<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_16_0239231</id>
	<title>Hackers Counter Microsoft COFEE With Some DECAF</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1260977760000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Two developers have created '<a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/12/protect-yourself-from-cofee-with-some-decaf-1.ars">Detect and Eliminate Computer Assisted Forensics</a>' (DECAF). The tool tries to stop Microsoft's Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor (COFEE), which helps law enforcement officials grab data from password-protected or encrypted sources. After COFEE was <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/08/1340208/Microsoft-COFEE-Leaked">leaked to the Web</a>, Microsoft <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/26/1356246/Microsoft-Issues-Takedown-Notices-Over-COFEE">issued takedown notices</a> to sites hosting the software."</i> The article notes that DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Two developers have created 'Detect and Eliminate Computer Assisted Forensics ' ( DECAF ) .
The tool tries to stop Microsoft 's Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor ( COFEE ) , which helps law enforcement officials grab data from password-protected or encrypted sources .
After COFEE was leaked to the Web , Microsoft issued takedown notices to sites hosting the software .
" The article notes that DECAF is not open source , so you are n't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Two developers have created 'Detect and Eliminate Computer Assisted Forensics' (DECAF).
The tool tries to stop Microsoft's Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor (COFEE), which helps law enforcement officials grab data from password-protected or encrypted sources.
After COFEE was leaked to the Web, Microsoft issued takedown notices to sites hosting the software.
" The article notes that DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453862</id>
	<title>Meh...</title>
	<author>Nabeel\_co</author>
	<datestamp>1260896940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think I'll just stick to Pepsi</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I 'll just stick to Pepsi</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I'll just stick to Pepsi</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453746</id>
	<title>Microsue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260895620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh Microsoft.... is there *anything* that can't be handled by a lawsuit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh Microsoft.... is there * anything * that ca n't be handled by a lawsuit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh Microsoft.... is there *anything* that can't be handled by a lawsuit?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453910</id>
	<title>LiveCD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260897480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>were I living in a communist country like China, i'd use a linux livecd with no attached hard drive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>were I living in a communist country like China , i 'd use a linux livecd with no attached hard drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>were I living in a communist country like China, i'd use a linux livecd with no attached hard drive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453736</id>
	<title>no source? it's a trap!</title>
	<author>FunkyRider</author>
	<datestamp>1260895560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe DECAF is a double agent blocking COFEE and collecting it's own things in the inventor's in interest. It's a trap!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe DECAF is a double agent blocking COFEE and collecting it 's own things in the inventor 's in interest .
It 's a trap !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe DECAF is a double agent blocking COFEE and collecting it's own things in the inventor's in interest.
It's a trap!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454304</id>
	<title>Wait, what--?</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1260902280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</p></div><p>You're saying you don't know how to run a debugger in a VM session? or registry and file monitoring utilities? I get that analyzing machine code may be a bit of a lost art, but if you have the binary file you have everything you need to figure out what it does -- eventually. Someone will reverse-engineer it. In fact, I rather expect the authors knew this when they released it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...so you are n't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.You 're saying you do n't know how to run a debugger in a VM session ?
or registry and file monitoring utilities ?
I get that analyzing machine code may be a bit of a lost art , but if you have the binary file you have everything you need to figure out what it does -- eventually .
Someone will reverse-engineer it .
In fact , I rather expect the authors knew this when they released it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.You're saying you don't know how to run a debugger in a VM session?
or registry and file monitoring utilities?
I get that analyzing machine code may be a bit of a lost art, but if you have the binary file you have everything you need to figure out what it does -- eventually.
Someone will reverse-engineer it.
In fact, I rather expect the authors knew this when they released it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30492254</id>
	<title>Game?</title>
	<author>idigitallDotCom</author>
	<datestamp>1261127280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My gut feel is that Microsoft (or somebody Big) fucked them (the authors of Decaf) in the arse and that's why they killed Decaf.<br>If i were a malicious hacker I'd rip decaf's internals out and either continue or repackage it. What kind of whackjob writes something like Decaf AS A LESSON TO THE WORLD. Sounds like one of those villains from Bond movies..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My gut feel is that Microsoft ( or somebody Big ) fucked them ( the authors of Decaf ) in the arse and that 's why they killed Decaf.If i were a malicious hacker I 'd rip decaf 's internals out and either continue or repackage it .
