symantec of yesteryear.
No, I wouldn't trust l0phtcrack to do the job when there are OSS alternatives, or even proprietary alternatives from small startups.
Anyone who has been a user of (Norton)Symantec Antivirus or Utilities in the early days and experienced the horror of any versions from the last eight years would likely agree.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151615</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>olivier69</author>
	<datestamp>1243716480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I bet that 90\% of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.</p></div><p>Hmmm no. I'm just wondering how I can smoke it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet that 90 \ % of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.Hmmm no .
I 'm just wondering how I can smoke it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet that 90\% of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.Hmmm no.
I'm just wondering how I can smoke it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151021</id>
	<title>Re:Missing everything</title>
	<author>causality</author>
	<datestamp>1243712820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Can we stop with this namby crap that the tool is somehow used and written by 'bad people' is 'bad' itself?</p></div></blockquote><p>
And lose an excuse for manipulating and controlling other people?!  No fucking way!  Next thing ya know, you'll want us to stop justifying bad laws with "for the children" and "to fight terrorism".  How the hell will we intrude into other peoples' lives then?  Huh?!  See, you haven't thought this through.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we stop with this namby crap that the tool is somehow used and written by 'bad people ' is 'bad ' itself ?
And lose an excuse for manipulating and controlling other people ? !
No fucking way !
Next thing ya know , you 'll want us to stop justifying bad laws with " for the children " and " to fight terrorism " .
How the hell will we intrude into other peoples ' lives then ?
Huh ? ! See , you have n't thought this through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we stop with this namby crap that the tool is somehow used and written by 'bad people' is 'bad' itself?
And lose an excuse for manipulating and controlling other people?!
No fucking way!
Next thing ya know, you'll want us to stop justifying bad laws with "for the children" and "to fight terrorism".
How the hell will we intrude into other peoples' lives then?
Huh?!  See, you haven't thought this through.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154001</id>
	<title>Re:I'd be careful</title>
	<author>deets101</author>
	<datestamp>1243688940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>First, I hope you're kidding.
<br>
Second, This raises an interesting question for me. When Symantec owned it did their AV product(s) detect this as malware? That would be a fun call to their tech support.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First , I hope you 're kidding .
Second , This raises an interesting question for me .
When Symantec owned it did their AV product ( s ) detect this as malware ?
That would be a fun call to their tech support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, I hope you're kidding.
Second, This raises an interesting question for me.
When Symantec owned it did their AV product(s) detect this as malware?
That would be a fun call to their tech support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154269</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1243690980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is like those inherently black-hat tools like DES, RSA, SHA-1, and their ilk.  Why anyone would want to be the "first to say" such a ridiculous thing is beyond me, but the fact that your ridiculous post has been modded up would only surprise me if this was Slashdot about a decade ago, before it became so popular among the gleefully clueless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is like those inherently black-hat tools like DES , RSA , SHA-1 , and their ilk .
Why anyone would want to be the " first to say " such a ridiculous thing is beyond me , but the fact that your ridiculous post has been modded up would only surprise me if this was Slashdot about a decade ago , before it became so popular among the gleefully clueless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is like those inherently black-hat tools like DES, RSA, SHA-1, and their ilk.
Why anyone would want to be the "first to say" such a ridiculous thing is beyond me, but the fact that your ridiculous post has been modded up would only surprise me if this was Slashdot about a decade ago, before it became so popular among the gleefully clueless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150969</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243712220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I waited for 10 minutes. No replies. Mute reaction.</p></div><p>I always say this when I lose First Post as well!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I waited for 10 minutes .
No replies .
Mute reaction.I always say this when I lose First Post as well !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I waited for 10 minutes.
No replies.
Mute reaction.I always say this when I lose First Post as well!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28180835</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243951560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pwned</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pwned</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pwned</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154349</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151347</id>
	<title>Re:Symantec has a knack of spoiling even the best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243714980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.</p></div></blockquote><p>To be fair, Midas' touch didn't really work out too well either...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.To be fair , Midas ' touch did n't really work out too well either.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.To be fair, Midas' touch didn't really work out too well either...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154417</id>
	<title>Re:Symantec has a knack of spoiling even the best</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1243692180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers' tool under their umbrella."</p></div></blockquote><p>You might want to read TFA, so you have some idea what you are talking about.  L0phtcrack is <b> <i>not</i></b>  owned by Symantec, and has been re-acquired by the original developers.  It is in the article.  Really.  Don't let the clueless mods fool you.  Your post was not only completely lacking in insight, it is just plain and flat wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers ' tool under their umbrella .
" You might want to read TFA , so you have some idea what you are talking about .
L0phtcrack is not owned by Symantec , and has been re-acquired by the original developers .
It is in the article .
Really. Do n't let the clueless mods fool you .
Your post was not only completely lacking in insight , it is just plain and flat wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers' tool under their umbrella.
"You might want to read TFA, so you have some idea what you are talking about.
L0phtcrack is  not  owned by Symantec, and has been re-acquired by the original developers.
It is in the article.
Really.  Don't let the clueless mods fool you.
Your post was not only completely lacking in insight, it is just plain and flat wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151481</id>
	<title>Don't mod that funny, mod it INSIGHTFUL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243715760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let's face it: Anything that symantec touches turns into worthless and junk.<br>Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.<br>They touched Norton and poof, a great tool was turned into the worst nightmare of all times.<br>Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers' tool under their umbrella.<br>If i was anything like ParMaster, i would run as fast as i could and as far as away from it.</p></div><p>Don't mod this as "funny."  Mod it as "insightful."  It's not a joke -- Symantec makes some of the worst products in the industry, and turns otherwise good products into terrible products.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's face it : Anything that symantec touches turns into worthless and junk.Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.They touched Norton and poof , a great tool was turned into the worst nightmare of all times.Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers ' tool under their umbrella.If i was anything like ParMaster , i would run as fast as i could and as far as away from it.Do n't mod this as " funny .
" Mod it as " insightful .
" It 's not a joke -- Symantec makes some of the worst products in the industry , and turns otherwise good products into terrible products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's face it: Anything that symantec touches turns into worthless and junk.Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.They touched Norton and poof, a great tool was turned into the worst nightmare of all times.Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers' tool under their umbrella.If i was anything like ParMaster, i would run as fast as i could and as far as away from it.Don't mod this as "funny.
