<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_22_0336246</id>
	<title>Time Warner Cable Modems Expose Users</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1256215500000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:my/.username@@@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">eldavojohn</a> writes <i>"Wired is reporting on <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/time-warner-cable/">a simple hack putting some 65,000 customers at risk</a>.  The hack to gain administrative access to the cable modem/router combo is remarkably simple: '[David] Chen, founder of a software startup called Pip.io, said he was trying to help a friend change the settings on his cable modem and discovered that Time Warner had hidden administrative functions from its customers with Javascript code. By simply disabling Javascript in his browser, he was able to see those functions, which included a tool to dump the router's configuration file.  That file, it turned out, included the administrative login and password in cleartext. Chen investigated and found the same login and password could access the admin panels for every router in the SMC8014 series on Time Warner's network &mdash; a grave vulnerability, given that the routers also expose their web interfaces to the public-facing internet.'  If you use Time Warner's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, watch for firmware to be released soon that they are reportedly in the process of testing."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " Wired is reporting on a simple hack putting some 65,000 customers at risk .
The hack to gain administrative access to the cable modem/router combo is remarkably simple : ' [ David ] Chen , founder of a software startup called Pip.io , said he was trying to help a friend change the settings on his cable modem and discovered that Time Warner had hidden administrative functions from its customers with Javascript code .
By simply disabling Javascript in his browser , he was able to see those functions , which included a tool to dump the router 's configuration file .
That file , it turned out , included the administrative login and password in cleartext .
Chen investigated and found the same login and password could access the admin panels for every router in the SMC8014 series on Time Warner 's network    a grave vulnerability , given that the routers also expose their web interfaces to the public-facing internet .
' If you use Time Warner 's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo , watch for firmware to be released soon that they are reportedly in the process of testing .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "Wired is reporting on a simple hack putting some 65,000 customers at risk.
The hack to gain administrative access to the cable modem/router combo is remarkably simple: '[David] Chen, founder of a software startup called Pip.io, said he was trying to help a friend change the settings on his cable modem and discovered that Time Warner had hidden administrative functions from its customers with Javascript code.
By simply disabling Javascript in his browser, he was able to see those functions, which included a tool to dump the router's configuration file.
That file, it turned out, included the administrative login and password in cleartext.
Chen investigated and found the same login and password could access the admin panels for every router in the SMC8014 series on Time Warner's network — a grave vulnerability, given that the routers also expose their web interfaces to the public-facing internet.
'  If you use Time Warner's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, watch for firmware to be released soon that they are reportedly in the process of testing.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834495</id>
	<title>Re:Still better than PLANET...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How stupid could they possible have been? It's easy (with the correct equipment) to extract white text on a white background. They should have used <tt>style="display: none"</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>How stupid could they possible have been ?
It 's easy ( with the correct equipment ) to extract white text on a white background .
They should have used style = " display : none "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How stupid could they possible have been?
It's easy (with the correct equipment) to extract white text on a white background.
They should have used style="display: none"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29878057</id>
	<title>SMC</title>
	<author>Adam Wood SMC</author>
	<datestamp>1256554200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>SMC Networks was recently made aware of a potential vulnerability in the firmware deployed in certain versions of its cable modems deployed on the Time Warner Cable network in North America. In specific and limited instances, the firmware could potentially be exploited by hackers intending to compromise the security of a user&rsquo;s Internet connection and network.

SMC Networks has moved quickly to develop new firmware that fixes the potential vulnerability and eliminates the possibility of a customer illegally accessing other users&rsquo; computers or Time Warner Cable's network. The new firmware has already been delivered to Time Warner Cable who are pushing the update to their end users&rsquo; equipment. This update is being deployed by Time Warner Cable and will require that no action be taken by the end users.

SMC Networks and Time Warner Cable take its customers&rsquo; network security concerns very seriously and apologizes for any inconvenience that has been caused by this vulnerability. It is of the utmost importance to SMC to deliver to markets products that are secure, safe and reliable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SMC Networks was recently made aware of a potential vulnerability in the firmware deployed in certain versions of its cable modems deployed on the Time Warner Cable network in North America .
In specific and limited instances , the firmware could potentially be exploited by hackers intending to compromise the security of a user    s Internet connection and network .
SMC Networks has moved quickly to develop new firmware that fixes the potential vulnerability and eliminates the possibility of a customer illegally accessing other users    computers or Time Warner Cable 's network .
The new firmware has already been delivered to Time Warner Cable who are pushing the update to their end users    equipment .
This update is being deployed by Time Warner Cable and will require that no action be taken by the end users .
SMC Networks and Time Warner Cable take its customers    network security concerns very seriously and apologizes for any inconvenience that has been caused by this vulnerability .
It is of the utmost importance to SMC to deliver to markets products that are secure , safe and reliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SMC Networks was recently made aware of a potential vulnerability in the firmware deployed in certain versions of its cable modems deployed on the Time Warner Cable network in North America.
In specific and limited instances, the firmware could potentially be exploited by hackers intending to compromise the security of a user’s Internet connection and network.
SMC Networks has moved quickly to develop new firmware that fixes the potential vulnerability and eliminates the possibility of a customer illegally accessing other users’ computers or Time Warner Cable's network.
The new firmware has already been delivered to Time Warner Cable who are pushing the update to their end users’ equipment.
This update is being deployed by Time Warner Cable and will require that no action be taken by the end users.
SMC Networks and Time Warner Cable take its customers’ network security concerns very seriously and apologizes for any inconvenience that has been caused by this vulnerability.
It is of the utmost importance to SMC to deliver to markets products that are secure, safe and reliable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834649</id>
	<title>time warner clients going offline in 3, 2, 1...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, how long will it take before someone scripts together a crawler to scan Time Warner's IP space for these modems, log in, and disable the connection ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , how long will it take before someone scripts together a crawler to scan Time Warner 's IP space for these modems , log in , and disable the connection ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, how long will it take before someone scripts together a crawler to scan Time Warner's IP space for these modems, log in, and disable the connection ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327</id>
	<title>Is this worse than the many unsecured wifi routers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...all sold to beacon by default , plenty sold with a googlable default password (or none at all) which they never prompt the user to change , encryption - even WEP - switched off by default.</p><p>Etc.</p><p>It took me all of 2 minutes to get into my mums neighbours home network via their belkin wifi router.</p><p>And yes , I did tell them how to secure it. And they ignored me. What can you do?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...all sold to beacon by default , plenty sold with a googlable default password ( or none at all ) which they never prompt the user to change , encryption - even WEP - switched off by default.Etc.It took me all of 2 minutes to get into my mums neighbours home network via their belkin wifi router.And yes , I did tell them how to secure it .
And they ignored me .
What can you do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...all sold to beacon by default , plenty sold with a googlable default password (or none at all) which they never prompt the user to change , encryption - even WEP - switched off by default.Etc.It took me all of 2 minutes to get into my mums neighbours home network via their belkin wifi router.And yes , I did tell them how to secure it.
And they ignored me.
What can you do?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834283</id>
	<title>That's what they get...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AOL/TWC have gone through so many reorganizations and consolidations, the best and brightest have been gone from the company for quite some time.  This is just a result of continuing to run a failing course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AOL/TWC have gone through so many reorganizations and consolidations , the best and brightest have been gone from the company for quite some time .
This is just a result of continuing to run a failing course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AOL/TWC have gone through so many reorganizations and consolidations, the best and brightest have been gone from the company for quite some time.
This is just a result of continuing to run a failing course.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834625</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>ijakings</author>
	<datestamp>1256223120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because they have a piece of paper from the government telling them they can do whatever the fuck they want. And if it isnt covered by an old agreement? Well new illegal ones spring up all the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they have a piece of paper from the government telling them they can do whatever the fuck they want .
And if it isnt covered by an old agreement ?
Well new illegal ones spring up all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they have a piece of paper from the government telling them they can do whatever the fuck they want.
And if it isnt covered by an old agreement?
Well new illegal ones spring up all the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834457</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836487</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>GeorgeS</author>
	<datestamp>1256232240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can have your connection switched over to ethernet. I had my FiOS install done on ethernet instead of the coax and the first thing I did when the installers left was plug the ethernet into my Debian bridge/firewall and I run their Actiontec off a gigabit switch along with my other PC's. Last time I had to call tech support they were unable to connect to the Actiontec and when I explained the setup and that I needed to open a port for them the Tech was like " that's awesome. Maybe you should work for us!" instead of bitching about how I blocked their access so they may not "support" the setup but, they didn't ask me to switch it back either.<br>Now there are 1 or 2 ports you will need to open up for the Actiontec especially if you also have TV service but, it's quite simple to open a port in IPTables.<br>Shoot me an email if you need some help setting this up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can have your connection switched over to ethernet .
I had my FiOS install done on ethernet instead of the coax and the first thing I did when the installers left was plug the ethernet into my Debian bridge/firewall and I run their Actiontec off a gigabit switch along with my other PC 's .
Last time I had to call tech support they were unable to connect to the Actiontec and when I explained the setup and that I needed to open a port for them the Tech was like " that 's awesome .
Maybe you should work for us !
" instead of bitching about how I blocked their access so they may not " support " the setup but , they did n't ask me to switch it back either.Now there are 1 or 2 ports you will need to open up for the Actiontec especially if you also have TV service but , it 's quite simple to open a port in IPTables.Shoot me an email if you need some help setting this up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can have your connection switched over to ethernet.
I had my FiOS install done on ethernet instead of the coax and the first thing I did when the installers left was plug the ethernet into my Debian bridge/firewall and I run their Actiontec off a gigabit switch along with my other PC's.
Last time I had to call tech support they were unable to connect to the Actiontec and when I explained the setup and that I needed to open a port for them the Tech was like " that's awesome.
Maybe you should work for us!
" instead of bitching about how I blocked their access so they may not "support" the setup but, they didn't ask me to switch it back either.Now there are 1 or 2 ports you will need to open up for the Actiontec especially if you also have TV service but, it's quite simple to open a port in IPTables.Shoot me an email if you need some help setting this up!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835985</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836341</id>
	<title>Speed suffers from extra equipment</title>
	<author>mi</author>
	<datestamp>1256231580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...is to put them in bridge mode and use your own router (no matter who your provider is).</p></div></blockquote><p>I was helping a day-trading friend with his home network. He is paying TimeWarner top dollars for the highest speed available. When his computer is connected to the cable modem <em>directly</em> speed-test was showing 15-17Mb/second. Adding even a (gigabit) switch &mdash; so that his main computer remained reachable by others on the LAN &mdash; in the middle lowered the speed down to 12-14Mb/second. If we used a NATing router instead of switch, the most speed we were able to see was 8Mb/second. (All cables were CAT6, all connections &mdash; full duplex.)

</p><p>Maybe, if we went with seriously expensive router, we'd get better speed, but I doubt, it would beat the top speed of using a switch &mdash; and that too was substantially lower, than the speed of the direct connection.

</p><p>Your proposal does improve security, but it impedes speed &mdash; not entirely unlike the security guards at the door, I might add... Not for everyone...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...is to put them in bridge mode and use your own router ( no matter who your provider is ) .I was helping a day-trading friend with his home network .
He is paying TimeWarner top dollars for the highest speed available .
When his computer is connected to the cable modem directly speed-test was showing 15-17Mb/second .
Adding even a ( gigabit ) switch    so that his main computer remained reachable by others on the LAN    in the middle lowered the speed down to 12-14Mb/second .
If we used a NATing router instead of switch , the most speed we were able to see was 8Mb/second .
( All cables were CAT6 , all connections    full duplex .
) Maybe , if we went with seriously expensive router , we 'd get better speed , but I doubt , it would beat the top speed of using a switch    and that too was substantially lower , than the speed of the direct connection .
Your proposal does improve security , but it impedes speed    not entirely unlike the security guards at the door , I might add... Not for everyone.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...is to put them in bridge mode and use your own router (no matter who your provider is).I was helping a day-trading friend with his home network.
He is paying TimeWarner top dollars for the highest speed available.
When his computer is connected to the cable modem directly speed-test was showing 15-17Mb/second.
Adding even a (gigabit) switch — so that his main computer remained reachable by others on the LAN — in the middle lowered the speed down to 12-14Mb/second.