What kind of whackjob writes something like Decaf AS A LESSON TO THE WORLD .
Sounds like one of those villains from Bond movies. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My gut feel is that Microsoft (or somebody Big) fucked them (the authors of Decaf) in the arse and that's why they killed Decaf.If i were a malicious hacker I'd rip decaf's internals out and either continue or repackage it.
What kind of whackjob writes something like Decaf AS A LESSON TO THE WORLD.
Sounds like one of those villains from Bond movies..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453826</id>
	<title>Q: does COFEE run on Linux?</title>
	<author>alexmin</author>
	<datestamp>1260896460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No? GOOD</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No ?
GOOD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No?
GOOD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453684</id>
	<title>first post?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260895140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>fp</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>fp</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fp</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454010</id>
	<title>Quit bitching</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260898860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"oh noes, it's not open source!" shut up you idiot, you're running windows. install linux and stop worrying about microsoft already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" oh noes , it 's not open source !
" shut up you idiot , you 're running windows .
install linux and stop worrying about microsoft already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"oh noes, it's not open source!
" shut up you idiot, you're running windows.
install linux and stop worrying about microsoft already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454846</id>
	<title>hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259700480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this thing tries to access dns on startup and crashes if not allowed</p><p>seems suspicious to me</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this thing tries to access dns on startup and crashes if not allowedseems suspicious to me</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this thing tries to access dns on startup and crashes if not allowedseems suspicious to me</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30470032</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>RobertM1968</author>
	<datestamp>1259696820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</p></div></blockquote><p>Haha, that'd be the perfect trojan horse. Have people with (illicit) things to hide run a program that claims to prevent them from being caught, all the while this program is just reporting them. And even if they post code, they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.</p></div><p>Your distrust in Microsoft is totally unwarran....

</p><p>Oh, nevermind... I cant even type that with a straight face...<nobr> <wbr></nobr><b>;-)</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DECAF is not open source , so you are n't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.Haha , that 'd be the perfect trojan horse .
Have people with ( illicit ) things to hide run a program that claims to prevent them from being caught , all the while this program is just reporting them .
And even if they post code , they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.Your distrust in Microsoft is totally unwarran... . Oh , nevermind... I cant even type that with a straight face... ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.Haha, that'd be the perfect trojan horse.
Have people with (illicit) things to hide run a program that claims to prevent them from being caught, all the while this program is just reporting them.
And even if they post code, they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.Your distrust in Microsoft is totally unwarran....

Oh, nevermind... I cant even type that with a straight face... ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453988</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260898740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this is true then the NSA got a lot lazier, a lot more efficient, and a lot more effective. The Soviets pioneered denouncing your neighbors but this is one better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is true then the NSA got a lot lazier , a lot more efficient , and a lot more effective .
The Soviets pioneered denouncing your neighbors but this is one better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is true then the NSA got a lot lazier, a lot more efficient, and a lot more effective.
The Soviets pioneered denouncing your neighbors but this is one better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455514</id>
	<title>It was forseen!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259667960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot users proved prophets for the nth time over:

<a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1435688&amp;cid=30021576" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1435688&amp;cid=30021576</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot users proved prophets for the nth time over : http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1435688&amp;cid = 30021576 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot users proved prophets for the nth time over:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1435688&amp;cid=30021576 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454646</id>
	<title>Re:no source? it's a trap!</title>
	<author>ozmanjusri</author>
	<datestamp>1260906480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slow down, stop blowin' the froth and chill a little.
<p>
That's right, it's a frappe!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slow down , stop blowin ' the froth and chill a little .
That 's right , it 's a frappe !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slow down, stop blowin' the froth and chill a little.
That's right, it's a frappe!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457462</id>
	<title>OT: Aaaaaagh!</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1259682420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Im a gamer, not a grammer major. This post is full of spelling and grammer mistakes.</p></div><p>Head... exploding... you evil.. bastard...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Im a gamer , not a grammer major .
This post is full of spelling and grammer mistakes.Head... exploding... you evil.. bastard.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Im a gamer, not a grammer major.