"  Mod it as "insightful.
"  It's not a joke -- Symantec makes some of the worst products in the industry, and turns otherwise good products into terrible products.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153709</id>
	<title>L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $1195.00</title>
	<author>Master of Transhuman</author>
	<datestamp>1243686840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I'll pay that just as soon as my hack of Bank of America puts another $100 million in my Swiss bank account.</p><p>Fucking morons. The only way anyone's going to pay that kind of money is if he's literally hacking Bank of America.</p><p>Talk about people with an exaggerated sense of their importance in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I 'll pay that just as soon as my hack of Bank of America puts another $ 100 million in my Swiss bank account.Fucking morons .
The only way anyone 's going to pay that kind of money is if he 's literally hacking Bank of America.Talk about people with an exaggerated sense of their importance in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I'll pay that just as soon as my hack of Bank of America puts another $100 million in my Swiss bank account.Fucking morons.
The only way anyone's going to pay that kind of money is if he's literally hacking Bank of America.Talk about people with an exaggerated sense of their importance in the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152475</id>
	<title>Re:Missing everything - Especially the point</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1243678560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a difference between posting about what is wrong in a dicsussion with tech folks on a site such as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. or zdnet  (which are both made up of technology workers and professional and/or amateur journalists) and communicating with customers. The approach and tone for each is and should be different as the education level, expectations, and requirements of each audience is different. Here I do not need to sugar-coat my comments or opinions of given product choices.</p><p>With customers sometimes the medicine needs to be dosed with a spoonful of sugar. I'm sorry you cannot grasp that distinction, however in this case I do not feel any need to apologise if this particular post offends you, since having nothing worthwhile to say you went directly for an ad-hominem attack. Therefore, I will assume you are a Symantec shill - either an employee, distributor, or associated with an advertising firm for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a difference between posting about what is wrong in a dicsussion with tech folks on a site such as / .
or zdnet ( which are both made up of technology workers and professional and/or amateur journalists ) and communicating with customers .
The approach and tone for each is and should be different as the education level , expectations , and requirements of each audience is different .
Here I do not need to sugar-coat my comments or opinions of given product choices.With customers sometimes the medicine needs to be dosed with a spoonful of sugar .
I 'm sorry you can not grasp that distinction , however in this case I do not feel any need to apologise if this particular post offends you , since having nothing worthwhile to say you went directly for an ad-hominem attack .
Therefore , I will assume you are a Symantec shill - either an employee , distributor , or associated with an advertising firm for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a difference between posting about what is wrong in a dicsussion with tech folks on a site such as /.
or zdnet  (which are both made up of technology workers and professional and/or amateur journalists) and communicating with customers.
The approach and tone for each is and should be different as the education level, expectations, and requirements of each audience is different.
Here I do not need to sugar-coat my comments or opinions of given product choices.With customers sometimes the medicine needs to be dosed with a spoonful of sugar.
I'm sorry you cannot grasp that distinction, however in this case I do not feel any need to apologise if this particular post offends you, since having nothing worthwhile to say you went directly for an ad-hominem attack.
Therefore, I will assume you are a Symantec shill - either an employee, distributor, or associated with an advertising firm for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152871</id>
	<title>Re:Missing everything</title>
	<author>blincoln</author>
	<datestamp>1243681080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Log in as Administrator (or root on *nix) and change the password. No recovery necessary.</i></p><p>Sometimes this isn't practical. For example, in a large enterprise it's easy to end up in a situation where if you can determine the password of a service account, you can get your work done non-intrusively and quickly, versus weeks or months of coordinating with other groups because you needed to change it. If you've inherited a bunch of legacy systems that depend on a single service account, you can pretty much guarantee that if you change the password, you will break *something* you didn't know about. Is this a best practice? No. But if your work is basically a triage situation, which is the most efficient solution?</p><p><i>Implement password policies which are supported through technical measures (group policies or any number of *nix equivalents) and require that everyone change passwords at next login.</i></p><p>The point of using a password cracking utility in that type of environment is to see how well your "technical measures" stand up to password-cracking tools in the real world. It's the difference between calculating how much stress a wing design should withstand, versus testing it to destruction to determine the real-world values.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Log in as Administrator ( or root on * nix ) and change the password .
No recovery necessary.Sometimes this is n't practical .
For example , in a large enterprise it 's easy to end up in a situation where if you can determine the password of a service account , you can get your work done non-intrusively and quickly , versus weeks or months of coordinating with other groups because you needed to change it .
If you 've inherited a bunch of legacy systems that depend on a single service account , you can pretty much guarantee that if you change the password , you will break * something * you did n't know about .
Is this a best practice ?
No. But if your work is basically a triage situation , which is the most efficient solution ? Implement password policies which are supported through technical measures ( group policies or any number of * nix equivalents ) and require that everyone change passwords at next login.The point of using a password cracking utility in that type of environment is to see how well your " technical measures " stand up to password-cracking tools in the real world .
It 's the difference between calculating how much stress a wing design should withstand , versus testing it to destruction to determine the real-world values .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Log in as Administrator (or root on *nix) and change the password.
No recovery necessary.Sometimes this isn't practical.
For example, in a large enterprise it's easy to end up in a situation where if you can determine the password of a service account, you can get your work done non-intrusively and quickly, versus weeks or months of coordinating with other groups because you needed to change it.
If you've inherited a bunch of legacy systems that depend on a single service account, you can pretty much guarantee that if you change the password, you will break *something* you didn't know about.
Is this a best practice?
No. But if your work is basically a triage situation, which is the most efficient solution?Implement password policies which are supported through technical measures (group policies or any number of *nix equivalents) and require that everyone change passwords at next login.The point of using a password cracking utility in that type of environment is to see how well your "technical measures" stand up to password-cracking tools in the real world.