If we used a NATing router instead of switch, the most speed we were able to see was 8Mb/second.
(All cables were CAT6, all connections — full duplex.
)

Maybe, if we went with seriously expensive router, we'd get better speed, but I doubt, it would beat the top speed of using a switch — and that too was substantially lower, than the speed of the direct connection.
Your proposal does improve security, but it impedes speed — not entirely unlike the security guards at the door, I might add... Not for everyone...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834837</id>
	<title>Re:Related to Belgacom hack and 'ransom'?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it's related, apart from the fact that the ISP screwed up.</p><p>The hack on BC(Belgacom) routers/modems is a firmware bug, even accessible with the web interface disabled for the outside, which is not the case here.</p><p>I'm a BC customer myself, but I don't think I really suffer from this bug, as my router is a *NIX box, properly firewalled (at least I hope I did it right), the modem/router they provided is way to old, and hasn't got enough memory to handle more than 100 concurrent tcp connections properly, so I'm running it in bridged mode, trying to access it's web interface from the outside just gives you the index of the webserver I run.<br>Also it's difficult to upgrade as it's an ISDN line, which requires another type of adsl router than the regular phone lines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it 's related , apart from the fact that the ISP screwed up.The hack on BC ( Belgacom ) routers/modems is a firmware bug , even accessible with the web interface disabled for the outside , which is not the case here.I 'm a BC customer myself , but I do n't think I really suffer from this bug , as my router is a * NIX box , properly firewalled ( at least I hope I did it right ) , the modem/router they provided is way to old , and has n't got enough memory to handle more than 100 concurrent tcp connections properly , so I 'm running it in bridged mode , trying to access it 's web interface from the outside just gives you the index of the webserver I run.Also it 's difficult to upgrade as it 's an ISDN line , which requires another type of adsl router than the regular phone lines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it's related, apart from the fact that the ISP screwed up.The hack on BC(Belgacom) routers/modems is a firmware bug, even accessible with the web interface disabled for the outside, which is not the case here.I'm a BC customer myself, but I don't think I really suffer from this bug, as my router is a *NIX box, properly firewalled (at least I hope I did it right), the modem/router they provided is way to old, and hasn't got enough memory to handle more than 100 concurrent tcp connections properly, so I'm running it in bridged mode, trying to access it's web interface from the outside just gives you the index of the webserver I run.Also it's difficult to upgrade as it's an ISDN line, which requires another type of adsl router than the regular phone lines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834355</id>
	<title>Multiple-levels of incompetence</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1256221200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't just a security vulnerability - those things happen.  This is gross negligence.  There are 3 simultaneous absolutely bone-headed things here:</p><p>- PUBLIC facing web configuration?  I have never, ever, ever, seen a router that did that.  Not even cheesy home routers.<br>- JAVASCRIPT is their security?  That was dumb back in 1998, but who does that now?<br>- CLEAR TEXT username/password?  There was this great technique we used back in 1975 called hashing.  Look it up.  Why does it even write the username/password out anyway?</p><p>This is one of those cases of just too many stupid things all at once for it to be a mistake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't just a security vulnerability - those things happen .
This is gross negligence .
There are 3 simultaneous absolutely bone-headed things here : - PUBLIC facing web configuration ?
I have never , ever , ever , seen a router that did that .
Not even cheesy home routers.- JAVASCRIPT is their security ?
That was dumb back in 1998 , but who does that now ? - CLEAR TEXT username/password ?
There was this great technique we used back in 1975 called hashing .
Look it up .
Why does it even write the username/password out anyway ? This is one of those cases of just too many stupid things all at once for it to be a mistake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't just a security vulnerability - those things happen.
This is gross negligence.
There are 3 simultaneous absolutely bone-headed things here:- PUBLIC facing web configuration?
I have never, ever, ever, seen a router that did that.
Not even cheesy home routers.- JAVASCRIPT is their security?
That was dumb back in 1998, but who does that now?- CLEAR TEXT username/password?
There was this great technique we used back in 1975 called hashing.
Look it up.
Why does it even write the username/password out anyway?This is one of those cases of just too many stupid things all at once for it to be a mistake.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29838165</id>
	<title>Re:VErizon FiOS routers do something similar</title>
	<author>DrVomact</author>
	<datestamp>1256238900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So get a gigabit wired router. I'd <em>never</em> trust a router that wasn't my property; I will always have my own router behind any provider-owned router, password protected so only I can maintain it. I refuse to install wi-fi, mostly because I know what it takes to secure a wireless network, and it's just easier to pull cable. Hmmm. You can disable wi-fi on those FIOS routers, right? Heck, if not, I'll rip off the frickin antennas and pack the whole thing in tin foil, if they ever get around to laying FIOS in my neighborhood. </p><p>
My friends say I'm paranoid. Of course, one of them just got his broadband shut off because the neighborhood kiddies were downloading pr0n courtesy of his poorly secured wireless. Heck, some of them give their <em>real</em> name when a Windows installation asks&mdash;and then they're supprised when their name shows up in places like the metadata to every Word document that's composed on their computers.</p><p>
Anyone who isn't paranoid these days is a sucker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So get a gigabit wired router .
I 'd never trust a router that was n't my property ; I will always have my own router behind any provider-owned router , password protected so only I can maintain it .
I refuse to install wi-fi , mostly because I know what it takes to secure a wireless network , and it 's just easier to pull cable .
Hmmm. You can disable wi-fi on those FIOS routers , right ?
Heck , if not , I 'll rip off the frickin antennas and pack the whole thing in tin foil , if they ever get around to laying FIOS in my neighborhood .
My friends say I 'm paranoid .
Of course , one of them just got his broadband shut off because the neighborhood kiddies were downloading pr0n courtesy of his poorly secured wireless .
Heck , some of them give their real name when a Windows installation asks    and then they 're supprised when their name shows up in places like the metadata to every Word document that 's composed on their computers .
Anyone who is n't paranoid these days is a sucker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So get a gigabit wired router.
I'd never trust a router that wasn't my property; I will always have my own router behind any provider-owned router, password protected so only I can maintain it.
I refuse to install wi-fi, mostly because I know what it takes to secure a wireless network, and it's just easier to pull cable.
Hmmm. You can disable wi-fi on those FIOS routers, right?
Heck, if not, I'll rip off the frickin antennas and pack the whole thing in tin foil, if they ever get around to laying FIOS in my neighborhood.
My friends say I'm paranoid.
Of course, one of them just got his broadband shut off because the neighborhood kiddies were downloading pr0n courtesy of his poorly secured wireless.
Heck, some of them give their real name when a Windows installation asks—and then they're supprised when their name shows up in places like the metadata to every Word document that's composed on their computers.
Anyone who isn't paranoid these days is a sucker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834457</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1256221920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is like finding out an uncut car key can open any Ford.</p><p>Meanwhile Verizon FIOS has been rolling out firmware upgrade to their routers that prohibit you from running your own secure sub-net inside their routers.</p><p>Why do these clowns think that because they control the last mile they can arrogantly control the whole internet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is like finding out an uncut car key can open any Ford.Meanwhile Verizon FIOS has been rolling out firmware upgrade to their routers that prohibit you from running your own secure sub-net inside their routers.Why do these clowns think that because they control the last mile they can arrogantly control the whole internet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is like finding out an uncut car key can open any Ford.Meanwhile Verizon FIOS has been rolling out firmware upgrade to their routers that prohibit you from running your own secure sub-net inside their routers.Why do these clowns think that because they control the last mile they can arrogantly control the whole internet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837513</id>
	<title>Re:Clock is ticking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256236440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the hackers who are exploiting this have already used the admin interface to upload their own custom firmware to the router.  Can't be allowing other hackers (or TW) to pwn the devices in your botnet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the hackers who are exploiting this have already used the admin interface to upload their own custom firmware to the router .
Ca n't be allowing other hackers ( or TW ) to pwn the devices in your botnet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the hackers who are exploiting this have already used the admin interface to upload their own custom firmware to the router.
Can't be allowing other hackers (or TW) to pwn the devices in your botnet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834223</id>
	<title>FAIL</title>
	<author>gzipped\_tar</author>
	<datestamp>1256220240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to TFA (my karma be damned), Web-based admin UI is enabled on these routers, not only for the LAN but for the whole fucking Internet. This must be the dumbest default setting ever.</p><p>Also in TFA...</p><blockquote><div><p>Time Warner&rsquo;s <b>Dudley</b> says the SMC8014 modem/routers are just a small portion of the 14 million devices its customers are using.</p></div></blockquote><p>What's more? Gnome With the Ping of Death?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to TFA ( my karma be damned ) , Web-based admin UI is enabled on these routers , not only for the LAN but for the whole fucking Internet .
This must be the dumbest default setting ever.Also in TFA...Time Warner    s Dudley says the SMC8014 modem/routers are just a small portion of the 14 million devices its customers are using.What 's more ?
Gnome With the Ping of Death ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to TFA (my karma be damned), Web-based admin UI is enabled on these routers, not only for the LAN but for the whole fucking Internet.
This must be the dumbest default setting ever.Also in TFA...Time Warner’s Dudley says the SMC8014 modem/routers are just a small portion of the 14 million devices its customers are using.What's more?
Gnome With the Ping of Death?
;)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</id>
	<title>The only prudent thing to do with these things...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1256219400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...is to put them in bridge mode and use your own router (no matter who your provider is).  Same with DSL modems.  Even when they aren't misconfigured (deliberately or due to sheer incompetence) the firmware is usually buggy and limited.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...is to put them in bridge mode and use your own router ( no matter who your provider is ) .
Same with DSL modems .
Even when they are n't misconfigured ( deliberately or due to sheer incompetence ) the firmware is usually buggy and limited .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...is to put them in bridge mode and use your own router (no matter who your provider is).
Same with DSL modems.
Even when they aren't misconfigured (deliberately or due to sheer incompetence) the firmware is usually buggy and limited.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834433</id>
	<title>There should be laws against this.</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1256221800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This shouldn't be legal. Cleartext password internet-facing consumer hardware? This is worse than those idiots using unsecured wireless routers for their credit card swiping machines. If I owned a Time Warner router I'd really feel justified in suing them for gross negligence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This should n't be legal .
Cleartext password internet-facing consumer hardware ?
This is worse than those idiots using unsecured wireless routers for their credit card swiping machines .
If I owned a Time Warner router I 'd really feel justified in suing them for gross negligence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This shouldn't be legal.
Cleartext password internet-facing consumer hardware?
This is worse than those idiots using unsecured wireless routers for their credit card swiping machines.
If I owned a Time Warner router I'd really feel justified in suing them for gross negligence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834623</id>
	<title>Happens all over the world...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cable &amp; Wireless here in Panama also has the same dumb password for almost every ADSL subscriber's box since ADSL came out years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cable &amp; Wireless here in Panama also has the same dumb password for almost every ADSL subscriber 's box since ADSL came out years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cable &amp; Wireless here in Panama also has the same dumb password for almost every ADSL subscriber's box since ADSL came out years ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834437</id>
	<title>Re:Is this worse than the many unsecured wifi rout</title>
	<author>wastedlife</author>
	<datestamp>1256221800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least those do not have the configuration accessable from the WAN by default. Also, they normally have either instructions or a setup wizard that sets up security for them. This is a case of WAN-accessable config pages that let unauthenticated users download the config file, which stores the username and password in plain text. The difference is clueless users versus extremely insecure design.</p><p>This is the difference between a linux box configured with insecure settings and a Windows 98 box sitting on the WAN with no firewall.</p><p>Or, how about a car analogy:</p><p>You can drive a brand new car with tons of safety features 100 mph into a brick wall and still die, or you can drive a Pinto which is likely to explode if someone rear-ends you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least those do not have the configuration accessable from the WAN by default .
Also , they normally have either instructions or a setup wizard that sets up security for them .
This is a case of WAN-accessable config pages that let unauthenticated users download the config file , which stores the username and password in plain text .
The difference is clueless users versus extremely insecure design.This is the difference between a linux box configured with insecure settings and a Windows 98 box sitting on the WAN with no firewall.Or , how about a car analogy : You can drive a brand new car with tons of safety features 100 mph into a brick wall and still die , or you can drive a Pinto which is likely to explode if someone rear-ends you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least those do not have the configuration accessable from the WAN by default.