This post is full of spelling and grammer mistakes.Head... exploding... you evil.. bastard...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457768</id>
	<title>Re:This is the best idea they've come up with yet.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259683680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And yes, I realize there might be &ldquo;legitimate&rdquo; reasons for keeping the source out of law enforcement&amp;s hands [...]</p></div><p>WTH? Machine code IS source code! Just in another language that is a tiny bit harder to read (assisted by tools). So there really is no real point in hiding the source code. Everybody who wants to look at what it does, can still do that.<br>How else would the CPU know what to do with it?</p><p>It&rsquo;s sad, when even on Slashdot, people think that &ldquo;closed&rdquo; source would be anymore than security trough obscurity theater.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And yes , I realize there might be    legitimate    reasons for keeping the source out of law enforcement&amp;s hands [ ... ] WTH ?
Machine code IS source code !
Just in another language that is a tiny bit harder to read ( assisted by tools ) .
So there really is no real point in hiding the source code .
Everybody who wants to look at what it does , can still do that.How else would the CPU know what to do with it ? It    s sad , when even on Slashdot , people think that    closed    source would be anymore than security trough obscurity theater .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And yes, I realize there might be “legitimate” reasons for keeping the source out of law enforcement&amp;s hands [...]WTH?
Machine code IS source code!
Just in another language that is a tiny bit harder to read (assisted by tools).
So there really is no real point in hiding the source code.
Everybody who wants to look at what it does, can still do that.How else would the CPU know what to do with it?It’s sad, when even on Slashdot, people think that “closed” source would be anymore than security trough obscurity theater.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30459278</id>
	<title>And nothing of value was lost</title>
	<author>barnyjr</author>
	<datestamp>1259689380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*Yawn*</p><p>Those of us in the computer forensics business don't use COFEE for real cases anyway.  It's barely useful as a quick analysis tool for something you don't need to worry about presenting in court (thus completely nullifying the term forensics when talking about it).</p><p>Not surprised at all the typical slashdot anti-law enforcement rhetoric in here... especially all of the "innocent people will be saved!" statements.  But I *am* a bit surprised that some of the commenters have said what they have.  Do this many people really not want truly guilty people caught and prosecuted?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* Yawn * Those of us in the computer forensics business do n't use COFEE for real cases anyway .
It 's barely useful as a quick analysis tool for something you do n't need to worry about presenting in court ( thus completely nullifying the term forensics when talking about it ) .Not surprised at all the typical slashdot anti-law enforcement rhetoric in here... especially all of the " innocent people will be saved !
" statements .
But I * am * a bit surprised that some of the commenters have said what they have .
Do this many people really not want truly guilty people caught and prosecuted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*Yawn*Those of us in the computer forensics business don't use COFEE for real cases anyway.
It's barely useful as a quick analysis tool for something you don't need to worry about presenting in court (thus completely nullifying the term forensics when talking about it).Not surprised at all the typical slashdot anti-law enforcement rhetoric in here... especially all of the "innocent people will be saved!
" statements.
But I *am* a bit surprised that some of the commenters have said what they have.
Do this many people really not want truly guilty people caught and prosecuted?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30456680</id>
	<title>COFEE? DECAF? Pointless.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259677920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My 2 cents:</p><p>If someone has physical access to your machine, you're likely going to be boned.      I tried COFEE,  it's nothing special.   It's not a secret elite tool.    If you are knowledgeable enough to secure things so that physical access to your machine doesn't matter,  there is nothing that COFEE can do to you.</p><p>All the hype around this is not generated by anyone in info. sec.   It's typical "scary" media coverage.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My 2 cents : If someone has physical access to your machine , you 're likely going to be boned .
I tried COFEE , it 's nothing special .
It 's not a secret elite tool .
If you are knowledgeable enough to secure things so that physical access to your machine does n't matter , there is nothing that COFEE can do to you.All the hype around this is not generated by anyone in info .
sec. It 's typical " scary " media coverage .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>My 2 cents:If someone has physical access to your machine, you're likely going to be boned.
I tried COFEE,  it's nothing special.
It's not a secret elite tool.