It's the difference between calculating how much stress a wing design should withstand, versus testing it to destruction to determine the real-world values.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151055</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</id>
	<title>Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243710360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Loph who?...<br>What cracks?<br>12 years? That's pretty old stuff. Who needs it?<br>Does it work on iPhone?<br>Can I crack my XBox with it?</p><p>Really people, I bet that 90\% of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.<br>I waited for 10 minutes. No replies. Mute reaction.</p><p>L0phtCrack, and their creators, the "L0pht Heavy Industries" group, were once shinning stars inside the Hacker community. Now who remembers them? There are not even scriptkiddies around, all society is a scripkiddy.</p><p>L0pht people also created the "tool that never got its true name" - "netcat", which can only be found in most *nix systems as "nc". Pretty great tool, just two weeks ago I used it, once again, for more than 11 years.</p><p>Hail to you  guys, happy to see you around.</p><p>And Hail to the Cow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Loph who ? ...What cracks ? 12 years ?
That 's pretty old stuff .
Who needs it ? Does it work on iPhone ? Can I crack my XBox with it ? Really people , I bet that 90 \ % of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.I waited for 10 minutes .
No replies .
Mute reaction.L0phtCrack , and their creators , the " L0pht Heavy Industries " group , were once shinning stars inside the Hacker community .
Now who remembers them ?
There are not even scriptkiddies around , all society is a scripkiddy.L0pht people also created the " tool that never got its true name " - " netcat " , which can only be found in most * nix systems as " nc " .
Pretty great tool , just two weeks ago I used it , once again , for more than 11 years.Hail to you guys , happy to see you around.And Hail to the Cow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Loph who?...What cracks?12 years?
That's pretty old stuff.
Who needs it?Does it work on iPhone?Can I crack my XBox with it?Really people, I bet that 90\% of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.I waited for 10 minutes.
No replies.
Mute reaction.L0phtCrack, and their creators, the "L0pht Heavy Industries" group, were once shinning stars inside the Hacker community.
Now who remembers them?
There are not even scriptkiddies around, all society is a scripkiddy.L0pht people also created the "tool that never got its true name" - "netcat", which can only be found in most *nix systems as "nc".
Pretty great tool, just two weeks ago I used it, once again, for more than 11 years.Hail to you  guys, happy to see you around.And Hail to the Cow!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243711500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Attention Overseas Customers<br>As required by law, L0phtcrack is subject to United States export controls. L0phtCrack may not be downloaded or otherwise exported or re-exported outside the United States. By downloading or using L0phtCrack, you are agreeing to the foregoing and all applicable export control laws. See disclaimer for more details.</p></div><p>What kind of sorry-ass <i>black-hat tool</i> is this?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Attention Overseas CustomersAs required by law , L0phtcrack is subject to United States export controls .
L0phtCrack may not be downloaded or otherwise exported or re-exported outside the United States .
By downloading or using L0phtCrack , you are agreeing to the foregoing and all applicable export control laws .
See disclaimer for more details.What kind of sorry-ass black-hat tool is this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attention Overseas CustomersAs required by law, L0phtcrack is subject to United States export controls.
L0phtCrack may not be downloaded or otherwise exported or re-exported outside the United States.
By downloading or using L0phtCrack, you are agreeing to the foregoing and all applicable export control laws.
See disclaimer for more details.What kind of sorry-ass black-hat tool is this?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158081</id>
	<title>Ghost Anyone?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1243783500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They haven't killed that off, yet.  We will see what happens now that they own Altiris and have pretty much merged it with that division, but so far it wasn't destroyed by the acquisition of norton.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have n't killed that off , yet .
We will see what happens now that they own Altiris and have pretty much merged it with that division , but so far it was n't destroyed by the acquisition of norton .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They haven't killed that off, yet.
We will see what happens now that they own Altiris and have pretty much merged it with that division, but so far it wasn't destroyed by the acquisition of norton.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28167313</id>
	<title>Re:I'd be careful</title>
	<author>hitnrunrambler</author>
	<datestamp>1243867860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah.... if you don't understand why you got that message then you probably shouldn't be playing with tools like l0phtcrack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah.... if you do n't understand why you got that message then you probably should n't be playing with tools like l0phtcrack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.... if you don't understand why you got that message then you probably shouldn't be playing with tools like l0phtcrack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158121</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1243783800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And why would anyone worth his salt rely on a commercial tool anyway?</p><p>Sure, if you are in the security field, you will now have to run it against your 'sandbox' just in case some low threat kid tries it on your network, but that is as far as it would go as far as i'm concerned.</p><p>Sounds like a good scam to me, release tool knowing full well it will end up on torrent sites for amateur kiddies to use, then sell copies to corporate so you can 'test' your network with to 'be thorough'. Sounds a lot like how they deal with viruses<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And why would anyone worth his salt rely on a commercial tool anyway ? Sure , if you are in the security field , you will now have to run it against your 'sandbox ' just in case some low threat kid tries it on your network , but that is as far as it would go as far as i 'm concerned.Sounds like a good scam to me , release tool knowing full well it will end up on torrent sites for amateur kiddies to use , then sell copies to corporate so you can 'test ' your network with to 'be thorough' .
Sounds a lot like how they deal with viruses : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And why would anyone worth his salt rely on a commercial tool anyway?Sure, if you are in the security field, you will now have to run it against your 'sandbox' just in case some low threat kid tries it on your network, but that is as far as it would go as far as i'm concerned.Sounds like a good scam to me, release tool knowing full well it will end up on torrent sites for amateur kiddies to use, then sell copies to corporate so you can 'test' your network with to 'be thorough'.