Also, they normally have either instructions or a setup wizard that sets up security for them.
This is a case of WAN-accessable config pages that let unauthenticated users download the config file, which stores the username and password in plain text.
The difference is clueless users versus extremely insecure design.This is the difference between a linux box configured with insecure settings and a Windows 98 box sitting on the WAN with no firewall.Or, how about a car analogy:You can drive a brand new car with tons of safety features 100 mph into a brick wall and still die, or you can drive a Pinto which is likely to explode if someone rear-ends you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835803</id>
	<title>VErizon FiOS routers do something similar</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1256229120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was very much worried when I got Verizon FiOS. The Verizon supplied router is actually a linux box that has a web server and it throws a username/password dialog to the WAN side. I was worried so much I had another old router behind the Verizon router and connected my machines to this second router. But the other router was
old and it maxed out at 10Mbps and FiOS was delivering 20Mbps. So I did some googling. Found that Verizon has been shipping that kind of routers for more than 5 years and so far no hack has been found. So I removed my second line of defense. Looks like it is a prudent idea to buy a more capable modern router and protect
the machines from possible future hacks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was very much worried when I got Verizon FiOS .
The Verizon supplied router is actually a linux box that has a web server and it throws a username/password dialog to the WAN side .
I was worried so much I had another old router behind the Verizon router and connected my machines to this second router .
But the other router was old and it maxed out at 10Mbps and FiOS was delivering 20Mbps .
So I did some googling .
Found that Verizon has been shipping that kind of routers for more than 5 years and so far no hack has been found .
So I removed my second line of defense .
Looks like it is a prudent idea to buy a more capable modern router and protect the machines from possible future hacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was very much worried when I got Verizon FiOS.
The Verizon supplied router is actually a linux box that has a web server and it throws a username/password dialog to the WAN side.
I was worried so much I had another old router behind the Verizon router and connected my machines to this second router.
But the other router was
old and it maxed out at 10Mbps and FiOS was delivering 20Mbps.
So I did some googling.
Found that Verizon has been shipping that kind of routers for more than 5 years and so far no hack has been found.
So I removed my second line of defense.
Looks like it is a prudent idea to buy a more capable modern router and protect
the machines from possible future hacks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836205</id>
	<title>Does this hole follow the provider or the hardware</title>
	<author>rekoil</author>
	<datestamp>1256230920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone know if this vulnerability is specific to Time Warner? That's the same model cable modem I have on my Comcast service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know if this vulnerability is specific to Time Warner ?
That 's the same model cable modem I have on my Comcast service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know if this vulnerability is specific to Time Warner?
That's the same model cable modem I have on my Comcast service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834685</id>
	<title>Re: the routers also expose their web interfaces t</title>
	<author>skiman1979</author>
	<datestamp>1256223600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just a nice way to make it so if an inexperienced hacker fails to break into your network, he can just pull up the web interface, open the port he's trying to use, and then continue hacking your internal systems.  Think of the (children) hackers!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just a nice way to make it so if an inexperienced hacker fails to break into your network , he can just pull up the web interface , open the port he 's trying to use , and then continue hacking your internal systems .
Think of the ( children ) hackers !
: -P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just a nice way to make it so if an inexperienced hacker fails to break into your network, he can just pull up the web interface, open the port he's trying to use, and then continue hacking your internal systems.
Think of the (children) hackers!
:-P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837019</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>Dare nMc</author>
	<datestamp>1256234280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you left out the tinfoil.  No seriously you would also want to remove the antennas, or wrap the TW box in a Faraday cage IE tinfoil (OK it is unlikely but...)<br>If anyone can remote into the Wifi/bridge config portion of the router, sounds like you could still remote into the neighbors router with this, change his wifi settings of the TW box for you to connect through, set your wifi connected box as their new dns/dhcp/etc host, change the IP of the TW box (so if they hardcoded) all their traffic would now go through hardware you controlled.)<br>Then you would pretty much have complete control over what they could do on the internet, even with their un-compromised router hardwired behind the TW box.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you left out the tinfoil .
No seriously you would also want to remove the antennas , or wrap the TW box in a Faraday cage IE tinfoil ( OK it is unlikely but... ) If anyone can remote into the Wifi/bridge config portion of the router , sounds like you could still remote into the neighbors router with this , change his wifi settings of the TW box for you to connect through , set your wifi connected box as their new dns/dhcp/etc host , change the IP of the TW box ( so if they hardcoded ) all their traffic would now go through hardware you controlled .
) Then you would pretty much have complete control over what they could do on the internet , even with their un-compromised router hardwired behind the TW box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you left out the tinfoil.
No seriously you would also want to remove the antennas, or wrap the TW box in a Faraday cage IE tinfoil (OK it is unlikely but...)If anyone can remote into the Wifi/bridge config portion of the router, sounds like you could still remote into the neighbors router with this, change his wifi settings of the TW box for you to connect through, set your wifi connected box as their new dns/dhcp/etc host, change the IP of the TW box (so if they hardcoded) all their traffic would now go through hardware you controlled.
)Then you would pretty much have complete control over what they could do on the internet, even with their un-compromised router hardwired behind the TW box.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1256223720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dial up is "worthless Internet?"  I guess half of the world's Internet users have been swindled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dial up is " worthless Internet ?
" I guess half of the world 's Internet users have been swindled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dial up is "worthless Internet?
"  I guess half of the world's Internet users have been swindled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835911</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I feel for ya dude.  I just upgraded to Fedora 11, ran my standard "# yum -y update" to get all the bugfixes and it said "download size: 1.4GB".  It's painful enough on 6Mbit DSL, but there's just no way on dial-up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel for ya dude .
I just upgraded to Fedora 11 , ran my standard " # yum -y update " to get all the bugfixes and it said " download size : 1.4GB " .
It 's painful enough on 6Mbit DSL , but there 's just no way on dial-up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel for ya dude.
I just upgraded to Fedora 11, ran my standard "# yum -y update" to get all the bugfixes and it said "download size: 1.4GB".
It's painful enough on 6Mbit DSL, but there's just no way on dial-up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836931</id>
	<title>Lack of foresight strikes again.</title>
	<author>RoboRay</author>
	<datestamp>1256234040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Wired is reporting on a simple hack putting some 65,000 customers at risk."</p><p>Tragically, if only TWC had used signed integers, they could have halved the impact of this problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Wired is reporting on a simple hack putting some 65,000 customers at risk .
" Tragically , if only TWC had used signed integers , they could have halved the impact of this problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Wired is reporting on a simple hack putting some 65,000 customers at risk.
"Tragically, if only TWC had used signed integers, they could have halved the impact of this problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835659</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>amplt1337</author>
	<datestamp>1256228520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like somebody hasn't heard about the cable monopoly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like somebody has n't heard about the cable monopoly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like somebody hasn't heard about the cable monopoly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834805</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"...is to put them in bridge mode"</i> <p>
Can you give some info and/or links to what 'bridge mode' is? New term to me...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...is to put them in bridge mode " Can you give some info and/or links to what 'bridge mode ' is ?
New term to me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...is to put them in bridge mode" 
Can you give some info and/or links to what 'bridge mode' is?
New term to me...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836609</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Vu1turEMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1256232720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I completely agree, but the main problem is with connections like FIOS, you are required to put a good 3-4 hours into getting this right, because the 'free' router still needs to give TV data to the TVs for programming and OnDemand purposes. There are ways to bypass this, but NONE that a novice should ever attempt doing.</p><p>My connection is currently set up so that it looks like my FIOS cable boxes are downloading torrents of TV shows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I completely agree , but the main problem is with connections like FIOS , you are required to put a good 3-4 hours into getting this right , because the 'free ' router still needs to give TV data to the TVs for programming and OnDemand purposes .
There are ways to bypass this , but NONE that a novice should ever attempt doing.My connection is currently set up so that it looks like my FIOS cable boxes are downloading torrents of TV shows : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I completely agree, but the main problem is with connections like FIOS, you are required to put a good 3-4 hours into getting this right, because the 'free' router still needs to give TV data to the TVs for programming and OnDemand purposes.
There are ways to bypass this, but NONE that a novice should ever attempt doing.My connection is currently set up so that it looks like my FIOS cable boxes are downloading torrents of TV shows :P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834479</id>
	<title>As I stare growling at my Time/Warner modem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah I think It's about time to set up that server as a gateway. Ironically the internet service has been excellent and since I live in rural Maine we have few people using the bandwidth so I have amazing speed. Their cable TV service is what sucks. That hole in the modems is about as bad as the old file swap backdoor in Unix. On the bright side how many people could know about it? It's not like it was posted on Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah I think It 's about time to set up that server as a gateway .
Ironically the internet service has been excellent and since I live in rural Maine we have few people using the bandwidth so I have amazing speed .
Their cable TV service is what sucks .
That hole in the modems is about as bad as the old file swap backdoor in Unix .
On the bright side how many people could know about it ?
It 's not like it was posted on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah I think It's about time to set up that server as a gateway.
Ironically the internet service has been excellent and since I live in rural Maine we have few people using the bandwidth so I have amazing speed.
Their cable TV service is what sucks.
That hole in the modems is about as bad as the old file swap backdoor in Unix.
On the bright side how many people could know about it?
It's not like it was posted on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837317</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1256235720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot is what you make it.</p><p>Look at the text you quoted.  He's advocating your sufficient solution in the second sentence.</p><p>Furthermore, adding your own router does what to Time Warner?  Is there any perceived value in switching to another company when you're dissatisfied with your current one?</p><p>You're reading what you want to, with large parts of your brain in an 'off' position, presumably because this is Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot is what you make it.Look at the text you quoted .
He 's advocating your sufficient solution in the second sentence.Furthermore , adding your own router does what to Time Warner ?
Is there any perceived value in switching to another company when you 're dissatisfied with your current one ? You 're reading what you want to , with large parts of your brain in an 'off ' position , presumably because this is Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot is what you make it.Look at the text you quoted.
He's advocating your sufficient solution in the second sentence.Furthermore, adding your own router does what to Time Warner?
Is there any perceived value in switching to another company when you're dissatisfied with your current one?You're reading what you want to, with large parts of your brain in an 'off' position, presumably because this is Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834517</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834595</id>
	<title>Not surprising</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1256222940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Javascript thing isn't important - that's how the device operates because it's been told to and, in 99\% of circumstances it's an internal-only device.  My printer offers up a lot worse options.  However, exposing that interface to the web is stupid, as are using standardised passwords.</p><p>The former is nothing but user-education and/or forcing them into a password from the factory (like a lot of wireless routers comes with WPA keys printed on the bottom of them).</p><p>For the latter, a lot of cheap ADSL modems/routers do this, it's hardly a shock.  Some of them run telnet on ports 254/255 and the only way to get rid of it is to forward that port to a non-existent IP address.  Yes, it's crap security.  Yes, they should know better.  But, additionally, it's their fault from day one and people have known about this for YEARS.</p><p>It would also pick up on *any* external security scanner (e.g. nmap, GRC.com's ShieldsUp!) and any competent person would be testing any new system with something like that anyway.  I know I've always scanned whenever I've used a new connection, if only to find what proxy servers / port-blocking / port-forwarding are in place.  And yet all my Internet connections have hard-coded DNS, the router acts as nothing more than a passthrough to a real firewall (usually Linux iptables, if only for decent, configurable NAT / port-forwarding) and anything vaguely suspicious on an external scan is investigated (my ISP offer port 139 filtering as default, for example).</p><p>If you didn't know about it, test it.  If you haven't already disabled it, do so.  If you're that worried, change the device.  This type of problem has been around for YEARS, and only the bog-standard, password is 'password', home users would ever be hurt by it.  I think it's disgusting that they are, but they are not the only ISP / modem / router that has these problems.</p><p>And to claim this is new/shocking is quite misleading - most router manufacturers have suffered from this since ADSL became mainstream.  Even things like BT's HomeHub have had similar security problems over the years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Javascript thing is n't important - that 's how the device operates because it 's been told to and , in 99 \ % of circumstances it 's an internal-only device .
