<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_16_0017221</id>
	<title>Hackers Find Remote iPhone Crack</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245154380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/" rel="nofollow">Al</a> writes <i>"Two researchers have found a way to <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/22782/">run unauthorized code on an iPhone remotely</a>. This is different than '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jailbreak\_(iPhone)">jailbreaking</a>,' which requires physical access to the device. Normally applications have to be signed cryptographically by Apple in order to run. But Charles Miller of Independent Security Evaluators and Vincenzo Iozzo from the University of Milan found more than one instance in which Apple failed to prevent unauthorized data from executing. This means that a program can be loaded into memory as a non-executable block of data, after which the attacker can essentially flip a programmatic switch and make the data executable. The trick is significant, say Miller and Iozzo, because it provides a way to do something on a device after making use of a remote exploit. Details will be presented next month at the Black Hat Conference in Las Vegas."</i> The attack was developed on version 2.0 of the iPhone software, and the researchers don't know if it will work when 3.0 is released.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Al writes " Two researchers have found a way to run unauthorized code on an iPhone remotely .
This is different than 'jailbreaking, ' which requires physical access to the device .
Normally applications have to be signed cryptographically by Apple in order to run .
But Charles Miller of Independent Security Evaluators and Vincenzo Iozzo from the University of Milan found more than one instance in which Apple failed to prevent unauthorized data from executing .
This means that a program can be loaded into memory as a non-executable block of data , after which the attacker can essentially flip a programmatic switch and make the data executable .
The trick is significant , say Miller and Iozzo , because it provides a way to do something on a device after making use of a remote exploit .
Details will be presented next month at the Black Hat Conference in Las Vegas .
" The attack was developed on version 2.0 of the iPhone software , and the researchers do n't know if it will work when 3.0 is released .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Al writes "Two researchers have found a way to run unauthorized code on an iPhone remotely.
This is different than 'jailbreaking,' which requires physical access to the device.
Normally applications have to be signed cryptographically by Apple in order to run.
But Charles Miller of Independent Security Evaluators and Vincenzo Iozzo from the University of Milan found more than one instance in which Apple failed to prevent unauthorized data from executing.
This means that a program can be loaded into memory as a non-executable block of data, after which the attacker can essentially flip a programmatic switch and make the data executable.
The trick is significant, say Miller and Iozzo, because it provides a way to do something on a device after making use of a remote exploit.
Details will be presented next month at the Black Hat Conference in Las Vegas.
" The attack was developed on version 2.0 of the iPhone software, and the researchers don't know if it will work when 3.0 is released.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28378937</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading Title/Summary</title>
	<author>Trailrunner7</author>
	<datestamp>1245357120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly. And this was on 2.0, and 3.0 is out already. Nothing to see here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
And this was on 2.0 , and 3.0 is out already .
Nothing to see here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
And this was on 2.0, and 3.0 is out already.
Nothing to see here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346261</id>
	<title>Is this good news.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does that mean if we go to the "wrong" web site we can enable Wi-Fi tethering without have to pay extra?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does that mean if we go to the " wrong " web site we can enable Wi-Fi tethering without have to pay extra ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does that mean if we go to the "wrong" web site we can enable Wi-Fi tethering without have to pay extra?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346699</id>
	<title>iPhone Access Structure is locked down?</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1245161820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the iphone API specifically prevent 3rd party apps from accessing sensitive areas? For instance non-system apps can't access things like your personal address book. Would those additional controls mitigate the exposure here to the non-sensitive user space?<br> <br>

Don't get me wrong. Any exposure is bad, but the summary makes this sound like some full blown windows remote code execution issue.<br> <br>

Are there any iPhone developers who can chime in with some insight?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone correct me if I 'm wrong , but does n't the iphone API specifically prevent 3rd party apps from accessing sensitive areas ?
For instance non-system apps ca n't access things like your personal address book .
Would those additional controls mitigate the exposure here to the non-sensitive user space ?
Do n't get me wrong .
Any exposure is bad , but the summary makes this sound like some full blown windows remote code execution issue .
Are there any iPhone developers who can chime in with some insight ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the iphone API specifically prevent 3rd party apps from accessing sensitive areas?
For instance non-system apps can't access things like your personal address book.
Would those additional controls mitigate the exposure here to the non-sensitive user space?
Don't get me wrong.
Any exposure is bad, but the summary makes this sound like some full blown windows remote code execution issue.