Sounds a lot like how they deal with viruses :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753</id>
	<title>Symantec has a knack of spoiling even the best of</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243710180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's face it: Anything that symantec touches turns into worthless and junk.<br>Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.<br>They touched Norton and poof, a great tool was turned into the worst nightmare of all times.<br>Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers' tool under their umbrella.<br>If i was anything like ParMaster, i would run as fast as i could and as far as away from it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's face it : Anything that symantec touches turns into worthless and junk.Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.They touched Norton and poof , a great tool was turned into the worst nightmare of all times.Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers ' tool under their umbrella.If i was anything like ParMaster , i would run as fast as i could and as far as away from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's face it: Anything that symantec touches turns into worthless and junk.Symantec is like the Anti-Midas of technology.They touched Norton and poof, a great tool was turned into the worst nightmare of all times.Now they are releasing the ultimate hackers' tool under their umbrella.If i was anything like ParMaster, i would run as fast as i could and as far as away from it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28157417</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243776300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And to think I was actually going to consider buying it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And to think I was actually going to consider buying it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And to think I was actually going to consider buying it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28164069</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243789500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Under US law, crypto is equiv. to munition and is subject to the same export laws per say</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Under US law , crypto is equiv .
to munition and is subject to the same export laws per say</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under US law, crypto is equiv.
to munition and is subject to the same export laws per say</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150767</id>
	<title>Open Source Competitors</title>
	<author>fv</author>
	<datestamp>1243710240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When the submitter referenced "open source alternatives that go by similar names", he was referring to <a href="http://ophcrack.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net">ophcrack</a> [sourceforge.net].  Similar features are also available from <a href="http://www.oxid.it/cain.html" title="www.oxid.it">Cain and Abel</a> [www.oxid.it], and <a href="http://www.openwall.com/john/" title="openwall.com">John the Ripper</a> [openwall.com].

</p><p>I maintain a list of <a href="http://sectools.org/crackers.html" title="sectools.org">top password crackers</a> [sectools.org] and <a href="http://sectools.org/sniffers.html" title="sectools.org">sniffers</a> [sectools.org] as part of my <a href="http://sectools.org/sniffers.html" title="sectools.org">SecTools.Org</a> [sectools.org] site.

</p><p>While the submitter is correct that they have much more competition now, I still wish to congratulate the former L0pht guys on the new release!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When the submitter referenced " open source alternatives that go by similar names " , he was referring to ophcrack [ sourceforge.net ] .
Similar features are also available from Cain and Abel [ www.oxid.it ] , and John the Ripper [ openwall.com ] .
I maintain a list of top password crackers [ sectools.org ] and sniffers [ sectools.org ] as part of my SecTools.Org [ sectools.org ] site .
While the submitter is correct that they have much more competition now , I still wish to congratulate the former L0pht guys on the new release !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the submitter referenced "open source alternatives that go by similar names", he was referring to ophcrack [sourceforge.net].
Similar features are also available from Cain and Abel [www.oxid.it], and John the Ripper [openwall.com].
I maintain a list of top password crackers [sectools.org] and sniffers [sectools.org] as part of my SecTools.Org [sectools.org] site.
While the submitter is correct that they have much more competition now, I still wish to congratulate the former L0pht guys on the new release!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150865</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1243711020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I bet that 90\% of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0pht<b>Crack</b> and how can you eat it.</p></div><p>Actually I was wondering how I could smoke it...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet that 90 \ % of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.Actually I was wondering how I could smoke it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet that 90\% of slashdotters are still wondering what is L0phtCrack and how can you eat it.Actually I was wondering how I could smoke it...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151283</id>
	<title>are you retarded, or just ignorant?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243714620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Precomputed hashes are useless unless they are *sorted* then they become useful.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Right, because if there's one thing that computers are horrible at, it's searching for things really, really quickly.  Thanks for the useful post!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Precomputed hashes are useless unless they are * sorted * then they become useful .
Right , because if there 's one thing that computers are horrible at , it 's searching for things really , really quickly .
Thanks for the useful post !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Precomputed hashes are useless unless they are *sorted* then they become useful.
Right, because if there's one thing that computers are horrible at, it's searching for things really, really quickly.
Thanks for the useful post!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150937</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Fulcrum of Evil</author>
	<datestamp>1243711800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>these types are also generally very weak and a modern cpu may be able to compute them faster than it can spool from disk.</p></div><p>The way a rainbow table works is to generate a reverse mapping for your password, so if it's in the table, it's one index lookup away. Kind of hard to beat that, unless you're cracking WEP or something.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>these types are also generally very weak and a modern cpu may be able to compute them faster than it can spool from disk.The way a rainbow table works is to generate a reverse mapping for your password , so if it 's in the table , it 's one index lookup away .
Kind of hard to beat that , unless you 're cracking WEP or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>these types are also generally very weak and a modern cpu may be able to compute them faster than it can spool from disk.The way a rainbow table works is to generate a reverse mapping for your password, so if it's in the table, it's one index lookup away.
Kind of hard to beat that, unless you're cracking WEP or something.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150973</id>
	<title>Any GPU Support?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243712280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would make a real killer for cracking would be a combination of Cain and Abel + GPU Support. Imagine having a ten/hundred fold increase in hashes per second from utilizing a Nvidia / ATI card.</p><p>You do have other programs for this kind of work, but the price tag I've seen so far would make my stomach turn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would make a real killer for cracking would be a combination of Cain and Abel + GPU Support .
Imagine having a ten/hundred fold increase in hashes per second from utilizing a Nvidia / ATI card.You do have other programs for this kind of work , but the price tag I 've seen so far would make my stomach turn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would make a real killer for cracking would be a combination of Cain and Abel + GPU Support.