My printer offers up a lot worse options .
However , exposing that interface to the web is stupid , as are using standardised passwords.The former is nothing but user-education and/or forcing them into a password from the factory ( like a lot of wireless routers comes with WPA keys printed on the bottom of them ) .For the latter , a lot of cheap ADSL modems/routers do this , it 's hardly a shock .
Some of them run telnet on ports 254/255 and the only way to get rid of it is to forward that port to a non-existent IP address .
Yes , it 's crap security .
Yes , they should know better .
But , additionally , it 's their fault from day one and people have known about this for YEARS.It would also pick up on * any * external security scanner ( e.g .
nmap , GRC.com 's ShieldsUp !
) and any competent person would be testing any new system with something like that anyway .
I know I 've always scanned whenever I 've used a new connection , if only to find what proxy servers / port-blocking / port-forwarding are in place .
And yet all my Internet connections have hard-coded DNS , the router acts as nothing more than a passthrough to a real firewall ( usually Linux iptables , if only for decent , configurable NAT / port-forwarding ) and anything vaguely suspicious on an external scan is investigated ( my ISP offer port 139 filtering as default , for example ) .If you did n't know about it , test it .
If you have n't already disabled it , do so .
If you 're that worried , change the device .
This type of problem has been around for YEARS , and only the bog-standard , password is 'password ' , home users would ever be hurt by it .
I think it 's disgusting that they are , but they are not the only ISP / modem / router that has these problems.And to claim this is new/shocking is quite misleading - most router manufacturers have suffered from this since ADSL became mainstream .
Even things like BT 's HomeHub have had similar security problems over the years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Javascript thing isn't important - that's how the device operates because it's been told to and, in 99\% of circumstances it's an internal-only device.
My printer offers up a lot worse options.
However, exposing that interface to the web is stupid, as are using standardised passwords.The former is nothing but user-education and/or forcing them into a password from the factory (like a lot of wireless routers comes with WPA keys printed on the bottom of them).For the latter, a lot of cheap ADSL modems/routers do this, it's hardly a shock.
Some of them run telnet on ports 254/255 and the only way to get rid of it is to forward that port to a non-existent IP address.
Yes, it's crap security.
Yes, they should know better.
But, additionally, it's their fault from day one and people have known about this for YEARS.It would also pick up on *any* external security scanner (e.g.
nmap, GRC.com's ShieldsUp!
) and any competent person would be testing any new system with something like that anyway.
I know I've always scanned whenever I've used a new connection, if only to find what proxy servers / port-blocking / port-forwarding are in place.
And yet all my Internet connections have hard-coded DNS, the router acts as nothing more than a passthrough to a real firewall (usually Linux iptables, if only for decent, configurable NAT / port-forwarding) and anything vaguely suspicious on an external scan is investigated (my ISP offer port 139 filtering as default, for example).If you didn't know about it, test it.
If you haven't already disabled it, do so.
If you're that worried, change the device.
This type of problem has been around for YEARS, and only the bog-standard, password is 'password', home users would ever be hurt by it.
I think it's disgusting that they are, but they are not the only ISP / modem / router that has these problems.And to claim this is new/shocking is quite misleading - most router manufacturers have suffered from this since ADSL became mainstream.
Even things like BT's HomeHub have had similar security problems over the years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29843121</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256237760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a mid-size ISP (we're pretty big, but not on the level of comcast or warner) and we use these same devices.<br>Here's how we config them:</p><p>1. Since they are on our network, they all have an internal 10 dot private IP we use to access the modem for config purposes. Unless you gain access to our internal IP scope you can't even get to that address, and if you do you have to connect via SSH and guess the login name and pw. Both are random letters/numbers which rotate once a month through forced updates.</p><p>2. None of them have the external (publicly addressable) IP-based login enabled at all. You don't need any Javascript, it's just an on/off setting in the firmware itself.</p><p>3. We don't run them as routers, as routers they suck major ass. They work great as either a bridger or a gateway. Running them as a bridge device is problematic since you are exposing the user to everyone else in the IP scope. We actually only use them for static IP customers, and run them as a gateway device. We also disable all the routing features because they run better that way... and why the fuck would the customer want their ISP to manage the routing in the first damn place?</p><p>In short, the guys at Time-Warner are a bunch of asshats. If you're going to just use them as a bridge device then save yourself the cash and use a motorola which is under half the price. They work great as a gateway for a static subscriber, and some models do have wireless. But again, why you as a customer would want the ISP in control of your router/wireless is completely beyond me, unless you are a gibbering idiot.</p><p>In any event they must be running some kind of goofy half-assed firmware they managed to get SMC to make just for them. Even the HTTP based GUI interfaces, both customer and ISP facing, can be disabled with a simple command line entry. So to sum it up, it's not the SMC's themselves that have an issue. And they don't need any firmware update to secure them, it takes about 10 seconds and one reboot to update the internal config. And when you factory reset them, it goes into a craptacular gateway mode that gives you a bullshit static IP that won't work anyhow... so you could use it as a local network router or wifi access spot but it won't give any upstream connectivity at all.</p><p>These devices are actually highly configurable. The default factory mode allows the customer to turn nat on/off and the firewall on/off, and view some basic info that's it. You CAN give them pretty much full access but I don't know why anyone would... they are actually pretty decent boxes to work with but it just sounds like TW just doesn't have a clue. Stick to the moto's guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a mid-size ISP ( we 're pretty big , but not on the level of comcast or warner ) and we use these same devices.Here 's how we config them : 1 .
Since they are on our network , they all have an internal 10 dot private IP we use to access the modem for config purposes .
Unless you gain access to our internal IP scope you ca n't even get to that address , and if you do you have to connect via SSH and guess the login name and pw .
Both are random letters/numbers which rotate once a month through forced updates.2 .
None of them have the external ( publicly addressable ) IP-based login enabled at all .
You do n't need any Javascript , it 's just an on/off setting in the firmware itself.3 .
We do n't run them as routers , as routers they suck major ass .
They work great as either a bridger or a gateway .
Running them as a bridge device is problematic since you are exposing the user to everyone else in the IP scope .
We actually only use them for static IP customers , and run them as a gateway device .
We also disable all the routing features because they run better that way... and why the fuck would the customer want their ISP to manage the routing in the first damn place ? In short , the guys at Time-Warner are a bunch of asshats .
If you 're going to just use them as a bridge device then save yourself the cash and use a motorola which is under half the price .
They work great as a gateway for a static subscriber , and some models do have wireless .
But again , why you as a customer would want the ISP in control of your router/wireless is completely beyond me , unless you are a gibbering idiot.In any event they must be running some kind of goofy half-assed firmware they managed to get SMC to make just for them .
Even the HTTP based GUI interfaces , both customer and ISP facing , can be disabled with a simple command line entry .
So to sum it up , it 's not the SMC 's themselves that have an issue .
And they do n't need any firmware update to secure them , it takes about 10 seconds and one reboot to update the internal config .
And when you factory reset them , it goes into a craptacular gateway mode that gives you a bullshit static IP that wo n't work anyhow... so you could use it as a local network router or wifi access spot but it wo n't give any upstream connectivity at all.These devices are actually highly configurable .
The default factory mode allows the customer to turn nat on/off and the firewall on/off , and view some basic info that 's it .
You CAN give them pretty much full access but I do n't know why anyone would... they are actually pretty decent boxes to work with but it just sounds like TW just does n't have a clue .
Stick to the moto 's guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a mid-size ISP (we're pretty big, but not on the level of comcast or warner) and we use these same devices.Here's how we config them:1.
Since they are on our network, they all have an internal 10 dot private IP we use to access the modem for config purposes.
Unless you gain access to our internal IP scope you can't even get to that address, and if you do you have to connect via SSH and guess the login name and pw.
Both are random letters/numbers which rotate once a month through forced updates.2.
None of them have the external (publicly addressable) IP-based login enabled at all.
You don't need any Javascript, it's just an on/off setting in the firmware itself.3.
We don't run them as routers, as routers they suck major ass.
They work great as either a bridger or a gateway.
Running them as a bridge device is problematic since you are exposing the user to everyone else in the IP scope.
We actually only use them for static IP customers, and run them as a gateway device.
We also disable all the routing features because they run better that way... and why the fuck would the customer want their ISP to manage the routing in the first damn place?In short, the guys at Time-Warner are a bunch of asshats.
If you're going to just use them as a bridge device then save yourself the cash and use a motorola which is under half the price.
They work great as a gateway for a static subscriber, and some models do have wireless.
But again, why you as a customer would want the ISP in control of your router/wireless is completely beyond me, unless you are a gibbering idiot.In any event they must be running some kind of goofy half-assed firmware they managed to get SMC to make just for them.
Even the HTTP based GUI interfaces, both customer and ISP facing, can be disabled with a simple command line entry.
So to sum it up, it's not the SMC's themselves that have an issue.
And they don't need any firmware update to secure them, it takes about 10 seconds and one reboot to update the internal config.
And when you factory reset them, it goes into a craptacular gateway mode that gives you a bullshit static IP that won't work anyhow... so you could use it as a local network router or wifi access spot but it won't give any upstream connectivity at all.These devices are actually highly configurable.
The default factory mode allows the customer to turn nat on/off and the firewall on/off, and view some basic info that's it.
You CAN give them pretty much full access but I don't know why anyone would... they are actually pretty decent boxes to work with but it just sounds like TW just doesn't have a clue.
Stick to the moto's guys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834243</id>
	<title>A hack? Hardly</title>
	<author>fgaliegue</author>
	<datestamp>1256220420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not a hack, this is incompetence from the guys who sold that in the first place.</p><p>Are all Time Warner employees marketers or something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a hack , this is incompetence from the guys who sold that in the first place.Are all Time Warner employees marketers or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a hack, this is incompetence from the guys who sold that in the first place.Are all Time Warner employees marketers or something?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836197</id>
	<title>Re:Related to Belgacom hack and 'ransom'?</title>
	<author>multipart/mixed</author>
	<datestamp>1256230860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I was him, I would have somehow figured out a way to add 285,000 TOR exit nodes.</p><p>THAT would have been fun.  Every user in the country hits their quota, while completely screwing the ISP's transit quotas. They would never dare bill all of their customers for that kind of overage, they would HAVE to eat it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was him , I would have somehow figured out a way to add 285,000 TOR exit nodes.THAT would have been fun .
Every user in the country hits their quota , while completely screwing the ISP 's transit quotas .
They would never dare bill all of their customers for that kind of overage , they would HAVE to eat it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was him, I would have somehow figured out a way to add 285,000 TOR exit nodes.THAT would have been fun.
Every user in the country hits their quota, while completely screwing the ISP's transit quotas.
They would never dare bill all of their customers for that kind of overage, they would HAVE to eat it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834099</id>
	<title>FIrst?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firsts!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firsts !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firsts!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834561</id>
	<title>How many ISPs are different?</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1256222640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got Sky broadband (because we only need the cheapest package, which is free with the TV package) and their router has a very easily guessable password <i>that they don't tell you</i> (so you can't configure things). I don't know if the interface is web accessible, but we were having network issues fairly recently and they said "we couldn't check your router", which I assume means that they tried to log in remotely with the original password.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got Sky broadband ( because we only need the cheapest package , which is free with the TV package ) and their router has a very easily guessable password that they do n't tell you ( so you ca n't configure things ) .
I do n't know if the interface is web accessible , but we were having network issues fairly recently and they said " we could n't check your router " , which I assume means that they tried to log in remotely with the original password .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got Sky broadband (because we only need the cheapest package, which is free with the TV package) and their router has a very easily guessable password that they don't tell you (so you can't configure things).
I don't know if the interface is web accessible, but we were having network issues fairly recently and they said "we couldn't check your router", which I assume means that they tried to log in remotely with the original password.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>TheRealMindChild</author>
	<datestamp>1256221620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you are saying I should go back to dial-up...? Because that is my only alternative. Thanks for doing my cost/benefit analysis of this situation for me! It is definitely better to have worthless internet than to just maintain my own router!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you are saying I should go back to dial-up... ?
Because that is my only alternative .
Thanks for doing my cost/benefit analysis of this situation for me !