Are there any iPhone developers who can chime in with some insight?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346251</id>
	<title>frost pist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple are brown hatters, not black.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple are brown hatters , not black .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple are brown hatters, not black.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28353493</id>
	<title>Re:iPhone Access Structure is locked down?</title>
	<author>jeff4747</author>
	<datestamp>1245146160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Would those additional controls mitigate the exposure here to the non-sensitive user space?</p></div></blockquote><p>It wouldn't be much of a 'hack' unless it included privilege escalation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would those additional controls mitigate the exposure here to the non-sensitive user space ? It would n't be much of a 'hack ' unless it included privilege escalation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would those additional controls mitigate the exposure here to the non-sensitive user space?It wouldn't be much of a 'hack' unless it included privilege escalation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346565</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading Title/Summary</title>
	<author>morgan\_greywolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245160860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, you're also being a bit misleading.  The exploit is to <em>remotely</em> cause unauthorized code to run.  What is most misleading about this is that it requires the phone to be jailbroken.  It won't work on an OOTB iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you 're also being a bit misleading .
The exploit is to remotely cause unauthorized code to run .
What is most misleading about this is that it requires the phone to be jailbroken .
It wo n't work on an OOTB iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you're also being a bit misleading.
The exploit is to remotely cause unauthorized code to run.
What is most misleading about this is that it requires the phone to be jailbroken.
It won't work on an OOTB iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245162000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What "lot" of iPhones are you talking about? Here in Germany, the iPhone is one of the rarest phones on the market. Because it's double the price of the best Nokia, and has only half the features. And I bet this will be the case for most of the world.</p><p>If you want to get a virus going, make it run on Symbian. Or with some luck, you can use J2ME, which pretty much every phone supports, but which is a bit hard to get to do something useful (because of the additional VM/Sandbox).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What " lot " of iPhones are you talking about ?
Here in Germany , the iPhone is one of the rarest phones on the market .
Because it 's double the price of the best Nokia , and has only half the features .
And I bet this will be the case for most of the world.If you want to get a virus going , make it run on Symbian .
Or with some luck , you can use J2ME , which pretty much every phone supports , but which is a bit hard to get to do something useful ( because of the additional VM/Sandbox ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What "lot" of iPhones are you talking about?
Here in Germany, the iPhone is one of the rarest phones on the market.
Because it's double the price of the best Nokia, and has only half the features.
And I bet this will be the case for most of the world.If you want to get a virus going, make it run on Symbian.
Or with some luck, you can use J2ME, which pretty much every phone supports, but which is a bit hard to get to do something useful (because of the additional VM/Sandbox).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347529</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>bytethese</author>
	<datestamp>1245167040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The lot of 11\% of global smart phones, about 4 million devices?
<a href="http://www.fiercedeveloper.com/story/iphone-captures-11-global-smartphone-os-share-q1/2009-05-25" title="fiercedeveloper.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.fiercedeveloper.com/story/iphone-captures-11-global-smartphone-os-share-q1/2009-05-25</a> [fiercedeveloper.com]
<br> <br>
Sure it's not the most abundant, but 4 million devices is still a lot of devices...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The lot of 11 \ % of global smart phones , about 4 million devices ?
http : //www.fiercedeveloper.com/story/iphone-captures-11-global-smartphone-os-share-q1/2009-05-25 [ fiercedeveloper.com ] Sure it 's not the most abundant , but 4 million devices is still a lot of devices.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lot of 11\% of global smart phones, about 4 million devices?
http://www.fiercedeveloper.com/story/iphone-captures-11-global-smartphone-os-share-q1/2009-05-25 [fiercedeveloper.com]
 
Sure it's not the most abundant, but 4 million devices is still a lot of devices...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283</id>
	<title>Misleading Title/Summary</title>
	<author>forand</author>
	<datestamp>1245158400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The title and summary are very misleading. The exploit is to run unauthorized code. They have not presented an injection path. While this is not good it is not as bad as having a "Remote iPhone Crack."</htmltext>
<tokenext>The title and summary are very misleading .
The exploit is to run unauthorized code .
They have not presented an injection path .
While this is not good it is not as bad as having a " Remote iPhone Crack .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The title and summary are very misleading.
The exploit is to run unauthorized code.
They have not presented an injection path.
While this is not good it is not as bad as having a "Remote iPhone Crack.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</id>
	<title>Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To this date, I cannot think of any cell phone viruses that have existed and spread.  I would assume that is because pretty much every cell phone is different, and writing a virus for one specific phone would be a waste of time, since it would represent only a fraction of a percent of the user base.  (Usually, when you write a virus, you want it to spread as far and wide as possible, right?)  However, with the popularity of the iPhone, I could see a malicious person writing a virus that would infect all of the Apple phones out there, since there are a <em>lot</em> of iPhones on the networks.</p><p>Could this crack be used for that?  If so, are we going to see an antivirus program on the next iteration of the iPhone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To this date , I can not think of any cell phone viruses that have existed and spread .
I would assume that is because pretty much every cell phone is different , and writing a virus for one specific phone would be a waste of time , since it would represent only a fraction of a percent of the user base .