Imagine having a ten/hundred fold increase in hashes per second from utilizing a Nvidia / ATI card.You do have other programs for this kind of work, but the price tag I've seen so far would make my stomach turn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28155351</id>
	<title>Re:Missing everything</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1243702620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It also has uses allowing mid level techs to get the local admin they should have which tightass upper management restrict in draconian business's<br>I've had to use it many times before, thank god I don't have to nowadays.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also has uses allowing mid level techs to get the local admin they should have which tightass upper management restrict in draconian business'sI 've had to use it many times before , thank god I do n't have to nowadays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also has uses allowing mid level techs to get the local admin they should have which tightass upper management restrict in draconian business'sI've had to use it many times before, thank god I don't have to nowadays.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150671</id>
	<title>um</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243709580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Password security seems pointless when password recovery systems are even less secure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Password security seems pointless when password recovery systems are even less secure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Password security seems pointless when password recovery systems are even less secure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150917</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>egr</author>
	<datestamp>1243711680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember, and I remember using it, however I think I remember it was gratis before.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember , and I remember using it , however I think I remember it was gratis before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember, and I remember using it, however I think I remember it was gratis before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1243710540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt a cracker would use this, most of the features listed seem to appeal to non technical management types...<br>Crackers (and for that matter more technical people other than crackers) are more likely to use john the ripper, which runs on more platforms, supports more cipher types, supports clustering etc.</p><p>Incidentally, the talk about "pre computed dictionary files" is a ridiculous idea, you turn a small dictionary, say 100 words, into a huge file consisting of 100 *  * , and you end up storing thousands of hashes for salts not being used in the passwords you're trying to crack..<br>Yes sure, some password types are not salted, but these types are also generally very weak and a modern cpu may be able to compute them faster than it can spool from disk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt a cracker would use this , most of the features listed seem to appeal to non technical management types...Crackers ( and for that matter more technical people other than crackers ) are more likely to use john the ripper , which runs on more platforms , supports more cipher types , supports clustering etc.Incidentally , the talk about " pre computed dictionary files " is a ridiculous idea , you turn a small dictionary , say 100 words , into a huge file consisting of 100 * * , and you end up storing thousands of hashes for salts not being used in the passwords you 're trying to crack..Yes sure , some password types are not salted , but these types are also generally very weak and a modern cpu may be able to compute them faster than it can spool from disk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt a cracker would use this, most of the features listed seem to appeal to non technical management types...Crackers (and for that matter more technical people other than crackers) are more likely to use john the ripper, which runs on more platforms, supports more cipher types, supports clustering etc.Incidentally, the talk about "pre computed dictionary files" is a ridiculous idea, you turn a small dictionary, say 100 words, into a huge file consisting of 100 *  * , and you end up storing thousands of hashes for salts not being used in the passwords you're trying to crack..Yes sure, some password types are not salted, but these types are also generally very weak and a modern cpu may be able to compute them faster than it can spool from disk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151083</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243713240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The cDc was my mom, in lieu of a real one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The cDc was my mom , in lieu of a real one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cDc was my mom, in lieu of a real one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28167885</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1243870380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please read:</p><p>Making a Faster Cryptanalytic Time-Memory Trade-O&#239;<br>Philippe Oechslin<br><a href="http://lasecwww.epfl.ch/~oechslin/publications/crypto03.pdf" title="lasecwww.epfl.ch">http://lasecwww.epfl.ch/~oechslin/publications/crypto03.pdf</a> [lasecwww.epfl.ch]</p><p>or any other paper in its references</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please read : Making a Faster Cryptanalytic Time-Memory Trade-O   Philippe Oechslinhttp : //lasecwww.epfl.ch/ ~ oechslin/publications/crypto03.pdf [ lasecwww.epfl.ch ] or any other paper in its references</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please read:Making a Faster Cryptanalytic Time-Memory Trade-OïPhilippe Oechslinhttp://lasecwww.epfl.ch/~oechslin/publications/crypto03.pdf [lasecwww.epfl.ch]or any other paper in its references</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707</id>
	<title>Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243709820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hahahahahahaa!<p><div class="quote"><p>L0phtCrack 6 Professional - $295.00<br>

L0phtCrack 6 Administrator - $595.00<br>

L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $1195.00</p> </div><p>I can build my own from scratch and existing resources for cheaper with the same feature set.<br>
Thanks but not thanks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hahahahahahaa ! L0phtCrack 6 Professional - $ 295.00 L0phtCrack 6 Administrator - $ 595.00 L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $ 1195.00 I can build my own from scratch and existing resources for cheaper with the same feature set .
Thanks but not thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hahahahahahaa!L0phtCrack 6 Professional - $295.00

L0phtCrack 6 Administrator - $595.00

L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $1195.00 I can build my own from scratch and existing resources for cheaper with the same feature set.
Thanks but not thanks.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151109</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>godIsaDJ</author>
	<datestamp>1243713420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember them and @stake. And at some point I even tried to get a job there (to be honest, luckily it did not work out!). Then Symantec bought them. I can't think of a more disappointing outcome...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember them and @ stake .
And at some point I even tried to get a job there ( to be honest , luckily it did not work out ! ) .
Then Symantec bought them .
I ca n't think of a more disappointing outcome.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember them and @stake.
And at some point I even tried to get a job there (to be honest, luckily it did not work out!).
Then Symantec bought them.
I can't think of a more disappointing outcome...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150809</id>
	<title>hefty price tag indeed...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243710660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>L0phtCrack 6 Professional - $295.00</p><p>L0phtCrack 6 Administrator - $595.00</p><p>L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $1195.00</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>L0phtCrack 6 Professional - $ 295.00L0phtCrack 6 Administrator - $ 595.00L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $ 1195.00</tokentext>
<sentencetext>L0phtCrack 6 Professional - $295.00L0phtCrack 6 Administrator - $595.00L0phtCrack 6 Consultant - $1195.00</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28156427</id>
	<title>Re:I'd be careful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243802880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, false positives on EXE packers is getting f*cking annoying. I'm finding that a lot of packed win32 executables are being blanket-flagged as virus/trojan by major anti-virus vendors, just due to the fact that the exe is packed via a certain method.</p><p>I downloaded a package that had tools and code to help write Win2k/XP drivers in Delphi, and the binaries were packed -- AntiVir freaked out. I looked at the binaries in a hex editor and googled the header bytes I found. Turned out it was a well-know packing method, so I downloaded a util that could unpack the compressed PEXE files. Whaddya know, the uncompressed programs, which functioned 100\%, were NOT flagged by AntiVir at all. So it appears antivirus vendors are just taking the lazy route and flagging ALL files using certain packers as malware based on the packing algorithm. LAME.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , false positives on EXE packers is getting f * cking annoying .
I 'm finding that a lot of packed win32 executables are being blanket-flagged as virus/trojan by major anti-virus vendors , just due to the fact that the exe is packed via a certain method.I downloaded a package that had tools and code to help write Win2k/XP drivers in Delphi , and the binaries were packed -- AntiVir freaked out .
I looked at the binaries in a hex editor and googled the header bytes I found .
Turned out it was a well-know packing method , so I downloaded a util that could unpack the compressed PEXE files .
Whaddya know , the uncompressed programs , which functioned 100 \ % , were NOT flagged by AntiVir at all .
So it appears antivirus vendors are just taking the lazy route and flagging ALL files using certain packers as malware based on the packing algorithm .
LAME .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, false positives on EXE packers is getting f*cking annoying.