It is definitely better to have worthless internet than to just maintain my own router !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you are saying I should go back to dial-up...?
Because that is my only alternative.
Thanks for doing my cost/benefit analysis of this situation for me!
It is definitely better to have worthless internet than to just maintain my own router!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834697</id>
	<title>Not a hack</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1256223720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not a hack.  This is leaving the key *on top* of the doormat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a hack .
This is leaving the key * on top * of the doormat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a hack.
This is leaving the key *on top* of the doormat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834487</id>
	<title>Re:Related to Belgacom hack and 'ransom'?</title>
	<author>eeeuh</author>
	<datestamp>1256222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems rather improbable that this was the same hack because these are <b>cable</b> modem/routers and the Belgacom hack was done on ADSL modem/routers.
Also, from TFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>That file, it turned out, included the administrative login and password in cleartext. Chen investigated and found the same login and password could access the admin panels for every router in the SMC8014 series on Time Warner's network</p></div><p>In ADSL modems there may be a reason for storing the users password in the modem: ppp-authentication, for cable modems I can't think of such a reason.

Then again, if you control a router/modem you can sniff out user's passwords if the use plain-text authentication e.g. for POP3.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems rather improbable that this was the same hack because these are cable modem/routers and the Belgacom hack was done on ADSL modem/routers .
Also , from TFA : That file , it turned out , included the administrative login and password in cleartext .
Chen investigated and found the same login and password could access the admin panels for every router in the SMC8014 series on Time Warner 's networkIn ADSL modems there may be a reason for storing the users password in the modem : ppp-authentication , for cable modems I ca n't think of such a reason .
Then again , if you control a router/modem you can sniff out user 's passwords if the use plain-text authentication e.g .
for POP3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems rather improbable that this was the same hack because these are cable modem/routers and the Belgacom hack was done on ADSL modem/routers.
Also, from TFA:That file, it turned out, included the administrative login and password in cleartext.
Chen investigated and found the same login and password could access the admin panels for every router in the SMC8014 series on Time Warner's networkIn ADSL modems there may be a reason for storing the users password in the modem: ppp-authentication, for cable modems I can't think of such a reason.
Then again, if you control a router/modem you can sniff out user's passwords if the use plain-text authentication e.g.
for POP3.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834751</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Meanwhile Verizon FIOS has been rolling out firmware upgrade to their routers that prohibit you from running your own secure sub-net inside their routers.</i></p><p>Huh?  Does that mean if I get FIOS, I wouldn't be able to plug in a wireless router into whatever the FIOS modem is?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile Verizon FIOS has been rolling out firmware upgrade to their routers that prohibit you from running your own secure sub-net inside their routers.Huh ?
Does that mean if I get FIOS , I would n't be able to plug in a wireless router into whatever the FIOS modem is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile Verizon FIOS has been rolling out firmware upgrade to their routers that prohibit you from running your own secure sub-net inside their routers.Huh?
Does that mean if I get FIOS, I wouldn't be able to plug in a wireless router into whatever the FIOS modem is?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834457</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834719</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>MikeBabcock</author>
	<datestamp>1256223900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've always used bridge mode on modems of either type from ISPs.  I never trust an ISP's modem/router combo.</p><p>The only ISP I have respect for doing anything vaguely similar shipped out a Cisco router with their modem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always used bridge mode on modems of either type from ISPs .
I never trust an ISP 's modem/router combo.The only ISP I have respect for doing anything vaguely similar shipped out a Cisco router with their modem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always used bridge mode on modems of either type from ISPs.
I never trust an ISP's modem/router combo.The only ISP I have respect for doing anything vaguely similar shipped out a Cisco router with their modem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835735</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>LordAndrewSama</author>
	<datestamp>1256228760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While everyone else is telling you how unfeasible your solution is, I would just like to thank you for the phrase "Abragofuckyourself".  It has reduced me to giggling.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While everyone else is telling you how unfeasible your solution is , I would just like to thank you for the phrase " Abragofuckyourself " .
It has reduced me to giggling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While everyone else is telling you how unfeasible your solution is, I would just like to thank you for the phrase "Abragofuckyourself".
It has reduced me to giggling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834663</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1256223480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract, throwing the router in the trash, and getting a new ISP with better hardware."</p><p>The only alternative where I live is dialup, and AOL is still the fastest dialup in the area.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract , throwing the router in the trash , and getting a new ISP with better hardware .
" The only alternative where I live is dialup , and AOL is still the fastest dialup in the area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract, throwing the router in the trash, and getting a new ISP with better hardware.
"The only alternative where I live is dialup, and AOL is still the fastest dialup in the area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834709</id>
	<title>Re:Is this worse than the many unsecured wifi rout</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> What can you do?</p></div></blockquote><p>Remotely access and use their unsecured networks to initiate p2p downloads of songs by Madonna, Metallica, and Sir Elton John. Narc them out to the British telco. Given their "three strikes" they'd be "safe" for good. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What can you do ? Remotely access and use their unsecured networks to initiate p2p downloads of songs by Madonna , Metallica , and Sir Elton John .
Narc them out to the British telco .
Given their " three strikes " they 'd be " safe " for good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> What can you do?Remotely access and use their unsecured networks to initiate p2p downloads of songs by Madonna, Metallica, and Sir Elton John.
Narc them out to the British telco.
Given their "three strikes" they'd be "safe" for good. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834817</id>
	<title>to be fair</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you know the <b>backdoor</b> exist solely to make your internet experience more <b>pleasurable</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you know the backdoor exist solely to make your internet experience more pleasurable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you know the backdoor exist solely to make your internet experience more pleasurable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29841027</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Monkey Angst</author>
	<datestamp>1256211240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A brief explanation of "bridge mode" as I give it to customers:
When you have a router, the router generally serves to isolate the internal network from the public network (the internet, usually). This means having a public IP address on one interface (the WAN interface) and distributing private IPs to the machines on the local network (the LAN ports). Bridge mode doesn't do that -- instead of acting as a router, the device merely passes traffic to the LAN, allowing (for example) one machine on the local network to claim the public IP that the modem is passing along. Usually, a router in bridge mode is connected to another router downstream, so that THAT router is giving out IPs. You see this a lot with wireless interfaces; you've got a modem/router without wireless capability, and you want to use a wireless router to give out addresses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A brief explanation of " bridge mode " as I give it to customers : When you have a router , the router generally serves to isolate the internal network from the public network ( the internet , usually ) .
This means having a public IP address on one interface ( the WAN interface ) and distributing private IPs to the machines on the local network ( the LAN ports ) .
Bridge mode does n't do that -- instead of acting as a router , the device merely passes traffic to the LAN , allowing ( for example ) one machine on the local network to claim the public IP that the modem is passing along .
Usually , a router in bridge mode is connected to another router downstream , so that THAT router is giving out IPs .
You see this a lot with wireless interfaces ; you 've got a modem/router without wireless capability , and you want to use a wireless router to give out addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A brief explanation of "bridge mode" as I give it to customers:
When you have a router, the router generally serves to isolate the internal network from the public network (the internet, usually).
This means having a public IP address on one interface (the WAN interface) and distributing private IPs to the machines on the local network (the LAN ports).
Bridge mode doesn't do that -- instead of acting as a router, the device merely passes traffic to the LAN, allowing (for example) one machine on the local network to claim the public IP that the modem is passing along.
Usually, a router in bridge mode is connected to another router downstream, so that THAT router is giving out IPs.
You see this a lot with wireless interfaces; you've got a modem/router without wireless capability, and you want to use a wireless router to give out addresses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834233</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>cable internet usually has no contract.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cable internet usually has no contract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cable internet usually has no contract.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834279</id>
	<title>Maybe</title>
	<author>Akita24</author>
	<datestamp>1256220600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe if they actually gave 0.0000000001\% of a shit about the service they provide instead of spending millions trying to figure out how to fuck the customers they've oversold to out of YetAnotherPenny<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... nah, won't happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe if they actually gave 0.0000000001 \ % of a shit about the service they provide instead of spending millions trying to figure out how to fuck the customers they 've oversold to out of YetAnotherPenny ... nah , wo n't happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe if they actually gave 0.0000000001\% of a shit about the service they provide instead of spending millions trying to figure out how to fuck the customers they've oversold to out of YetAnotherPenny ... nah, won't happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834715</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>aaaaaaargh!</author>
	<datestamp>1256223840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Not that I care very much, but I still think it's weird that the people responsible for security holes like that don't go to prison for it or have to face other serious consequences. It seems to me that in every other engineering domain engineers are more liable for what they do and companies at one point or another are held responsible for failures and malfunctions than in end-consumer hardware and particularly software, where people seem to get away with just about anything that doesn't kill the customer instantly. I'm not talking about bugs or mistakes, which cannot be avoided 100\%, but obvious negligence or incompetence like in the above case. Strange.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that I care very much , but I still think it 's weird that the people responsible for security holes like that do n't go to prison for it or have to face other serious consequences .
It seems to me that in every other engineering domain engineers are more liable for what they do and companies at one point or another are held responsible for failures and malfunctions than in end-consumer hardware and particularly software , where people seem to get away with just about anything that does n't kill the customer instantly .
I 'm not talking about bugs or mistakes , which can not be avoided 100 \ % , but obvious negligence or incompetence like in the above case .
Strange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Not that I care very much, but I still think it's weird that the people responsible for security holes like that don't go to prison for it or have to face other serious consequences.
It seems to me that in every other engineering domain engineers are more liable for what they do and companies at one point or another are held responsible for failures and malfunctions than in end-consumer hardware and particularly software, where people seem to get away with just about anything that doesn't kill the customer instantly.
I'm not talking about bugs or mistakes, which cannot be avoided 100\%, but obvious negligence or incompetence like in the above case.
Strange.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837903</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256237820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So much for "Security through Obscurity"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So much for " Security through Obscurity "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much for "Security through Obscurity"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29840963</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256210820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, I have a bridge only and I use a cisco 2621XM for my gateway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , I have a bridge only and I use a cisco 2621XM for my gateway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, I have a bridge only and I use a cisco 2621XM for my gateway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836005</id>
	<title>This is sad...</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1256229960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember 10 years ago already, when there were a few good articles, and lists of all the default passwords given for all the routers brands and makes, etc... so that hacking would be that much easier, but this is like finding a few hundred needles in a haystack, talk about bad management<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.....I am sure someone wanted to save time and factor in a quick access method with the least amount of effort or memory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember 10 years ago already , when there were a few good articles , and lists of all the default passwords given for all the routers brands and makes , etc... so that hacking would be that much easier , but this is like finding a few hundred needles in a haystack , talk about bad management .....I am sure someone wanted to save time and factor in a quick access method with the least amount of effort or memory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember 10 years ago already, when there were a few good articles, and lists of all the default passwords given for all the routers brands and makes, etc... so that hacking would be that much easier, but this is like finding a few hundred needles in a haystack, talk about bad management .....I am sure someone wanted to save time and factor in a quick access method with the least amount of effort or memory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835889</id>
	<title>Re:Multiple-levels of incompetence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not always, the old Linksys routers had this as one of the primary configuration methods, though it did come off by default, it wasn't hidden deep in advanced settings at all. And it's still an option on every Linksys I've ever seen.</p><p>Even on business class routers I've seen this as an option. I even have one Cisco router that this is enabled by default.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not always , the old Linksys routers had this as one of the primary configuration methods , though it did come off by default , it was n't hidden deep in advanced settings at all .
And it 's still an option on every Linksys I 've ever seen.Even on business class routers I 've seen this as an option .
I even have one Cisco router that this is enabled by default .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not always, the old Linksys routers had this as one of the primary configuration methods, though it did come off by default, it wasn't hidden deep in advanced settings at all.
And it's still an option on every Linksys I've ever seen.Even on business class routers I've seen this as an option.
I even have one Cisco router that this is enabled by default.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835709</id>
	<title>Good thing</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1256228640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good thing they waited for the updated firmware to be installed, before reporting this problem on a heavily read web site. Until then, nobody will even think of trying to exploit this hole before it's been patched.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good thing they waited for the updated firmware to be installed , before reporting this problem on a heavily read web site .