( Usually , when you write a virus , you want it to spread as far and wide as possible , right ?
) However , with the popularity of the iPhone , I could see a malicious person writing a virus that would infect all of the Apple phones out there , since there are a lot of iPhones on the networks.Could this crack be used for that ?
If so , are we going to see an antivirus program on the next iteration of the iPhone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To this date, I cannot think of any cell phone viruses that have existed and spread.
I would assume that is because pretty much every cell phone is different, and writing a virus for one specific phone would be a waste of time, since it would represent only a fraction of a percent of the user base.
(Usually, when you write a virus, you want it to spread as far and wide as possible, right?
)  However, with the popularity of the iPhone, I could see a malicious person writing a virus that would infect all of the Apple phones out there, since there are a lot of iPhones on the networks.Could this crack be used for that?
If so, are we going to see an antivirus program on the next iteration of the iPhone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346547</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>gclef</author>
	<datestamp>1245160800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, they exist.  You're right that they're not as widespread as regular ones, since the hardware and software world is much more diverse.  But, they are there.  For example, there was a talk at blackhat 2007 about them (<a href="https://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-usa-07/Hypponen/Whitepaper/bh-usa-07-hypponen-WP.pdf" title="blackhat.com">slides</a> [blackhat.com]).  One interesting side part of that talk for me was the question of how to research a cell phone virus without risking infecting the production network.  (The answer: one hell of a Farraday cage around the lab.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , they exist .
You 're right that they 're not as widespread as regular ones , since the hardware and software world is much more diverse .
But , they are there .
For example , there was a talk at blackhat 2007 about them ( slides [ blackhat.com ] ) .
One interesting side part of that talk for me was the question of how to research a cell phone virus without risking infecting the production network .
( The answer : one hell of a Farraday cage around the lab .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, they exist.
You're right that they're not as widespread as regular ones, since the hardware and software world is much more diverse.
But, they are there.
For example, there was a talk at blackhat 2007 about them (slides [blackhat.com]).
One interesting side part of that talk for me was the question of how to research a cell phone virus without risking infecting the production network.
(The answer: one hell of a Farraday cage around the lab.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347253</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1245165480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I run the VNC server on my phone (veency) and I constantly get requests to connect while I am on the AT&amp;T network.</p><p>Just to illustrate your point</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I run the VNC server on my phone ( veency ) and I constantly get requests to connect while I am on the AT&amp;T network.Just to illustrate your point</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run the VNC server on my phone (veency) and I constantly get requests to connect while I am on the AT&amp;T network.Just to illustrate your point</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348153</id>
	<title>Re:Is this good news.</title>
	<author>qopax</author>
	<datestamp>1245170100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or, you know, you could have some balls and use the bandwidth you pay for $30 a month in any way you want until they tell you otherwise</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or , you know , you could have some balls and use the bandwidth you pay for $ 30 a month in any way you want until they tell you otherwise</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or, you know, you could have some balls and use the bandwidth you pay for $30 a month in any way you want until they tell you otherwise</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346581</id>
	<title>Good old Presto Changeo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245160980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I recall, Microsoft used to have an api call called PrestocChangeo or some such that did this.  Probably in Win16.  Always thought that changing a chunk of data into executable code was a bad idea.  I would have thought such nonsense was a thing of the past but who knows, maybe that same or similar api still exists.  (I'm an old guy and I don't get down to the system level calls much anymore, someone younger will need to look.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I recall , Microsoft used to have an api call called PrestocChangeo or some such that did this .
Probably in Win16 .
Always thought that changing a chunk of data into executable code was a bad idea .
I would have thought such nonsense was a thing of the past but who knows , maybe that same or similar api still exists .
( I 'm an old guy and I do n't get down to the system level calls much anymore , someone younger will need to look .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I recall, Microsoft used to have an api call called PrestocChangeo or some such that did this.
Probably in Win16.
Always thought that changing a chunk of data into executable code was a bad idea.
I would have thought such nonsense was a thing of the past but who knows, maybe that same or similar api still exists.
(I'm an old guy and I don't get down to the system level calls much anymore, someone younger will need to look.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346439</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>think\_nix</author>
	<datestamp>1245159900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To this date, I cannot think of any cell phone viruses that have existed and spread.  </p></div><p>Windows Mobile ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To this date , I can not think of any cell phone viruses that have existed and spread .
Windows Mobile ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To this date, I cannot think of any cell phone viruses that have existed and spread.
Windows Mobile ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347065</id>
	<title>Re:Is this good news.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245164280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple or the carriers charges for Wi-Fi tethering? And you actual bought a device configured that way?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple or the carriers charges for Wi-Fi tethering ?