I'm finding that a lot of packed win32 executables are being blanket-flagged as virus/trojan by major anti-virus vendors, just due to the fact that the exe is packed via a certain method.I downloaded a package that had tools and code to help write Win2k/XP drivers in Delphi, and the binaries were packed -- AntiVir freaked out.
I looked at the binaries in a hex editor and googled the header bytes I found.
Turned out it was a well-know packing method, so I downloaded a util that could unpack the compressed PEXE files.
Whaddya know, the uncompressed programs, which functioned 100\%, were NOT flagged by AntiVir at all.
So it appears antivirus vendors are just taking the lazy route and flagging ALL files using certain packers as malware based on the packing algorithm.
LAME.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150959</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243712100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Pretty great tool, just two weeks ago I used it, once again, for more than 11 years.</i> <br>
<br>
Two weeks ago you used it for more than 11 years? Are you sure about that? Maybe you like to recast that sentence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty great tool , just two weeks ago I used it , once again , for more than 11 years .
Two weeks ago you used it for more than 11 years ?
Are you sure about that ?
Maybe you like to recast that sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty great tool, just two weeks ago I used it, once again, for more than 11 years.
Two weeks ago you used it for more than 11 years?
Are you sure about that?
Maybe you like to recast that sentence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153457</id>
	<title>still?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243685100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this still useful against modern implementations of active directory? I thought it used either kerberos or an improved version of NTLM these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this still useful against modern implementations of active directory ?
I thought it used either kerberos or an improved version of NTLM these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this still useful against modern implementations of active directory?
I thought it used either kerberos or an improved version of NTLM these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158063</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1243783380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't want to be sued because of what you do with it..  Pretty normal CYA these days when people are getting sued just for downloading a song.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't want to be sued because of what you do with it.. Pretty normal CYA these days when people are getting sued just for downloading a song .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't want to be sued because of what you do with it..  Pretty normal CYA these days when people are getting sued just for downloading a song.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152379</id>
	<title>Re:I'd be careful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243678080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the entire point.</p><p>Your in murky waters here. AV's normally scan and using heuristics or signatures flag files and usually say HackTool/Keygen. Or if it's a bit more advanced you might get a completely unrelated Trojan for detection.</p><p>Same for games. If you have something that injects itself into another app like a speedhack or something it sets of a red flag somewhere due to the way it interfaces with the system.</p><p>It might be planted there, it might be just another false warning. But you can't really do much without a source code or something, unless your really up to Reverse Engineering</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the entire point.Your in murky waters here .
AV 's normally scan and using heuristics or signatures flag files and usually say HackTool/Keygen .
Or if it 's a bit more advanced you might get a completely unrelated Trojan for detection.Same for games .
If you have something that injects itself into another app like a speedhack or something it sets of a red flag somewhere due to the way it interfaces with the system.It might be planted there , it might be just another false warning .
But you ca n't really do much without a source code or something , unless your really up to Reverse Engineering</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the entire point.Your in murky waters here.
AV's normally scan and using heuristics or signatures flag files and usually say HackTool/Keygen.
Or if it's a bit more advanced you might get a completely unrelated Trojan for detection.Same for games.
If you have something that injects itself into another app like a speedhack or something it sets of a red flag somewhere due to the way it interfaces with the system.It might be planted there, it might be just another false warning.
But you can't really do much without a source code or something, unless your really up to Reverse Engineering</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152117</id>
	<title>who needs to crack windows  passwords anymore???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243676280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://oss.coresecurity.com/projects/pshtoolkit.htm" title="coresecurity.com" rel="nofollow">http://oss.coresecurity.com/projects/pshtoolkit.htm</a> [coresecurity.com]</p><p>'nuff said</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //oss.coresecurity.com/projects/pshtoolkit.htm [ coresecurity.com ] 'nuff said</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://oss.coresecurity.com/projects/pshtoolkit.htm [coresecurity.com]'nuff said</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151243</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243714380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's more or less what it is but it was used to find password vulnerabilities back in the day created by various mixed Windows (LANMAN passwords on an old NT network were insta-cracked so it was nice to know who was connecting with win16 OSes so you could go stab then in the face and take their machines away) versions back in the day.  Also used to be good to unlock your build server when the operator went to Russia for a month and locked everyone out of it.  There were many legit uses of it but it is or at least was a password recovery tool.
<br> <br>
These days I'm guessing there are better alternatives that haven't been on hiatus for 12 years and that are free and open source but in its day it was a wonderful tool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's more or less what it is but it was used to find password vulnerabilities back in the day created by various mixed Windows ( LANMAN passwords on an old NT network were insta-cracked so it was nice to know who was connecting with win16 OSes so you could go stab then in the face and take their machines away ) versions back in the day .
Also used to be good to unlock your build server when the operator went to Russia for a month and locked everyone out of it .
There were many legit uses of it but it is or at least was a password recovery tool .
These days I 'm guessing there are better alternatives that have n't been on hiatus for 12 years and that are free and open source but in its day it was a wonderful tool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's more or less what it is but it was used to find password vulnerabilities back in the day created by various mixed Windows (LANMAN passwords on an old NT network were insta-cracked so it was nice to know who was connecting with win16 OSes so you could go stab then in the face and take their machines away) versions back in the day.
Also used to be good to unlock your build server when the operator went to Russia for a month and locked everyone out of it.
There were many legit uses of it but it is or at least was a password recovery tool.
These days I'm guessing there are better alternatives that haven't been on hiatus for 12 years and that are free and open source but in its day it was a wonderful tool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150657</id>
	<title>interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243709520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>interesting... the download site seems to be unavailable right now. =)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>interesting... the download site seems to be unavailable right now .
= )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>interesting... the download site seems to be unavailable right now.
=)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633</id>
	<title>I'd be careful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243716600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a copy of l0phtcrack on my disk that I downloaded years ago from their site, and was left gathering dust on a forgotten corner of my hard drive. Recently a full drive scan by an antivirus (AVG?) identified it has having a trojan. It could be a false positive, but it seems more likely to really be a trojan that had been deliberately planted there.

Consider yourselves warned.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a copy of l0phtcrack on my disk that I downloaded years ago from their site , and was left gathering dust on a forgotten corner of my hard drive .