Until then , nobody will even think of trying to exploit this hole before it 's been patched .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good thing they waited for the updated firmware to be installed, before reporting this problem on a heavily read web site.
Until then, nobody will even think of trying to exploit this hole before it's been patched.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834517</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>pak9rabid</author>
	<datestamp>1256222400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract, throwing the router in the trash, and getting a new ISP with better hardware. Hell, fork out $50 for a tried and tested model from Newegg. Be sure to tell Time Warner to "Abragofuckyourself" when they say you're tied into a contract by using the words "unfit for purpose" "gross criminal negligence" and "class action"</p></div><p>Only on slashdot would such a ridiculous "solution" be proposed, when putting the CPE in bridged mode and using your own router (which I'd think most everyone here would be doing already) would suffice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract , throwing the router in the trash , and getting a new ISP with better hardware .
Hell , fork out $ 50 for a tried and tested model from Newegg .
Be sure to tell Time Warner to " Abragofuckyourself " when they say you 're tied into a contract by using the words " unfit for purpose " " gross criminal negligence " and " class action " Only on slashdot would such a ridiculous " solution " be proposed , when putting the CPE in bridged mode and using your own router ( which I 'd think most everyone here would be doing already ) would suffice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract, throwing the router in the trash, and getting a new ISP with better hardware.
Hell, fork out $50 for a tried and tested model from Newegg.
Be sure to tell Time Warner to "Abragofuckyourself" when they say you're tied into a contract by using the words "unfit for purpose" "gross criminal negligence" and "class action"Only on slashdot would such a ridiculous "solution" be proposed, when putting the CPE in bridged mode and using your own router (which I'd think most everyone here would be doing already) would suffice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837169</id>
	<title>For a topper try Intel AMT.</title>
	<author>Ungrounded Lightning</author>
	<datestamp>1256235120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>- PUBLIC facing web configuration? I have never, ever, ever, seen a router that did that. Not even cheesy home routers.</i></p><p>For a topper, try Intel's AMT.</p><p>Remote administration by a little board with its own computer.<br>
&nbsp; - Always-on.  (Goodbye battery life in powerdown mode on laptops.)<br>
&nbsp; - Sits between the REAL computer and its network interfaces - "under", invisible to, inaccessable to and overriding the OS.<br>
&nbsp; - Lets a remote administrator establish a tunnel to it (or reaches out to establish its own).<br>
&nbsp; - Able to otherwise act as a man-in-the-middle for network traffic.<br>
&nbsp; - Able to sniff and twiddle the rest of the system.<br>
&nbsp; - Even able to turn it off.</p><p>Intended for remote administration of the machine and shutting it down to defend the LAN and VLAN from the machine if it becomes infected and/or any of its services stop mumbling occasional prayers to tell its watchdog function that they're sane.</p><p>My immediate reaction was "Remote administration?  Yeah - by the NSA, DHS, Chinese spys, Russian malware gangs, and any tech-savvy terrorist group."</p><p>How do you know it's turned off?  The BIOS says so.  Yeah, right!</p><p>That's why no more Intel PCs for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- PUBLIC facing web configuration ?
I have never , ever , ever , seen a router that did that .
Not even cheesy home routers.For a topper , try Intel 's AMT.Remote administration by a little board with its own computer .
  - Always-on .
( Goodbye battery life in powerdown mode on laptops .
)   - Sits between the REAL computer and its network interfaces - " under " , invisible to , inaccessable to and overriding the OS .
  - Lets a remote administrator establish a tunnel to it ( or reaches out to establish its own ) .
  - Able to otherwise act as a man-in-the-middle for network traffic .
  - Able to sniff and twiddle the rest of the system .
  - Even able to turn it off.Intended for remote administration of the machine and shutting it down to defend the LAN and VLAN from the machine if it becomes infected and/or any of its services stop mumbling occasional prayers to tell its watchdog function that they 're sane.My immediate reaction was " Remote administration ?
Yeah - by the NSA , DHS , Chinese spys , Russian malware gangs , and any tech-savvy terrorist group .
" How do you know it 's turned off ?
The BIOS says so .
Yeah , right ! That 's why no more Intel PCs for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- PUBLIC facing web configuration?
I have never, ever, ever, seen a router that did that.
Not even cheesy home routers.For a topper, try Intel's AMT.Remote administration by a little board with its own computer.
  - Always-on.
(Goodbye battery life in powerdown mode on laptops.
)
  - Sits between the REAL computer and its network interfaces - "under", invisible to, inaccessable to and overriding the OS.
  - Lets a remote administrator establish a tunnel to it (or reaches out to establish its own).
  - Able to otherwise act as a man-in-the-middle for network traffic.
  - Able to sniff and twiddle the rest of the system.
  - Even able to turn it off.Intended for remote administration of the machine and shutting it down to defend the LAN and VLAN from the machine if it becomes infected and/or any of its services stop mumbling occasional prayers to tell its watchdog function that they're sane.My immediate reaction was "Remote administration?
Yeah - by the NSA, DHS, Chinese spys, Russian malware gangs, and any tech-savvy terrorist group.
"How do you know it's turned off?
The BIOS says so.
Yeah, right!That's why no more Intel PCs for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834115</id>
	<title>They need to act on this immediately!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Presumably armed FBI agents are en route to neutralize notorious terrorist hacker David Chen <em>even now</em>.  50 years in Gitmo is too good for him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably armed FBI agents are en route to neutralize notorious terrorist hacker David Chen even now .
50 years in Gitmo is too good for him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably armed FBI agents are en route to neutralize notorious terrorist hacker David Chen even now.
50 years in Gitmo is too good for him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834739</id>
	<title>Trust these guys without net neutrality laws?</title>
	<author>zerofoo</author>
	<datestamp>1256224020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These idiots can't figure out how to secure the config pages of a cable modem, and we are to trust that they can implement QOS correctly?  I've only been working on networks and IT stuff for a decade, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but QOS seems a bit harder to do than securing a cable modem config page.</p><p>We need net neutrality for two reasons:</p><p>1. To keep the internet open to all that would want to use it.</p><p>2. To keep grossly incompetent network administrators' hands off of our data.</p><p>-ted</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These idiots ca n't figure out how to secure the config pages of a cable modem , and we are to trust that they can implement QOS correctly ?
I 've only been working on networks and IT stuff for a decade , so maybe I do n't know what I 'm talking about , but QOS seems a bit harder to do than securing a cable modem config page.We need net neutrality for two reasons : 1 .
To keep the internet open to all that would want to use it.2 .
To keep grossly incompetent network administrators ' hands off of our data.-ted</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These idiots can't figure out how to secure the config pages of a cable modem, and we are to trust that they can implement QOS correctly?
I've only been working on networks and IT stuff for a decade, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but QOS seems a bit harder to do than securing a cable modem config page.We need net neutrality for two reasons:1.
To keep the internet open to all that would want to use it.2.
To keep grossly incompetent network administrators' hands off of our data.-ted</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</id>
	<title>Why wait?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract, throwing the router in the trash, and getting a new ISP with better hardware. Hell, fork out $50 for a tried and tested model from Newegg. Be sure to tell Time Warner to "Abragofuckyourself" when they say you're tied into a contract by using the words "unfit for purpose" "gross criminal negligence" and "class action"<br> <br>Yeah, my utopian world of consumer power is better than this one of "Please, Mr Corporation, harder and deeper!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract , throwing the router in the trash , and getting a new ISP with better hardware .
Hell , fork out $ 50 for a tried and tested model from Newegg .
Be sure to tell Time Warner to " Abragofuckyourself " when they say you 're tied into a contract by using the words " unfit for purpose " " gross criminal negligence " and " class action " Yeah , my utopian world of consumer power is better than this one of " Please , Mr Corporation , harder and deeper !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Install your own patch right now by cancelling your Time Warner contract, throwing the router in the trash, and getting a new ISP with better hardware.
Hell, fork out $50 for a tried and tested model from Newegg.
Be sure to tell Time Warner to "Abragofuckyourself" when they say you're tied into a contract by using the words "unfit for purpose" "gross criminal negligence" and "class action" Yeah, my utopian world of consumer power is better than this one of "Please, Mr Corporation, harder and deeper!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834579</id>
	<title>Re:Still better than PLANET...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait what? I don't see anything. How'd you do that?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait what ?
I do n't see anything .
How 'd you do that ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait what?
I don't see anything.
How'd you do that?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834209</id>
	<title>the routers also expose their web interfaces to</title>
	<author>Col. Panic</author>
	<datestamp>1256220120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the public-facing internet</p><p>wait. what? why?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the public-facing internetwait .
what ? why ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the public-facing internetwait.
what? why?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834519</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the only choice I really have with my Verizon DSL setup. The combo modem/transceiver/router/AP thing that they gave me sucks balls (constant disconnects &amp; reboots needed), so I had to pull out my 10+ year-old standalone DSL modem/transceiver box which works flawlessly. Threw a Linksys router/wifi AP on the back end of that and I've been sailing along flawlessly for 3+ years now. There's a reason why they "give" you those crappy all-in-one routers, and it's not because they're reliable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the only choice I really have with my Verizon DSL setup .
The combo modem/transceiver/router/AP thing that they gave me sucks balls ( constant disconnects &amp; reboots needed ) , so I had to pull out my 10 + year-old standalone DSL modem/transceiver box which works flawlessly .
Threw a Linksys router/wifi AP on the back end of that and I 've been sailing along flawlessly for 3 + years now .
There 's a reason why they " give " you those crappy all-in-one routers , and it 's not because they 're reliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the only choice I really have with my Verizon DSL setup.
The combo modem/transceiver/router/AP thing that they gave me sucks balls (constant disconnects &amp; reboots needed), so I had to pull out my 10+ year-old standalone DSL modem/transceiver box which works flawlessly.
Threw a Linksys router/wifi AP on the back end of that and I've been sailing along flawlessly for 3+ years now.
There's a reason why they "give" you those crappy all-in-one routers, and it's not because they're reliable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834555</id>
	<title>Re:Multiple-levels of incompetence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>- PUBLIC facing web configuration? I have never, ever, ever, seen a router that did that. Not even cheesy home routers.</i> <br>
<br>
Even the cheesy home routers have this as an option, but it's always buried deep in the 'advanced' configuration options, and it's ALWAYS disabled by default.</htmltext>
<tokenext>- PUBLIC facing web configuration ?
I have never , ever , ever , seen a router that did that .
Not even cheesy home routers .
Even the cheesy home routers have this as an option , but it 's always buried deep in the 'advanced ' configuration options , and it 's ALWAYS disabled by default .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- PUBLIC facing web configuration?
I have never, ever, ever, seen a router that did that.
Not even cheesy home routers.
Even the cheesy home routers have this as an option, but it's always buried deep in the 'advanced' configuration options, and it's ALWAYS disabled by default.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29846683</id>
	<title>Alpine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256316240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to work for Time Warner in upstate NY.  All wireless netgear modem/wireless router combos had remote admin access on 8080.  Sure there was a username and password on it, but if you couldn't guess it in 5 tries it was because you were having a stroke.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to work for Time Warner in upstate NY .
All wireless netgear modem/wireless router combos had remote admin access on 8080 .
Sure there was a username and password on it , but if you could n't guess it in 5 tries it was because you were having a stroke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to work for Time Warner in upstate NY.
All wireless netgear modem/wireless router combos had remote admin access on 8080.
Sure there was a username and password on it, but if you couldn't guess it in 5 tries it was because you were having a stroke.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834359</id>
	<title>Still better than PLANET...</title>
	<author>loutr</author>
	<datestamp>1256221200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some years ago, part of my tech support job was to set up <a href="http://www.planet.com.tw/" title="planet.com.tw">PLANET</a> [planet.com.tw] ADSL modem/wifi routers. I quickly noticed that the admin login / password was embedded in most configuration pages. But not to worry, they had cleverly hidden them with this brilliant security technique :<blockquote><div><p> <tt>style="color:white;background-color:white"</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some years ago , part of my tech support job was to set up PLANET [ planet.com.tw ] ADSL modem/wifi routers .
I quickly noticed that the admin login / password was embedded in most configuration pages .