And you actual bought a device configured that way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple or the carriers charges for Wi-Fi tethering?
And you actual bought a device configured that way?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28351535</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>cortesoft</author>
	<datestamp>1245181800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here in San Francisco, I am pretty sure everyone and their mother has an iPhone.  It feels like a novelty to see another phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in San Francisco , I am pretty sure everyone and their mother has an iPhone .
It feels like a novelty to see another phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here in San Francisco, I am pretty sure everyone and their mother has an iPhone.
It feels like a novelty to see another phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346923</id>
	<title>An app that smashes its own stack</title>
	<author>AntiRush</author>
	<datestamp>1245163500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I haven't done the legwork but it appears that an attack vector exists via the App Store.  Applications allow downloading of data files (podcasts, for example).  <p>Simply get your application published and give people some incentive to download it (for free).  Once your intended target or target quota has installed download a "media file" that's actually the malicious binary.  Then it's just a matter of smashing your own application's stack to run the code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't done the legwork but it appears that an attack vector exists via the App Store .
Applications allow downloading of data files ( podcasts , for example ) .
Simply get your application published and give people some incentive to download it ( for free ) .
Once your intended target or target quota has installed download a " media file " that 's actually the malicious binary .
Then it 's just a matter of smashing your own application 's stack to run the code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't done the legwork but it appears that an attack vector exists via the App Store.
Applications allow downloading of data files (podcasts, for example).
Simply get your application published and give people some incentive to download it (for free).
Once your intended target or target quota has installed download a "media file" that's actually the malicious binary.
Then it's just a matter of smashing your own application's stack to run the code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347177</id>
	<title>yeah, sure</title>
	<author>catmistake</author>
	<datestamp>1245165000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Details of the exploit will be presented next month...</p></div><p>My remote iPhone exploit is a Canadian    supermodel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Details of the exploit will be presented next month...My remote iPhone exploit is a Canadian supermodel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Details of the exploit will be presented next month...My remote iPhone exploit is a Canadian    supermodel.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346413</id>
	<title>Chances</title>
	<author>s1lverl0rd</author>
	<datestamp>1245159660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, it's all just chance calculation. Let's say that 1 million iPhones/iPod Touches were sold. Let us then assume that 0.5 percent of the people that buy an iPhone are Evil Haxx0rz and want to hack their new phone. I guess that no more that a half percent of *that* group succeed in finding a way to execute arbitrary code.</p><p>One of the 25 is holding his speech at the Black Hat conference in Las Vegas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it 's all just chance calculation .
Let 's say that 1 million iPhones/iPod Touches were sold .
Let us then assume that 0.5 percent of the people that buy an iPhone are Evil Haxx0rz and want to hack their new phone .
I guess that no more that a half percent of * that * group succeed in finding a way to execute arbitrary code.One of the 25 is holding his speech at the Black Hat conference in Las Vegas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it's all just chance calculation.
Let's say that 1 million iPhones/iPod Touches were sold.
Let us then assume that 0.5 percent of the people that buy an iPhone are Evil Haxx0rz and want to hack their new phone.
I guess that no more that a half percent of *that* group succeed in finding a way to execute arbitrary code.One of the 25 is holding his speech at the Black Hat conference in Las Vegas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346269</id>
	<title>Dumbing down the text...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't it lovely when the text on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is dumbed down to suit the readers of Doanld Duck ?</p><p>I would have thought that "geekdom" ment more than this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it lovely when the text on / .
is dumbed down to suit the readers of Doanld Duck ? I would have thought that " geekdom " ment more than this : p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it lovely when the text on /.
is dumbed down to suit the readers of Doanld Duck ?I would have thought that "geekdom" ment more than this :p</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346931</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1245163560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It might be more prudent to fix the unsigned code execution vulnerability first, but phone antivirus is a good idea and would be innovative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It might be more prudent to fix the unsigned code execution vulnerability first , but phone antivirus is a good idea and would be innovative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might be more prudent to fix the unsigned code execution vulnerability first, but phone antivirus is a good idea and would be innovative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347095</id>
	<title>Re:Is this good news.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245164460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only if you want to risk losing your service. Tethering without a tethering plan is a violation of AT&amp;T's terms of use. It seems to me that it would be pretty easy to detect. For instance, they could check your browser agent information when you make HTTP requests. They could also look for connections over known ports that would imply you're not on a phone (such as a WoW connection). It seems there are several ways AT&amp;T could spot that you're using a tethered connection without paying for it. So even if you can enable it, it would probably be best not to unless you're interested in potentially losing your phone service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only if you want to risk losing your service .
Tethering without a tethering plan is a violation of AT&amp;T 's terms of use .
It seems to me that it would be pretty easy to detect .
For instance , they could check your browser agent information when you make HTTP requests .