Recently a full drive scan by an antivirus ( AVG ?
) identified it has having a trojan .
It could be a false positive , but it seems more likely to really be a trojan that had been deliberately planted there .
Consider yourselves warned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a copy of l0phtcrack on my disk that I downloaded years ago from their site, and was left gathering dust on a forgotten corner of my hard drive.
Recently a full drive scan by an antivirus (AVG?
) identified it has having a trojan.
It could be a false positive, but it seems more likely to really be a trojan that had been deliberately planted there.
Consider yourselves warned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28156207</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>chord.wav</author>
	<datestamp>1243712820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, I remember them, the hacker news network and the hairy palm for Palm Pilot!<br>Good to see them back. I hated the shutdown of HNN, it was one of my favorite sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , I remember them , the hacker news network and the hairy palm for Palm Pilot ! Good to see them back .
I hated the shutdown of HNN , it was one of my favorite sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, I remember them, the hacker news network and the hairy palm for Palm Pilot!Good to see them back.
I hated the shutdown of HNN, it was one of my favorite sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28170481</id>
	<title>Re:Symantec has a knack of spoiling even the best</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243882020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>May I remind you Veritas is now (since 2005) part of Symantec.<br>Symantec is much more than just consumer anti virus and personal firewalls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>May I remind you Veritas is now ( since 2005 ) part of Symantec.Symantec is much more than just consumer anti virus and personal firewalls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>May I remind you Veritas is now (since 2005) part of Symantec.Symantec is much more than just consumer anti virus and personal firewalls.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158053</id>
	<title>15 day trial?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1243783320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, so where is the torrent of the real release, where your download isn't also tracked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , so where is the torrent of the real release , where your download is n't also tracked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, so where is the torrent of the real release, where your download isn't also tracked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150925</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243711740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Precomputed hashes are useless unless they are *sorted* then they become useful. If you have a sorted precomputed hash table for, say, all 10 character passwords and you have a hash then you can *instantly* locate the matching hash from your table and retrieve the password provided it is 10 or fewer characters. Brute forcing would take *much* longer, even on modern CPUS. With hard drive space as cheap as it is these days, huge presorted precomputed hash tables are very feasible.. this is largely the reason why salts are used, as they effectively increase the password length to the point where using a table is infeasible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Precomputed hashes are useless unless they are * sorted * then they become useful .
If you have a sorted precomputed hash table for , say , all 10 character passwords and you have a hash then you can * instantly * locate the matching hash from your table and retrieve the password provided it is 10 or fewer characters .
Brute forcing would take * much * longer , even on modern CPUS .
With hard drive space as cheap as it is these days , huge presorted precomputed hash tables are very feasible.. this is largely the reason why salts are used , as they effectively increase the password length to the point where using a table is infeasible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Precomputed hashes are useless unless they are *sorted* then they become useful.
If you have a sorted precomputed hash table for, say, all 10 character passwords and you have a hash then you can *instantly* locate the matching hash from your table and retrieve the password provided it is 10 or fewer characters.
Brute forcing would take *much* longer, even on modern CPUS.
With hard drive space as cheap as it is these days, huge presorted precomputed hash tables are very feasible.. this is largely the reason why salts are used, as they effectively increase the password length to the point where using a table is infeasible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154307</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1243691280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are missing the fact that such a tool is useful.  If your sysadmin can use it to figure out your password then so can a black hat (cracker.)  You see, on a truly secure system the password is not discoverable even by the root user. (I'd say root/Administrator, but again, I am only talking about potentially secure operating systems here)</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are missing the fact that such a tool is useful .
If your sysadmin can use it to figure out your password then so can a black hat ( cracker .
) You see , on a truly secure system the password is not discoverable even by the root user .
( I 'd say root/Administrator , but again , I am only talking about potentially secure operating systems here )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are missing the fact that such a tool is useful.
If your sysadmin can use it to figure out your password then so can a black hat (cracker.
)  You see, on a truly secure system the password is not discoverable even by the root user.
(I'd say root/Administrator, but again, I am only talking about potentially secure operating systems here)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153725</id>
	<title>And by the way</title>
	<author>Master of Transhuman</author>
	<datestamp>1243686960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>whoever gets the first clean cracked version, email me.</p><p>Should take about thirty seconds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>whoever gets the first clean cracked version , email me.Should take about thirty seconds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whoever gets the first clean cracked version, email me.Should take about thirty seconds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150665</id>
	<title>Frosty l0pht piss with fags</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243709580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>l0phtcrack is the worst, and I mean the worst piece of software ever made by anyone, ever.

As a side note, this is possibly the best tasting piss I have ever frostied.</htmltext>
<tokenext>l0phtcrack is the worst , and I mean the worst piece of software ever made by anyone , ever .
As a side note , this is possibly the best tasting piss I have ever frostied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>l0phtcrack is the worst, and I mean the worst piece of software ever made by anyone, ever.
As a side note, this is possibly the best tasting piss I have ever frostied.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151407</id>
	<title>Re:Missing everything - Especially the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243715220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>There needs to be a -1 Missed the Point mod.  He was saying there are various legit reasons to do password recovery and you respond with a mixed list of how you think security consulting should work and why you wouldn't run L0pht and why there are better tools than L0pht.  The funny thing is I don't really disagree with any of your rants  but his list was valid as well and you simply took a weird side path to argue some points that apparently have been irritating you lately
<br> <br>
Perhaps the reason your clients don't listen is because despite technical competence your communication skills needs some work.  Try listening to their complaints and problem and trying to respond to them and convincing them rather than just preaching loudly and sounding like Chicken Little.  Every company I've worked at in the past 20 years has adopted strong (or at least medium) password policies at some point.  The reason IT gets a bad name (other than the fact we fail to deliver ALOT) is that we have bad attitudes about the skills of others and we don't listen to those that are actually paying for our services we just preach and get upset when they don't immediately take our advice.  Being right and knowledgeable is important but being convincing and influential is even more important if you actually want to get something done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There needs to be a -1 Missed the Point mod .
He was saying there are various legit reasons to do password recovery and you respond with a mixed list of how you think security consulting should work and why you would n't run L0pht and why there are better tools than L0pht .