But not to worry , they had cleverly hidden them with this brilliant security technique : style = " color : white ; background-color : white " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some years ago, part of my tech support job was to set up PLANET [planet.com.tw] ADSL modem/wifi routers.
I quickly noticed that the admin login / password was embedded in most configuration pages.
But not to worry, they had cleverly hidden them with this brilliant security technique : style="color:white;background-color:white" ...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199</id>
	<title>Related to Belgacom hack and 'ransom'?</title>
	<author>Animaether</author>
	<datestamp>1256220000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if this is the same 'hack' used to attack Belgacom.<br><a href="http://tweakers.net/nieuws/63200/belgacom-hacker-publiceerde-authentieke-inloggegevens-van-klanten.html" title="tweakers.net">http://tweakers.net/nieuws/63200/belgacom-hacker-publiceerde-authentieke-inloggegevens-van-klanten.html</a> [tweakers.net]</p><p>For the curious, a quick recap in English...</p><p>A hacker going by the name 'Vendetta', supposedly an American living in Belgium, got fed up with the monthly data cap (at Belgacom, figured out that there's a way to find the username/password for a modem by browsing to it (much as in this article), did that to a claimed several thousand (285,000) modems, and is threatening to release them slowly over time until November 30th as long as Belgacom keeps its monthly data cap.</p><p>So far this hacker released 30 usernames/passwords, and they were found to be genuine.</p><p>Belgacom contacted authorities, is investigating the claimed method of hacking, blabla.</p><p>The modem in question with Belgacom is labeled a "B-Box2-modem".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if this is the same 'hack ' used to attack Belgacom.http : //tweakers.net/nieuws/63200/belgacom-hacker-publiceerde-authentieke-inloggegevens-van-klanten.html [ tweakers.net ] For the curious , a quick recap in English...A hacker going by the name 'Vendetta ' , supposedly an American living in Belgium , got fed up with the monthly data cap ( at Belgacom , figured out that there 's a way to find the username/password for a modem by browsing to it ( much as in this article ) , did that to a claimed several thousand ( 285,000 ) modems , and is threatening to release them slowly over time until November 30th as long as Belgacom keeps its monthly data cap.So far this hacker released 30 usernames/passwords , and they were found to be genuine.Belgacom contacted authorities , is investigating the claimed method of hacking , blabla.The modem in question with Belgacom is labeled a " B-Box2-modem " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if this is the same 'hack' used to attack Belgacom.http://tweakers.net/nieuws/63200/belgacom-hacker-publiceerde-authentieke-inloggegevens-van-klanten.html [tweakers.net]For the curious, a quick recap in English...A hacker going by the name 'Vendetta', supposedly an American living in Belgium, got fed up with the monthly data cap (at Belgacom, figured out that there's a way to find the username/password for a modem by browsing to it (much as in this article), did that to a claimed several thousand (285,000) modems, and is threatening to release them slowly over time until November 30th as long as Belgacom keeps its monthly data cap.So far this hacker released 30 usernames/passwords, and they were found to be genuine.Belgacom contacted authorities, is investigating the claimed method of hacking, blabla.The modem in question with Belgacom is labeled a "B-Box2-modem".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835985</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1256229900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup - same issue here with FIOS - I really didn't want to have to mess with getting their router to bridge (it can be done, but it is a real pain and if you need to make a change you need to reset and reconfigure).  So, now I have a box sitting on my LAN that I have no control over.  In theory all the devices on the LAN are routinely scanned with nessus/etc, but it isn't ideal.</p><p>Many of these integrated services have all kinds of tie-ins that make bridging the router painful.  For example, on FIOS the network link from set-top boxes to the internet is via the outward-facing port on the router.  If you bridge the router then it has no internet connectivity of its own and can't route packets from the set-top boxes.  Plus, when it is bridged you can't get into the router's web-based admin console, so to change a setting you need to hard-reset it.  I guess if you don't mind having your own router NATed that is an easy option.  Sometimes I'm tempted to go IPv6 with a tunnel provider just to get past all that stuff...</p><p>FIOS is a bit of an unusual case since they run the network over coax.  Where standard ethernet is used you have more hope of just bypassing the router entirely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup - same issue here with FIOS - I really did n't want to have to mess with getting their router to bridge ( it can be done , but it is a real pain and if you need to make a change you need to reset and reconfigure ) .
So , now I have a box sitting on my LAN that I have no control over .
In theory all the devices on the LAN are routinely scanned with nessus/etc , but it is n't ideal.Many of these integrated services have all kinds of tie-ins that make bridging the router painful .
For example , on FIOS the network link from set-top boxes to the internet is via the outward-facing port on the router .
If you bridge the router then it has no internet connectivity of its own and ca n't route packets from the set-top boxes .
Plus , when it is bridged you ca n't get into the router 's web-based admin console , so to change a setting you need to hard-reset it .
I guess if you do n't mind having your own router NATed that is an easy option .
Sometimes I 'm tempted to go IPv6 with a tunnel provider just to get past all that stuff...FIOS is a bit of an unusual case since they run the network over coax .
Where standard ethernet is used you have more hope of just bypassing the router entirely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup - same issue here with FIOS - I really didn't want to have to mess with getting their router to bridge (it can be done, but it is a real pain and if you need to make a change you need to reset and reconfigure).
So, now I have a box sitting on my LAN that I have no control over.
In theory all the devices on the LAN are routinely scanned with nessus/etc, but it isn't ideal.Many of these integrated services have all kinds of tie-ins that make bridging the router painful.
For example, on FIOS the network link from set-top boxes to the internet is via the outward-facing port on the router.
If you bridge the router then it has no internet connectivity of its own and can't route packets from the set-top boxes.
Plus, when it is bridged you can't get into the router's web-based admin console, so to change a setting you need to hard-reset it.
I guess if you don't mind having your own router NATed that is an easy option.
Sometimes I'm tempted to go IPv6 with a tunnel provider just to get past all that stuff...FIOS is a bit of an unusual case since they run the network over coax.
Where standard ethernet is used you have more hope of just bypassing the router entirely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834071</id>
	<title>Vilka ska betala f&#246;r skattekalaset?!?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jag &#228;r en groda<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jag   r en groda : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jag är en groda :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834335</id>
	<title>re: the summary</title>
	<author>jlmale0</author>
	<datestamp>1256221080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>My initial, gut response to this was sheer horror.  They list exploit and target side-by-side!  The only mention of a fix is that it's to be 'released soon', informing any malicious agents out there that now is the time to strike.<br> <br>Reading the Wired article, the right thing was done.  Big company was sitting on their hands, and now that publicity has been made, they're starting to move.<br> <br>Wired did the right thing.  But this summary, it's fear-mongering and bad journalism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My initial , gut response to this was sheer horror .
They list exploit and target side-by-side !
The only mention of a fix is that it 's to be 'released soon ' , informing any malicious agents out there that now is the time to strike .
Reading the Wired article , the right thing was done .
Big company was sitting on their hands , and now that publicity has been made , they 're starting to move .
Wired did the right thing .
But this summary , it 's fear-mongering and bad journalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My initial, gut response to this was sheer horror.
They list exploit and target side-by-side!
The only mention of a fix is that it's to be 'released soon', informing any malicious agents out there that now is the time to strike.
Reading the Wired article, the right thing was done.
Big company was sitting on their hands, and now that publicity has been made, they're starting to move.
Wired did the right thing.
But this summary, it's fear-mongering and bad journalism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834735</id>
	<title>Router</title>
	<author>p51d007</author>
	<datestamp>1256224020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone dumb enough to hook one of these gateway boxes or "cable modems" directly into their computer is just asking for trouble.
As you say...plugging it into a router is the ONLY safe way to connect them.  Even my dad's computer, who doesn't need anything
but a connection, is connected to a router though his gateway DSL box.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone dumb enough to hook one of these gateway boxes or " cable modems " directly into their computer is just asking for trouble .
As you say...plugging it into a router is the ONLY safe way to connect them .
Even my dad 's computer , who does n't need anything but a connection , is connected to a router though his gateway DSL box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone dumb enough to hook one of these gateway boxes or "cable modems" directly into their computer is just asking for trouble.
As you say...plugging it into a router is the ONLY safe way to connect them.
Even my dad's computer, who doesn't need anything
but a connection, is connected to a router though his gateway DSL box.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836273</id>
	<title>It's good that's all you did...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256231220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Otherwise they do call the feds and label you a cyber terrorist. The smarter thing would've been to NOT tell them anything but instead quietly reroute all their traffic to some nasty ass pr0n site (or just the goat cx site.) They'll quickly learn the importance of securing their wifi.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Otherwise they do call the feds and label you a cyber terrorist .
The smarter thing would 've been to NOT tell them anything but instead quietly reroute all their traffic to some nasty ass pr0n site ( or just the goat cx site .
) They 'll quickly learn the importance of securing their wifi .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Otherwise they do call the feds and label you a cyber terrorist.
The smarter thing would've been to NOT tell them anything but instead quietly reroute all their traffic to some nasty ass pr0n site (or just the goat cx site.
) They'll quickly learn the importance of securing their wifi.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835883</id>
	<title>That's the kind of thing ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... an idiot would have on his luggage!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... an idiot would have on his luggage !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... an idiot would have on his luggage!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834539</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>SleepingWaterBear</author>
	<datestamp>1256222520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Be sure to tell Time Warner to "Abragofuckyourself" when they say you're tied into a contract by using the words "unfit for purpose" "gross criminal negligence" and "class action"</p></div><p>Unfortunately, in negligence cases the courts often look to the industry standard to decide what sort of precautions a company ought to take.  Given that the industry standard is basically no security at all this might be a tough case.  Also, to establish negligence you'd have to show some actual harm done - not just the potential for harm.  "Unfit for purpose" might still get you out of the contract though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Be sure to tell Time Warner to " Abragofuckyourself " when they say you 're tied into a contract by using the words " unfit for purpose " " gross criminal negligence " and " class action " Unfortunately , in negligence cases the courts often look to the industry standard to decide what sort of precautions a company ought to take .
Given that the industry standard is basically no security at all this might be a tough case .
Also , to establish negligence you 'd have to show some actual harm done - not just the potential for harm .
" Unfit for purpose " might still get you out of the contract though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be sure to tell Time Warner to "Abragofuckyourself" when they say you're tied into a contract by using the words "unfit for purpose" "gross criminal negligence" and "class action"Unfortunately, in negligence cases the courts often look to the industry standard to decide what sort of precautions a company ought to take.
Given that the industry standard is basically no security at all this might be a tough case.
Also, to establish negligence you'd have to show some actual harm done - not just the potential for harm.
"Unfit for purpose" might still get you out of the contract though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835223</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256226840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah.  It's a shame to waste hardware like that though.  For example my Verizon DSL modem is also a router and wireless access point.  I can't use any of those features though because it is well known that Verizon can get into these modems from the outside (to do firmware upgrades and such) and if they can do it who's to say some random hacker can't.  So I put the damn thing in bridge mode and use the trusty old WRT54GL running Tomato as the actual router/firewall.  Such a waste of hardware because I would rather use that WRT54GL for something else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
It 's a shame to waste hardware like that though .
For example my Verizon DSL modem is also a router and wireless access point .
I ca n't use any of those features though because it is well known that Verizon can get into these modems from the outside ( to do firmware upgrades and such ) and if they can do it who 's to say some random hacker ca n't .
So I put the damn thing in bridge mode and use the trusty old WRT54GL running Tomato as the actual router/firewall .
Such a waste of hardware because I would rather use that WRT54GL for something else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
It's a shame to waste hardware like that though.
For example my Verizon DSL modem is also a router and wireless access point.
I can't use any of those features though because it is well known that Verizon can get into these modems from the outside (to do firmware upgrades and such) and if they can do it who's to say some random hacker can't.
So I put the damn thing in bridge mode and use the trusty old WRT54GL running Tomato as the actual router/firewall.