If you are knowledgeable enough to secure things so that physical access to your machine doesn't matter,  there is nothing that COFEE can do to you.All the hype around this is not generated by anyone in info.
sec.   It's typical "scary" media coverage.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30465340</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1259666760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>decaf.exe.config - no disassembly needed.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;setting name="NotifyUser" serializeAs="String"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;value&gt;False&lt;/value&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/setting&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;setting name="CustomMessage" serializeAs="String"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;value&gt;Yay!&lt;/value&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/setting&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;setting name="DropperPath" serializeAs="String"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;value&gt;c:\calc.exe&lt;/value&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/setting&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;setting name="LDSPhoneHome" serializeAs="String"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;value&gt;True&lt;/value&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/setting&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;setting name="LDSKillProcs" serializeAs="String"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;value&gt;False&lt;/value&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/setting&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;setting name="LDSDisableNetwork" serializeAs="String"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;value&gt;False&lt;/value&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/setting&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>decaf.exe.config - no disassembly needed .
                                                        False                                                                                 Yay !
                                                                                c : \ calc.exe                                                                                 True                                                                                 False                                                                                 False                        </tokentext>
<sentencetext>decaf.exe.config - no disassembly needed.
                        
                                False
                        
                        
                                Yay!
                        
                        
                                c:\calc.exe
                        
                        
                                True
                        
                        
                                False
                        
                        
                                False
                        </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30466554</id>
	<title>Re:And nothing of value was lost</title>
	<author>vivaelamor</author>
	<datestamp>1259671380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do this many people really not want truly guilty people caught and prosecuted?</p></div><p>Guilty of what and at the expense of what? Could you cite specific examples, as you seem so eager to chastise others for failing to provide?</p><p>I don't want people <a href="http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/64438/nyc\_has\_the\_most\_marijuana\_arrests\_in\_the\_world\_(but\_don\%E2\%80\%99t\_worry,\_white\_people,\_it\_won\%E2\%80\%99t\_be\_you)/" title="alternet.org">truly guilty</a> [alternet.org] of possessing marijuana to be caught and prosecuted. I don't want people <a href="http://www.stateofprotest.com/morality/lisa-simpson-the-cartoon-character-is-a-real-life-8-year-old-girl/" title="stateofprotest.com">truly guilty</a> [stateofprotest.com] of indulging in whimsical fantasies involving fictional characters to be caught and prosecuted. I don't want people <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars" title="arstechnica.com">truly guilty</a> [arstechnica.com] of copyright infringement to be caught and prosecuted. Had this been some years ago I would not have wanted people <a href="http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/prosecuted-for-being-gay-campaigners-demand-pardon-for-genius-alan-turing-14457486.html" title="belfasttelegraph.co.uk">truly guilty</a> [belfasttelegraph.co.uk] of being gay to be caught and prosecuted. I do not want people <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/01/teens-send-nude-pics-to-one-other-face-kiddie-porn-charges.ars" title="arstechnica.com">truly guilty</a> [arstechnica.com] of sexting to be caught and prosecuted. I do not want people <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean\_Charles\_de\_Menezes" title="wikipedia.org">truly guilty</a> [wikipedia.org] of being mistaken for a terrorist to be shot on the London Underground.  I do not want people <a href="http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article784644.ece" title="politiken.dk">truly guilty</a> [politiken.dk] of possessing a knife to be caught and prosecuted. I do not want people <a href="http://www.dallasobserver.com/2003-04-17/news/1-hour-arrest/full" title="dallasobserver.com">truly guilty</a> [dallasobserver.com] of breast feeding to be caught and prosecuted. I do not want people <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rV7VBx\_xunI" title="youtube.com">truly guilty</a> [youtube.com] of disobeying school authorities to be caught and prosecuted. </p><p>Aside from that, I'd rather <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa\_jfl/" title="theregister.co.uk">rot in prison</a> [theregister.co.uk] than have some moron telling me that my privacy is less important than their fishing expedition for child pornography or bomb making recipes. Note from that article a detective is quoted as saying "Unless you tell us we're never gonna know... What is anybody gonna think?". I'd rather be water-boarded than cooperate with that sort of pond life. If a detective wants me to cooperate then they will need a better reason than 'we hope you're guilty of something, let us pry into your private life or we will presume the worse'.</p><p>If you haven't guessed, I'm not by definition a 'law-abiding' citizen. Were laws in perfect alignment with my principles then I would still only be law abiding by circumstance, not choice. I'd feel much safer around a person who doesn't try to kill me because they choose not to than someone who is just abiding by the law. So, here's me. Sticking it to the man. And proud of it. With long hair. But not a hippy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do this many people really not want truly guilty people caught and prosecuted ? Guilty of what and at the expense of what ?