They could also look for connections over known ports that would imply you 're not on a phone ( such as a WoW connection ) .
It seems there are several ways AT&amp;T could spot that you 're using a tethered connection without paying for it .
So even if you can enable it , it would probably be best not to unless you 're interested in potentially losing your phone service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only if you want to risk losing your service.
Tethering without a tethering plan is a violation of AT&amp;T's terms of use.
It seems to me that it would be pretty easy to detect.
For instance, they could check your browser agent information when you make HTTP requests.
They could also look for connections over known ports that would imply you're not on a phone (such as a WoW connection).
It seems there are several ways AT&amp;T could spot that you're using a tethered connection without paying for it.
So even if you can enable it, it would probably be best not to unless you're interested in potentially losing your phone service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346381</id>
	<title>Capt Crunch?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245159360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is there any irony in that some early Apple folks started out phone phreaking?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there any irony in that some early Apple folks started out phone phreaking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there any irony in that some early Apple folks started out phone phreaking?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347903</id>
	<title>No infection vector?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245168960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Viruses spread not because a computer can be broken into, but because a computer can be broken into AND because it can broadcast the virus to other computers.</p><p>That's why there were no wild Palm OS viruses even when Palm had 80\% of the market for years, because the only way to transfer the infection from one Palm to another was for the owner of the infected Palm and the target to deliberately beam a file from one to another.</p><p>For cellphones, there's even fewer opportunities for infection, because iPhone owners don't routinely beam files to each other. Most phone-to-phone communication is voice or very short text messages.</p><p>What mechanisms are there for an iPhone in my pocket to infect an iPhone in your pocket?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Viruses spread not because a computer can be broken into , but because a computer can be broken into AND because it can broadcast the virus to other computers.That 's why there were no wild Palm OS viruses even when Palm had 80 \ % of the market for years , because the only way to transfer the infection from one Palm to another was for the owner of the infected Palm and the target to deliberately beam a file from one to another.For cellphones , there 's even fewer opportunities for infection , because iPhone owners do n't routinely beam files to each other .
Most phone-to-phone communication is voice or very short text messages.What mechanisms are there for an iPhone in my pocket to infect an iPhone in your pocket ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Viruses spread not because a computer can be broken into, but because a computer can be broken into AND because it can broadcast the virus to other computers.That's why there were no wild Palm OS viruses even when Palm had 80\% of the market for years, because the only way to transfer the infection from one Palm to another was for the owner of the infected Palm and the target to deliberately beam a file from one to another.For cellphones, there's even fewer opportunities for infection, because iPhone owners don't routinely beam files to each other.
Most phone-to-phone communication is voice or very short text messages.What mechanisms are there for an iPhone in my pocket to infect an iPhone in your pocket?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346531</id>
	<title>Woznia = phreak :: Jobs = control phreak</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1245160680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They went from blue boxes to beige boxes to white boxes.  Now the white boxes themselves are getting blue-boxed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>That is, play the right piece of software at 2600 Hz into the iPhone microphone and you can use it to access the <em>whole</em> network instead of Apple and AT&amp;T's walled garden.</p><p>Only this time, the wall is on your phone and not the network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They went from blue boxes to beige boxes to white boxes .
Now the white boxes themselves are getting blue-boxed ; - ) That is , play the right piece of software at 2600 Hz into the iPhone microphone and you can use it to access the whole network instead of Apple and AT&amp;T 's walled garden.Only this time , the wall is on your phone and not the network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They went from blue boxes to beige boxes to white boxes.
Now the white boxes themselves are getting blue-boxed ;-)That is, play the right piece of software at 2600 Hz into the iPhone microphone and you can use it to access the whole network instead of Apple and AT&amp;T's walled garden.Only this time, the wall is on your phone and not the network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346735</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>Stenchwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1245162180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't think of an instance where any iPhone talks to another iPhone. You'd have to write the virus with the ability to route through AT$T's network to other iPhone handsets. If you are going to do that, then you may as well write the code to infiltrate AT$T directly...I would imagine there is much more valuable information in AT$T's database of subscribers than on any given iPhone.</p><p>Maybe a suitable injection method, without having to try and figure out how to hack the carrier, would be to write the malicious code into a seemingly legitimate app and post it on the app store. If the only thing it was doing was sitting there idle and awaiting instructions, would it be that hard to detect? Even if Apple finds the virus I'm sure at least a few people would have gotten a hold of it before it was yanked. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't think of an instance where any iPhone talks to another iPhone .
You 'd have to write the virus with the ability to route through AT $ T 's network to other iPhone handsets .