Such a waste of hardware because I would rather use that WRT54GL for something else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834301</id>
	<title>Mod me redundant</title>
	<author>HNS-I</author>
	<datestamp>1256220840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>..but I believe the word flabbergasted comes to mind.</htmltext>
<tokenext>..but I believe the word flabbergasted comes to mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..but I believe the word flabbergasted comes to mind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834427</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>TimeTraveler1884</author>
	<datestamp>1256221800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Initially I was a little confused about the cable modem <i>not</i> being in bridge mode and having an admin interface at all. After RTFA, this vulnerability is only for SMC router/modem combo devices from TW. There was no mention of the Motorola cable modem I have from TW. The Motorola cable modems are acting as a bridge already because my router gets the lease to the public IP.
<br> <br>
So apparently no worries regarding this vulnerability for me, but this certainly sucks for 65K other people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Initially I was a little confused about the cable modem not being in bridge mode and having an admin interface at all .
After RTFA , this vulnerability is only for SMC router/modem combo devices from TW .
There was no mention of the Motorola cable modem I have from TW .
The Motorola cable modems are acting as a bridge already because my router gets the lease to the public IP .
So apparently no worries regarding this vulnerability for me , but this certainly sucks for 65K other people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Initially I was a little confused about the cable modem not being in bridge mode and having an admin interface at all.
After RTFA, this vulnerability is only for SMC router/modem combo devices from TW.
There was no mention of the Motorola cable modem I have from TW.
The Motorola cable modems are acting as a bridge already because my router gets the lease to the public IP.
So apparently no worries regarding this vulnerability for me, but this certainly sucks for 65K other people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834825</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So you are saying I should go back to dial-up...?</p></div></blockquote><p>If that's what it takes, yes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you are saying I should go back to dial-up... ? If that 's what it takes , yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you are saying I should go back to dial-up...?If that's what it takes, yes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834417</id>
	<title>Re:The only prudent thing to do with these things.</title>
	<author>Bakkster</author>
	<datestamp>1256221740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was under the impression that the only user-configurable option is to add URLs to a blocking list.  There is no way to put it in bridge mode, and even if it was someone could log on and change it, and simply pass all your data to their servers anyway.
</p><p>This is the kind of setup you give people who don't know about security, so they can't muck it up.  Of course, it needs to be secure in the first place, so this is a huge issue and fixable only with firmware (or different hardware).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was under the impression that the only user-configurable option is to add URLs to a blocking list .
There is no way to put it in bridge mode , and even if it was someone could log on and change it , and simply pass all your data to their servers anyway .
This is the kind of setup you give people who do n't know about security , so they ca n't muck it up .
Of course , it needs to be secure in the first place , so this is a huge issue and fixable only with firmware ( or different hardware ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was under the impression that the only user-configurable option is to add URLs to a blocking list.
There is no way to put it in bridge mode, and even if it was someone could log on and change it, and simply pass all your data to their servers anyway.
This is the kind of setup you give people who don't know about security, so they can't muck it up.
Of course, it needs to be secure in the first place, so this is a huge issue and fixable only with firmware (or different hardware).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834251</id>
	<title>Clock is ticking</title>
	<author>oldspewey</author>
	<datestamp>1256220480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you use Time Warner's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, watch for firmware to be released soon that they are reportedly in the process of testing.</p></div><p>And if you are a hacker planning to pwn Time Warner's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, be sure to get your exploit written and distributed soon before the new firmware is released.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you use Time Warner 's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo , watch for firmware to be released soon that they are reportedly in the process of testing.And if you are a hacker planning to pwn Time Warner 's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo , be sure to get your exploit written and distributed soon before the new firmware is released .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you use Time Warner's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, watch for firmware to be released soon that they are reportedly in the process of testing.And if you are a hacker planning to pwn Time Warner's SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, be sure to get your exploit written and distributed soon before the new firmware is released.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834815</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256224560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking as someone who has no option of anything other than dial-up, I can tell you that it most certainly is worthless.</p><p>Remember back in 1999 how it would take 15 seconds to load a page?  Now imagine that every page has flash instead of pictures and most serves will decide to give you a timeout message if you take longer than 45 seconds to respond to a request.  Youtube, torrents, the whole digital distribution revolution is totally useless.</p><p>I dare you, go back to dial-up for two weeks.  <i>Completely</i> worthless Internet.  Yeah, I've still got Internet at the library, but that doesn't allow me to get patches for my OS or watch Youtube, now does it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking as someone who has no option of anything other than dial-up , I can tell you that it most certainly is worthless.Remember back in 1999 how it would take 15 seconds to load a page ?
Now imagine that every page has flash instead of pictures and most serves will decide to give you a timeout message if you take longer than 45 seconds to respond to a request .
Youtube , torrents , the whole digital distribution revolution is totally useless.I dare you , go back to dial-up for two weeks .
Completely worthless Internet .
Yeah , I 've still got Internet at the library , but that does n't allow me to get patches for my OS or watch Youtube , now does it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking as someone who has no option of anything other than dial-up, I can tell you that it most certainly is worthless.Remember back in 1999 how it would take 15 seconds to load a page?
Now imagine that every page has flash instead of pictures and most serves will decide to give you a timeout message if you take longer than 45 seconds to respond to a request.
Youtube, torrents, the whole digital distribution revolution is totally useless.I dare you, go back to dial-up for two weeks.
Completely worthless Internet.
Yeah, I've still got Internet at the library, but that doesn't allow me to get patches for my OS or watch Youtube, now does it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834757</id>
	<title>Re:Related to Belgacom hack and 'ransom'?</title>
	<author>Bucc5062</author>
	<datestamp>1256224200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are evil minions so dumb.  This guy gets access to all these passwords and his only idea is to blackmail a corporate entity more evil then himself...by doling out uid/pwd combinations a few at a time...please!!</p><p>As was already stated the first action by evil corporation is to get the law on their side so they do not have to do any work to change anything.  The law pursues the bad guy and he realizes the grand scheme not only fails, but now he's screwed because ultimately he either gets caught, or can't release anything else for fear of being caught and thus becomes harmless.  He never gets what he wants.</p><p>Were it me (and I most certainly do not live in Belgium) and I choose to do evil I would have blasted all uid/pwds at once across as many nodes as possible thus, for a moment, potentially hurting the pockets of evil corporation.  Short lived excitement with no long term reward, but still would be fun to watch the fallout.</p><p>My other idea would be to use my new found data to my advantage.  Can I load slaves on all those systems so that when I want to watch streaming video of pr0n I piggyback on someone else's quota.  Perhaps I can monitor usage and find users with low bandwidth and borrow (steal) from them.  I would never ever share this information with others, because certainly at some point a "friend" would abuse the system, or rat me out if/when caught.</p><p>No, the guy blackmails a corporate with some stupid ass name and a piss poor methodology for revenge.  Do they not teach anything at Evil U any more?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are evil minions so dumb .
This guy gets access to all these passwords and his only idea is to blackmail a corporate entity more evil then himself...by doling out uid/pwd combinations a few at a time...please !
! As was already stated the first action by evil corporation is to get the law on their side so they do not have to do any work to change anything .
The law pursues the bad guy and he realizes the grand scheme not only fails , but now he 's screwed because ultimately he either gets caught , or ca n't release anything else for fear of being caught and thus becomes harmless .
He never gets what he wants.Were it me ( and I most certainly do not live in Belgium ) and I choose to do evil I would have blasted all uid/pwds at once across as many nodes as possible thus , for a moment , potentially hurting the pockets of evil corporation .
Short lived excitement with no long term reward , but still would be fun to watch the fallout.My other idea would be to use my new found data to my advantage .
Can I load slaves on all those systems so that when I want to watch streaming video of pr0n I piggyback on someone else 's quota .
Perhaps I can monitor usage and find users with low bandwidth and borrow ( steal ) from them .
I would never ever share this information with others , because certainly at some point a " friend " would abuse the system , or rat me out if/when caught.No , the guy blackmails a corporate with some stupid ass name and a piss poor methodology for revenge .
Do they not teach anything at Evil U any more ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are evil minions so dumb.
This guy gets access to all these passwords and his only idea is to blackmail a corporate entity more evil then himself...by doling out uid/pwd combinations a few at a time...please!
!As was already stated the first action by evil corporation is to get the law on their side so they do not have to do any work to change anything.
The law pursues the bad guy and he realizes the grand scheme not only fails, but now he's screwed because ultimately he either gets caught, or can't release anything else for fear of being caught and thus becomes harmless.
He never gets what he wants.Were it me (and I most certainly do not live in Belgium) and I choose to do evil I would have blasted all uid/pwds at once across as many nodes as possible thus, for a moment, potentially hurting the pockets of evil corporation.
Short lived excitement with no long term reward, but still would be fun to watch the fallout.My other idea would be to use my new found data to my advantage.
Can I load slaves on all those systems so that when I want to watch streaming video of pr0n I piggyback on someone else's quota.
Perhaps I can monitor usage and find users with low bandwidth and borrow (steal) from them.
I would never ever share this information with others, because certainly at some point a "friend" would abuse the system, or rat me out if/when caught.No, the guy blackmails a corporate with some stupid ass name and a piss poor methodology for revenge.
Do they not teach anything at Evil U any more?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837245</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1256235360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You dare me to go back for two weeks?  I travel very frequently, and often have nothing more than a cell phone GSM modem -- that's 9.6k dialup -- and I manage to get by.  No, I cannot watch Youtube or download the latest torrents -- but that hardly makes it "worthless."  There is more to the Internet than Adobe's plugin.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You dare me to go back for two weeks ?
I travel very frequently , and often have nothing more than a cell phone GSM modem -- that 's 9.6k dialup -- and I manage to get by .
No , I can not watch Youtube or download the latest torrents -- but that hardly makes it " worthless .
" There is more to the Internet than Adobe 's plugin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You dare me to go back for two weeks?
I travel very frequently, and often have nothing more than a cell phone GSM modem -- that's 9.6k dialup -- and I manage to get by.
No, I cannot watch Youtube or download the latest torrents -- but that hardly makes it "worthless.
"  There is more to the Internet than Adobe's plugin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836735</id>
	<title>This is only a small part of the story</title>
	<author>denttford</author>
	<datestamp>1256233260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And has been known for a while.  <a href="http://www.lipstadt.com/noted/archives/120" title="lipstadt.com">Oddly, this vulnerability is the easiest way to <b>secure</b> the greater vulnerability in the router</a> [lipstadt.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>And has been known for a while .
Oddly , this vulnerability is the easiest way to secure the greater vulnerability in the router [ lipstadt.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And has been known for a while.
Oddly, this vulnerability is the easiest way to secure the greater vulnerability in the router [lipstadt.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835973</id>
	<title>Re:They need to act on this immediately!</title>
	<author>Abreu</author>
	<datestamp>1256229840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sad part is that Time Warner would probably push for this, rather than admit guilt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sad part is that Time Warner would probably push for this , rather than admit guilt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sad part is that Time Warner would probably push for this, rather than admit guilt</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834115</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834931</id>
	<title>Re:Why wait?</title>
	<author>SydShamino</author>
	<datestamp>1256225280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two-thirds of the world's internet just care about their email and bbc.co.uk.  They're fine.</p><p>However, it's a fair assumption that anyone posting on Slashdot uses the internet for many, many more things, and having all those other things taken away would make it "worthless", especially since most Slashdot users can check their email and the news on their phone for "free".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two-thirds of the world 's internet just care about their email and bbc.co.uk .
They 're fine.However , it 's a fair assumption that anyone posting on Slashdot uses the internet for many , many more things , and having all those other things taken away would make it " worthless " , especially since most Slashdot users can check their email and the news on their phone for " free " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two-thirds of the world's internet just care about their email and bbc.co.uk.
They're fine.However, it's a fair assumption that anyone posting on Slashdot uses the internet for many, many more things, and having all those other things taken away would make it "worthless", especially since most Slashdot users can check their email and the news on their phone for "free".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29843121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835973
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834115
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29838165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834209
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29840963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29841027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836609
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837317
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0336246_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834555
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835889
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29838165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834335
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837513
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834757
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834837
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834283
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834099
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834243
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834437
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834709
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835973
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834359
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834579
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834625
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29840963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835223
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835985
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29843121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834805
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29841027
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29836609
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834071
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834595
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0336246.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834517
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837317
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837019
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834401
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834825
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834699
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834815
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29837245
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835911
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29835735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0336246.29834233
</commentlist>
</conversation>