Could you cite specific examples , as you seem so eager to chastise others for failing to provide ? I do n't want people truly guilty [ alternet.org ] of possessing marijuana to be caught and prosecuted .
I do n't want people truly guilty [ stateofprotest.com ] of indulging in whimsical fantasies involving fictional characters to be caught and prosecuted .
I do n't want people truly guilty [ arstechnica.com ] of copyright infringement to be caught and prosecuted .
Had this been some years ago I would not have wanted people truly guilty [ belfasttelegraph.co.uk ] of being gay to be caught and prosecuted .
I do not want people truly guilty [ arstechnica.com ] of sexting to be caught and prosecuted .
I do not want people truly guilty [ wikipedia.org ] of being mistaken for a terrorist to be shot on the London Underground .
I do not want people truly guilty [ politiken.dk ] of possessing a knife to be caught and prosecuted .
I do not want people truly guilty [ dallasobserver.com ] of breast feeding to be caught and prosecuted .
I do not want people truly guilty [ youtube.com ] of disobeying school authorities to be caught and prosecuted .
Aside from that , I 'd rather rot in prison [ theregister.co.uk ] than have some moron telling me that my privacy is less important than their fishing expedition for child pornography or bomb making recipes .
Note from that article a detective is quoted as saying " Unless you tell us we 're never gon na know... What is anybody gon na think ? " .
I 'd rather be water-boarded than cooperate with that sort of pond life .
If a detective wants me to cooperate then they will need a better reason than 'we hope you 're guilty of something , let us pry into your private life or we will presume the worse'.If you have n't guessed , I 'm not by definition a 'law-abiding ' citizen .
Were laws in perfect alignment with my principles then I would still only be law abiding by circumstance , not choice .
I 'd feel much safer around a person who does n't try to kill me because they choose not to than someone who is just abiding by the law .
So , here 's me .
Sticking it to the man .
And proud of it .
With long hair .
But not a hippy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do this many people really not want truly guilty people caught and prosecuted?Guilty of what and at the expense of what?
Could you cite specific examples, as you seem so eager to chastise others for failing to provide?I don't want people truly guilty [alternet.org] of possessing marijuana to be caught and prosecuted.
I don't want people truly guilty [stateofprotest.com] of indulging in whimsical fantasies involving fictional characters to be caught and prosecuted.
I don't want people truly guilty [arstechnica.com] of copyright infringement to be caught and prosecuted.
Had this been some years ago I would not have wanted people truly guilty [belfasttelegraph.co.uk] of being gay to be caught and prosecuted.
I do not want people truly guilty [arstechnica.com] of sexting to be caught and prosecuted.
I do not want people truly guilty [wikipedia.org] of being mistaken for a terrorist to be shot on the London Underground.
I do not want people truly guilty [politiken.dk] of possessing a knife to be caught and prosecuted.
I do not want people truly guilty [dallasobserver.com] of breast feeding to be caught and prosecuted.
I do not want people truly guilty [youtube.com] of disobeying school authorities to be caught and prosecuted.
Aside from that, I'd rather rot in prison [theregister.co.uk] than have some moron telling me that my privacy is less important than their fishing expedition for child pornography or bomb making recipes.
Note from that article a detective is quoted as saying "Unless you tell us we're never gonna know... What is anybody gonna think?".
I'd rather be water-boarded than cooperate with that sort of pond life.
If a detective wants me to cooperate then they will need a better reason than 'we hope you're guilty of something, let us pry into your private life or we will presume the worse'.If you haven't guessed, I'm not by definition a 'law-abiding' citizen.
Were laws in perfect alignment with my principles then I would still only be law abiding by circumstance, not choice.
I'd feel much safer around a person who doesn't try to kill me because they choose not to than someone who is just abiding by the law.
So, here's me.
Sticking it to the man.
And proud of it.