If you are going to do that , then you may as well write the code to infiltrate AT $ T directly...I would imagine there is much more valuable information in AT $ T 's database of subscribers than on any given iPhone.Maybe a suitable injection method , without having to try and figure out how to hack the carrier , would be to write the malicious code into a seemingly legitimate app and post it on the app store .
If the only thing it was doing was sitting there idle and awaiting instructions , would it be that hard to detect ?
Even if Apple finds the virus I 'm sure at least a few people would have gotten a hold of it before it was yanked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't think of an instance where any iPhone talks to another iPhone.
You'd have to write the virus with the ability to route through AT$T's network to other iPhone handsets.
If you are going to do that, then you may as well write the code to infiltrate AT$T directly...I would imagine there is much more valuable information in AT$T's database of subscribers than on any given iPhone.Maybe a suitable injection method, without having to try and figure out how to hack the carrier, would be to write the malicious code into a seemingly legitimate app and post it on the app store.
If the only thing it was doing was sitting there idle and awaiting instructions, would it be that hard to detect?
Even if Apple finds the virus I'm sure at least a few people would have gotten a hold of it before it was yanked. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346671</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading Title/Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245161700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I assumed that when I got to the bit that said "kdawson".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I assumed that when I got to the bit that said " kdawson " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assumed that when I got to the bit that said "kdawson".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347291</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>peppepz</author>
	<datestamp>1245165720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to get a virus going, make it run on Symbian.</p></div><p>On ancient Symbian versions, perhaps. After S60v3 they added that darn platform security that won&rsquo;t even let you execute your own code, let alone third-party viruses.<br>Pirates periodically find cracks, but they tend to be model- and firmware version- specific.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to get a virus going , make it run on Symbian.On ancient Symbian versions , perhaps .
After S60v3 they added that darn platform security that won    t even let you execute your own code , let alone third-party viruses.Pirates periodically find cracks , but they tend to be model- and firmware version- specific .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to get a virus going, make it run on Symbian.On ancient Symbian versions, perhaps.
After S60v3 they added that darn platform security that won’t even let you execute your own code, let alone third-party viruses.Pirates periodically find cracks, but they tend to be model- and firmware version- specific.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347009</id>
	<title>Re:iPhone Access Structure is locked down?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245164040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>iPhone Access Structure is locked down</i>
<br> <br>
Sure, and btw, nicely designed Apple tinfoil hat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>iPhone Access Structure is locked down Sure , and btw , nicely designed Apple tinfoil hat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iPhone Access Structure is locked down
 
Sure, and btw, nicely designed Apple tinfoil hat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346505</id>
	<title>This is news?</title>
	<author>lseltzer</author>
	<datestamp>1245160500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA makes it sound like there have never been any remotely exploitable vulnerabilities in the iPhone before. There have been dozens of exploitable bugs in Webkit, for example. The fact that no phones were cracked at Pwn2Own didn't prove they weren't crackable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA makes it sound like there have never been any remotely exploitable vulnerabilities in the iPhone before .
There have been dozens of exploitable bugs in Webkit , for example .
The fact that no phones were cracked at Pwn2Own did n't prove they were n't crackable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA makes it sound like there have never been any remotely exploitable vulnerabilities in the iPhone before.
There have been dozens of exploitable bugs in Webkit, for example.
The fact that no phones were cracked at Pwn2Own didn't prove they weren't crackable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28353101</id>
	<title>Re:No infection vector?</title>
	<author>slashkitty</author>
	<datestamp>1245144600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're thinking of worms, not viruses.  Viruses do not need to be able to 'broadcast' to spread.  They spread via contact or in the old days, infected disks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're thinking of worms , not viruses .
Viruses do not need to be able to 'broadcast ' to spread .
They spread via contact or in the old days , infected disks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're thinking of worms, not viruses.
Viruses do not need to be able to 'broadcast' to spread.
They spread via contact or in the old days, infected disks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348457</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>bruno.fatia</author>
	<datestamp>1245171420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He's just saying that most iPhone sales ought to be in US. Here in Brazil an iPhone costs around 800 US with 1 year contract* so one might say they are not the most popular phone around.
<br> <br>
* Excluding eBay derivatives which import the phone from somewhere else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's just saying that most iPhone sales ought to be in US .
Here in Brazil an iPhone costs around 800 US with 1 year contract * so one might say they are not the most popular phone around .
* Excluding eBay derivatives which import the phone from somewhere else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's just saying that most iPhone sales ought to be in US.
Here in Brazil an iPhone costs around 800 US with 1 year contract* so one might say they are not the most popular phone around.