The funny thing is I do n't really disagree with any of your rants but his list was valid as well and you simply took a weird side path to argue some points that apparently have been irritating you lately Perhaps the reason your clients do n't listen is because despite technical competence your communication skills needs some work .
Try listening to their complaints and problem and trying to respond to them and convincing them rather than just preaching loudly and sounding like Chicken Little .
Every company I 've worked at in the past 20 years has adopted strong ( or at least medium ) password policies at some point .
The reason IT gets a bad name ( other than the fact we fail to deliver ALOT ) is that we have bad attitudes about the skills of others and we do n't listen to those that are actually paying for our services we just preach and get upset when they do n't immediately take our advice .
Being right and knowledgeable is important but being convincing and influential is even more important if you actually want to get something done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There needs to be a -1 Missed the Point mod.
He was saying there are various legit reasons to do password recovery and you respond with a mixed list of how you think security consulting should work and why you wouldn't run L0pht and why there are better tools than L0pht.
The funny thing is I don't really disagree with any of your rants  but his list was valid as well and you simply took a weird side path to argue some points that apparently have been irritating you lately
 
Perhaps the reason your clients don't listen is because despite technical competence your communication skills needs some work.
Try listening to their complaints and problem and trying to respond to them and convincing them rather than just preaching loudly and sounding like Chicken Little.
Every company I've worked at in the past 20 years has adopted strong (or at least medium) password policies at some point.
The reason IT gets a bad name (other than the fact we fail to deliver ALOT) is that we have bad attitudes about the skills of others and we don't listen to those that are actually paying for our services we just preach and get upset when they don't immediately take our advice.
Being right and knowledgeable is important but being convincing and influential is even more important if you actually want to get something done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151055</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28157217</id>
	<title>EXE</title>
	<author>anonieuweling</author>
	<datestamp>1243773000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A windows-only binary?<br>
The world has changed since then...
<br>
<br>
Also:<br>&gt;
Attention Overseas Customers<br>
(etc)<br>
What do overseas customers have to do with USA law?</htmltext>
<tokenext>A windows-only binary ?
The world has changed since then.. . Also : &gt; Attention Overseas Customers ( etc ) What do overseas customers have to do with USA law ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A windows-only binary?
The world has changed since then...


Also:&gt;
Attention Overseas Customers
(etc)
What do overseas customers have to do with USA law?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150861</id>
	<title>Re:Who remembers it?</title>
	<author>wmbetts</author>
	<datestamp>1243711020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember them and that program. I'm sure a lot of people remember who they are.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember them and that program .
I 'm sure a lot of people remember who they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember them and that program.
I'm sure a lot of people remember who they are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154349</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243691580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The original author, Mudge, is not only highly technical, he is <b>much, much, much</b> smarter than you.  He is also world famous, and it isn't cause he has a way k3w1 hax0r name.  He creates tools for security professionals, and he is one of the most elite in the industry.  He thinks it is useful to highly technical types and you don't.  Maybe you'd like to do some serious introspection before deciding if it is you or Mudge that is missing something here?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original author , Mudge , is not only highly technical , he is much , much , much smarter than you .
He is also world famous , and it is n't cause he has a way k3w1 hax0r name .
He creates tools for security professionals , and he is one of the most elite in the industry .
He thinks it is useful to highly technical types and you do n't .
Maybe you 'd like to do some serious introspection before deciding if it is you or Mudge that is missing something here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original author, Mudge, is not only highly technical, he is much, much, much smarter than you.
He is also world famous, and it isn't cause he has a way k3w1 hax0r name.
He creates tools for security professionals, and he is one of the most elite in the industry.
He thinks it is useful to highly technical types and you don't.
Maybe you'd like to do some serious introspection before deciding if it is you or Mudge that is missing something here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151591</id>
	<title>Re:Am I missing something??</title>
	<author>this great guy</author>
	<datestamp>1243716240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Incidentally, the talk about "pre computed dictionary files" is a ridiculous idea</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
This is not what you think it is. What they mean by that term is they support <a href="http://www.l0phtcrack.com/help/generator.html" title="l0phtcrack.com">rainbow tables</a> [l0phtcrack.com]. This is a time-memory trade-off that is very useful to crack non-salted hashes like Windows's standard NTLM hashes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Incidentally , the talk about " pre computed dictionary files " is a ridiculous idea This is not what you think it is .
What they mean by that term is they support rainbow tables [ l0phtcrack.com ] .
This is a time-memory trade-off that is very useful to crack non-salted hashes like Windows 's standard NTLM hashes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incidentally, the talk about "pre computed dictionary files" is a ridiculous idea

This is not what you think it is.
What they mean by that term is they support rainbow tables [l0phtcrack.com].
This is a time-memory trade-off that is very useful to crack non-salted hashes like Windows's standard NTLM hashes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151381</id>
	<title>Re:Let me be the first to say:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243715160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then do it.. and offer it for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then do it.. and offer it for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then do it.. and offer it for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152073</id>
	<title>Smart of them...</title>
	<author>Simulant</author>
	<datestamp>1243675980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... especially considering the recently announced cyber-security initiatives, not to mention all of the DOD stuff going on.</p><p>We are building an entire ARMY of script kiddies who will need such tools.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)  And guess who's paying for them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... especially considering the recently announced cyber-security initiatives , not to mention all of the DOD stuff going on.We are building an entire ARMY of script kiddies who will need such tools .
; ) And guess who 's paying for them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... especially considering the recently announced cyber-security initiatives, not to mention all of the DOD stuff going on.We are building an entire ARMY of script kiddies who will need such tools.
;)  And guess who's paying for them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28180835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28157417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28164069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28155555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28155351
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28156207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28170481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151055
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28167313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28156427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28167885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151055
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_1631224_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151055
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151407
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152475
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28155351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150973
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150799
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154349
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28180835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28167885
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150937
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158121
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150925
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154307
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150893
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28164069
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158063
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28157417
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28156427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28167313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28155555
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150657
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150767
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28152727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28156207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150969
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28153709
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_1631224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28150753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28170481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28158081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28151347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_1631224.28154417
</commentlist>
</conversation>