With long hair.
But not a hippy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30459278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454252</id>
	<title>Best DECAF is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260901800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Linux!

ammite?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux !
ammite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux!
ammite?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454888</id>
	<title>Re:DECAF: A welcoming news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259658180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Less innocent people will be going to jail. Less family will be broke up. [sic]</p> </div><p> Any particular reason to think innocent people are more likely to use DECAF than the guilty? I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Less innocent people will be going to jail .
Less family will be broke up .
[ sic ] Any particular reason to think innocent people are more likely to use DECAF than the guilty ?
I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Less innocent people will be going to jail.
Less family will be broke up.
[sic]  Any particular reason to think innocent people are more likely to use DECAF than the guilty?
I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</id>
	<title>Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260895560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>Haha, that'd be the perfect trojan horse. Have people with (illicit) things to hide run a program that claims to prevent them from being caught, all the while this program is just reporting them. And even if they post code, they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DECAF is not open source , so you are n't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer .
Haha , that 'd be the perfect trojan horse .
Have people with ( illicit ) things to hide run a program that claims to prevent them from being caught , all the while this program is just reporting them .
And even if they post code , they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.
Haha, that'd be the perfect trojan horse.
Have people with (illicit) things to hide run a program that claims to prevent them from being caught, all the while this program is just reporting them.
And even if they post code, they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770</id>
	<title>Disable autorun, lock your computer</title>
	<author>OverlordQ</author>
	<datestamp>1260895860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AFAIK, if your computer is locked COFEE relies on autorun to work, so disable autorun and lock your computer will pretty much thwart COFEE, since it would somehow require bypassing MS's supplied GINA dll, which given it's Microsoft, might know how to do, but would find it highly unlikely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AFAIK , if your computer is locked COFEE relies on autorun to work , so disable autorun and lock your computer will pretty much thwart COFEE , since it would somehow require bypassing MS 's supplied GINA dll , which given it 's Microsoft , might know how to do , but would find it highly unlikely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AFAIK, if your computer is locked COFEE relies on autorun to work, so disable autorun and lock your computer will pretty much thwart COFEE, since it would somehow require bypassing MS's supplied GINA dll, which given it's Microsoft, might know how to do, but would find it highly unlikely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30491386</id>
	<title>Re:The Site...</title>
	<author>solosaint</author>
	<datestamp>1261167300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i'm stealing this signature...</htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'm stealing this signature.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'm stealing this signature...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30460518</id>
	<title>Re:Arguments</title>
	<author>Java Pimp</author>
	<datestamp>1259693640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just did a Google search to see if anyone has reported it to be a virus and found nothing. It's probably safe.</p><p>I'm installing it now. I'll let you know what hap</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just did a Google search to see if anyone has reported it to be a virus and found nothing .
It 's probably safe.I 'm installing it now .
I 'll let you know what hap</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just did a Google search to see if anyone has reported it to be a virus and found nothing.
It's probably safe.I'm installing it now.
I'll let you know what hap</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458516</id>
	<title>DECAF?</title>
	<author>piemcfly</author>
	<datestamp>1259686440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't wait for the 'LATTE MOCHA' fork.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait for the 'LATTE MOCHA ' fork .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait for the 'LATTE MOCHA' fork.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455136</id>
	<title>Re:I am confused.</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1259662860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm, because the password used to encrypt the data is on the SAME PC ?</p><p>Or to use a car analogy, the things inside a locked car are safe, unless you leave the keys in the lock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , because the password used to encrypt the data is on the SAME PC ? Or to use a car analogy , the things inside a locked car are safe , unless you leave the keys in the lock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, because the password used to encrypt the data is on the SAME PC ?Or to use a car analogy, the things inside a locked car are safe, unless you leave the keys in the lock.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453954</id>
	<title>Arguments</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1260898260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I realize a large number of people won't trust it because its not opensource. I can see the authors view point though of not wanting Microsoft to turn around and make a patch against it. If you don't want it don't run it, but if it is a trojan a firewall can easily defeat that. If it is a virus word will spread and people will avoid it. It is like the Antivirus 2009 programs, other then being blatantly obvious viruses, don't work anymore because people know they are bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I realize a large number of people wo n't trust it because its not opensource .