* Excluding eBay derivatives which import the phone from somewhere else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28350775</id>
	<title>Mac User Status:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245178920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><tt>[ ] Not told<br>[ ] Pending<br>[X] TOLD</tt></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ ] Not told [ ] Pending [ X ] TOLD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[ ] Not told[ ] Pending[X] TOLD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347025</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245164100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crazy frog was a bloody annoying virus which went across lots of phones and networks.</p><p>Thankfully its now dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crazy frog was a bloody annoying virus which went across lots of phones and networks.Thankfully its now dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crazy frog was a bloody annoying virus which went across lots of phones and networks.Thankfully its now dead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28368271</id>
	<title>Re:frost pist</title>
	<author>DigitalExtremeMedia</author>
	<datestamp>1245245880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple are brown hatters, not black.</p></div><p>Good one. Never heard that before.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple are brown hatters , not black.Good one .
Never heard that before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple are brown hatters, not black.Good one.
Never heard that before.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346891</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245163200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, Nokia is the Microsoft of the mobile industry. There was a whole range of SMS viruses for Nokia some five years back, I think they finally started to validate the SMS'es better now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , Nokia is the Microsoft of the mobile industry .
There was a whole range of SMS viruses for Nokia some five years back , I think they finally started to validate the SMS'es better now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, Nokia is the Microsoft of the mobile industry.
There was a whole range of SMS viruses for Nokia some five years back, I think they finally started to validate the SMS'es better now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346439</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346253</id>
	<title>BadAnalogyGuy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BadAnalogyGuy is a scientologist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BadAnalogyGuy is a scientologist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BadAnalogyGuy is a scientologist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347007</id>
	<title>I don't want a walled garden anyhow.</title>
	<author>jbn-o</author>
	<datestamp>1245164040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps, but this activity is the kind of thing Apple used as reason to not allow users their software freedom with their own phone.  Around the time of the iPhone's introduction <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16566968/site/newsweek/page/2/" title="msn.com">Steve Jobs told Newsweek</a> [msn.com]:</p><blockquote><div><p>"You don't want your phone to be an open platform," meaning that anyone can write applications for it and potentially gum up the provider's network, says Jobs. "You need it to work when you need it to work. Cingular doesn't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up."</p></div></blockquote><p>Leaving one to wonder about <a href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/iphone" title="fsf.org">that other network called the Internet</a> [fsf.org].  Even when viewed only from a security standpoint, this was a tall order to fill.  It appears that Apple has failed to fill it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps , but this activity is the kind of thing Apple used as reason to not allow users their software freedom with their own phone .
Around the time of the iPhone 's introduction Steve Jobs told Newsweek [ msn.com ] : " You do n't want your phone to be an open platform , " meaning that anyone can write applications for it and potentially gum up the provider 's network , says Jobs .
" You need it to work when you need it to work .
Cingular does n't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up .
" Leaving one to wonder about that other network called the Internet [ fsf.org ] .
Even when viewed only from a security standpoint , this was a tall order to fill .
It appears that Apple has failed to fill it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps, but this activity is the kind of thing Apple used as reason to not allow users their software freedom with their own phone.
Around the time of the iPhone's introduction Steve Jobs told Newsweek [msn.com]:"You don't want your phone to be an open platform," meaning that anyone can write applications for it and potentially gum up the provider's network, says Jobs.
"You need it to work when you need it to work.
Cingular doesn't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up.
"Leaving one to wonder about that other network called the Internet [fsf.org].
Even when viewed only from a security standpoint, this was a tall order to fill.
It appears that Apple has failed to fill it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28350323</id>
	<title>Re:Is this good news.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245177480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple or the carriers charges for Wi-Fi tethering? And you actual bought a device configured that way?</p></div><p>You must not be from the USA.</p><p>Point #1 is, this is an iPhone article, and teathering is an AT&amp;T issue, both of those companies are American.  Not being involved or related to either, this article is clearly not directed at you.</p><p>Point #2, you say that as if there was any choice.  If you actually lived here, you might have some right to make a snide comment, but lacking that you do not.</p><p>Point #3, the full American population can not move to your country just to get better and more advanced cellular network technology.  There is no room to relocate an entire country, so that is not an option.</p><p>Point #4, the fact the American government gave a monopoly to the wireless carriers means there is absolutely NOTHING the American public can do about this issue.  So you should watch where you are placing blame.  This is the peoples fault no more than it is personally your fault.</p><p>If the basic assumption of you not being American is incorrect, then your comment is clearly not based on reality in any shape or form, and you are trolling...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple or the carriers charges for Wi-Fi tethering ?
And you actual bought a device configured that way ? You must not be from the USA.Point # 1 is , this is an iPhone article , and teathering is an AT&amp;T issue , both of those companies are American .
Not being involved or related to either , this article is clearly not directed at you.Point # 2 , you say that as if there was any choice .
If you actually lived here , you might have some right to make a snide comment , but lacking that you do not.Point # 3 , the full American population can not move to your country just to get better and more advanced cellular network technology .
There is no room to relocate an entire country , so that is not an option.Point # 4 , the fact the American government gave a monopoly to the wireless carriers means there is absolutely NOTHING the American public can do about this issue .
So you should watch where you are placing blame .
This is the peoples fault no more than it is personally your fault.If the basic assumption of you not being American is incorrect , then your comment is clearly not based on reality in any shape or form , and you are trolling.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple or the carriers charges for Wi-Fi tethering?
And you actual bought a device configured that way?You must not be from the USA.Point #1 is, this is an iPhone article, and teathering is an AT&amp;T issue, both of those companies are American.
Not being involved or related to either, this article is clearly not directed at you.Point #2, you say that as if there was any choice.
If you actually lived here, you might have some right to make a snide comment, but lacking that you do not.Point #3, the full American population can not move to your country just to get better and more advanced cellular network technology.
There is no room to relocate an entire country, so that is not an option.Point #4, the fact the American government gave a monopoly to the wireless carriers means there is absolutely NOTHING the American public can do about this issue.
So you should watch where you are placing blame.
This is the peoples fault no more than it is personally your fault.If the basic assumption of you not being American is incorrect, then your comment is clearly not based on reality in any shape or form, and you are trolling...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348739</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>takev</author>
	<datestamp>1245172440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thing is, non smartphones in Europe have more features than the iPhone. Its just that the interface sucks on most of these phones.<br>I am going to get the iPhone because I want a device with a good user interface (currently I don't use the mp3 playback on the my phone, mostly because it requires a dock connector on the headphone), I find that the new iPhone has finally a decent camera in it.</p><p>Although the user interface of the camera on my current phone (sony ericson) is the best, bar none: slide open, press the button on the side slightly to lock focus and lock light (I have my camera settings to semi-auto), aim, press button deeper, put it back in your pocket. This works without unlocking the phone or anything. It even has an actual xenon flash. On an iPhone getting the camera to take an actual picture takes much more time and effort.</p><p>Why doesn't the iPhone have flash, or even second camera (video phone), these are standard features in any phone these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thing is , non smartphones in Europe have more features than the iPhone .
Its just that the interface sucks on most of these phones.I am going to get the iPhone because I want a device with a good user interface ( currently I do n't use the mp3 playback on the my phone , mostly because it requires a dock connector on the headphone ) , I find that the new iPhone has finally a decent camera in it.Although the user interface of the camera on my current phone ( sony ericson ) is the best , bar none : slide open , press the button on the side slightly to lock focus and lock light ( I have my camera settings to semi-auto ) , aim , press button deeper , put it back in your pocket .
This works without unlocking the phone or anything .
It even has an actual xenon flash .
On an iPhone getting the camera to take an actual picture takes much more time and effort.Why does n't the iPhone have flash , or even second camera ( video phone ) , these are standard features in any phone these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thing is, non smartphones in Europe have more features than the iPhone.
Its just that the interface sucks on most of these phones.I am going to get the iPhone because I want a device with a good user interface (currently I don't use the mp3 playback on the my phone, mostly because it requires a dock connector on the headphone), I find that the new iPhone has finally a decent camera in it.Although the user interface of the camera on my current phone (sony ericson) is the best, bar none: slide open, press the button on the side slightly to lock focus and lock light (I have my camera settings to semi-auto), aim, press button deeper, put it back in your pocket.
This works without unlocking the phone or anything.
It even has an actual xenon flash.
On an iPhone getting the camera to take an actual picture takes much more time and effort.Why doesn't the iPhone have flash, or even second camera (video phone), these are standard features in any phone these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346843</id>
	<title>Re:Phone Viruses</title>
	<author>bleh-of-the-huns</author>
	<datestamp>1245162840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure why this was modded funny, since there is a huge winmo population of phones... granted across different manufacturers, but the underlying code is the same.</p><p>Then, in addition to WinMo, there is Symbian, aren't all nokias symbian based.. thats millions of phones...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure why this was modded funny , since there is a huge winmo population of phones... granted across different manufacturers , but the underlying code is the same.Then , in addition to WinMo , there is Symbian , are n't all nokias symbian based.. thats millions of phones.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure why this was modded funny, since there is a huge winmo population of phones... granted across different manufacturers, but the underlying code is the same.Then, in addition to WinMo, there is Symbian, aren't all nokias symbian based.. thats millions of phones...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346439</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28353101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28368271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28351535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28350323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28378937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28353493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_16_0017221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28368271
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346505
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28378937
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346671
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346413
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346923
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346269
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28353493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347009
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347095
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347065
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28350323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346531
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_16_0017221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347903
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28353101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346709
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347529
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348739
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28348457
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28351535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346439
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346843
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28346931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_16_0017221.28347253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