I can see the authors view point though of not wanting Microsoft to turn around and make a patch against it .
If you do n't want it do n't run it , but if it is a trojan a firewall can easily defeat that .
If it is a virus word will spread and people will avoid it .
It is like the Antivirus 2009 programs , other then being blatantly obvious viruses , do n't work anymore because people know they are bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I realize a large number of people won't trust it because its not opensource.
I can see the authors view point though of not wanting Microsoft to turn around and make a patch against it.
If you don't want it don't run it, but if it is a trojan a firewall can easily defeat that.
If it is a virus word will spread and people will avoid it.
It is like the Antivirus 2009 programs, other then being blatantly obvious viruses, don't work anymore because people know they are bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455414</id>
	<title>And what does the COFEE generated data prove?</title>
	<author>fluch</author>
	<datestamp>1259666760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, what does COFEE generated data prove? If my computer would run XP and for some reason some official would want to plug a USB stick with the label "COFEE" into it, then what ever data they claim to find I could deny easily that it was mine. After all, on the USB stick there could have been ANY program which plants ANY data on the computer it was plugged into!</p><p>As far as I know, part of proper computer forensics work is to first (!) dublicate the hard drive in question, then generate a checksum for both drives (which of course should be the same), and lock away one of the drives to a seperate place such that one can prove later on that nobody has changed the original hard drive and that the gathered data is authentic!</p><p>But this COFEE is just pathetic!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , what does COFEE generated data prove ?
If my computer would run XP and for some reason some official would want to plug a USB stick with the label " COFEE " into it , then what ever data they claim to find I could deny easily that it was mine .
After all , on the USB stick there could have been ANY program which plants ANY data on the computer it was plugged into ! As far as I know , part of proper computer forensics work is to first ( !
) dublicate the hard drive in question , then generate a checksum for both drives ( which of course should be the same ) , and lock away one of the drives to a seperate place such that one can prove later on that nobody has changed the original hard drive and that the gathered data is authentic ! But this COFEE is just pathetic !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, what does COFEE generated data prove?
If my computer would run XP and for some reason some official would want to plug a USB stick with the label "COFEE" into it, then what ever data they claim to find I could deny easily that it was mine.
After all, on the USB stick there could have been ANY program which plants ANY data on the computer it was plugged into!As far as I know, part of proper computer forensics work is to first (!
) dublicate the hard drive in question, then generate a checksum for both drives (which of course should be the same), and lock away one of the drives to a seperate place such that one can prove later on that nobody has changed the original hard drive and that the gathered data is authentic!But this COFEE is just pathetic!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454610</id>
	<title>I am confused.</title>
	<author>TexasTroy</author>
	<datestamp>1260905820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone please explain.  How is Windows secure (no pun intended) if Microsoft can release a tool, or script, which can get information from a password or encrypted system?  Surely this cannot be an exploit to a backdoor.  Does the use of COFEE require a user to already be logged in for it to work?  Seriously.  If this is the case, what keeps an evil-doer from using the tool to get into any window system they want and do whatever they want?

If the tool has been leaked, then there is plausible deniability regarding any type of evidence on any windows box.  Even if it were not leaked, this is proof that the windows platform is inherently insecure because there is a built-in method for bypassing its security features.

Someone knowledgeable care to enlighten the uninformed?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone please explain .
How is Windows secure ( no pun intended ) if Microsoft can release a tool , or script , which can get information from a password or encrypted system ?
Surely this can not be an exploit to a backdoor .
Does the use of COFEE require a user to already be logged in for it to work ?
Seriously. If this is the case , what keeps an evil-doer from using the tool to get into any window system they want and do whatever they want ?
If the tool has been leaked , then there is plausible deniability regarding any type of evidence on any windows box .
Even if it were not leaked , this is proof that the windows platform is inherently insecure because there is a built-in method for bypassing its security features .
Someone knowledgeable care to enlighten the uninformed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone please explain.
How is Windows secure (no pun intended) if Microsoft can release a tool, or script, which can get information from a password or encrypted system?
Surely this cannot be an exploit to a backdoor.
Does the use of COFEE require a user to already be logged in for it to work?
Seriously.  If this is the case, what keeps an evil-doer from using the tool to get into any window system they want and do whatever they want?
If the tool has been leaked, then there is plausible deniability regarding any type of evidence on any windows box.
Even if it were not leaked, this is proof that the windows platform is inherently insecure because there is a built-in method for bypassing its security features.
Someone knowledgeable care to enlighten the uninformed?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457732</id>
	<title>COFEE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259683560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the COFEE without the donuts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the COFEE without the donuts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the COFEE without the donuts?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30456346</id>
	<title>No thanks...</title>
	<author>NastyGnat</author>
	<datestamp>1259675220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll stick with my SODAS (Some Other Data Archival System).  It run's on Linux and doesn't like COFFEE or DECAF.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll stick with my SODAS ( Some Other Data Archival System ) .
It run 's on Linux and does n't like COFFEE or DECAF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll stick with my SODAS (Some Other Data Archival System).
It run's on Linux and doesn't like COFFEE or DECAF.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453732</id>
	<title>DECAF: A welcoming news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260895500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Less innocent people will be going to jail. Less family will be broke up.</p><p>The time has come to rise against the machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Less innocent people will be going to jail .
Less family will be broke up.The time has come to rise against the machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Less innocent people will be going to jail.
Less family will be broke up.The time has come to rise against the machine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455372</id>
	<title>Re:Disable autorun, lock your computer</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1259666460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><tt>$ apt-cache search GINA dll<br>$<br></tt></p><p>Dammit, now I can't check out COFEE<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ apt-cache search GINA dll $ Dammit , now I ca n't check out COFEE : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$ apt-cache search GINA dll$Dammit, now I can't check out COFEE :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455708</id>
	<title>Re:Arguments</title>
	<author>henrik.falk</author>
	<datestamp>1259669760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft already knows what they need to patch, seeing as they know what source code they leaked.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft already knows what they need to patch , seeing as they know what source code they leaked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft already knows what they need to patch, seeing as they know what source code they leaked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454170</id>
	<title>Just wait!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260900660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soon I'll Release my Beta version of FRENCH VANILA</p><p>(Forensic Reducing Emulator Named Coherantly and Handsomely for Very Awesome Naughty and Illicit Activities)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soon I 'll Release my Beta version of FRENCH VANILA ( Forensic Reducing Emulator Named Coherantly and Handsomely for Very Awesome Naughty and Illicit Activities )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soon I'll Release my Beta version of FRENCH VANILA(Forensic Reducing Emulator Named Coherantly and Handsomely for Very Awesome Naughty and Illicit Activities)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454992</id>
	<title>Re:So let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>Gerzel</author>
	<datestamp>1259659980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For your private information it is too late.  Your info is already on closed source and quite probably badly maintained/secured computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For your private information it is too late .
Your info is already on closed source and quite probably badly maintained/secured computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For your private information it is too late.
Your info is already on closed source and quite probably badly maintained/secured computers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454552</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260904980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... which is why you read the code, and if you approve of the code, compile it yourself.  If your C.S. skills aren't up to that level, then check with someone you trust as competent to do that code analysis/compilation.</p><p>It's essentially the same with every program.</p><p>But yeah, this looks like an exploit opportunity, and I won't run DECAF on any of my boxes (uh, wait... do I *have* any Windows boxes?  Oh, yeah, my gaming box!) without first carefully isolating the code and analyzing what it does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable .
" ... which is why you read the code , and if you approve of the code , compile it yourself .
If your C.S .
skills are n't up to that level , then check with someone you trust as competent to do that code analysis/compilation.It 's essentially the same with every program.But yeah , this looks like an exploit opportunity , and I wo n't run DECAF on any of my boxes ( uh , wait... do I * have * any Windows boxes ?
Oh , yeah , my gaming box !
) without first carefully isolating the code and analyzing what it does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.
" ... which is why you read the code, and if you approve of the code, compile it yourself.
If your C.S.
skills aren't up to that level, then check with someone you trust as competent to do that code analysis/compilation.It's essentially the same with every program.But yeah, this looks like an exploit opportunity, and I won't run DECAF on any of my boxes (uh, wait... do I *have* any Windows boxes?
Oh, yeah, my gaming box!
) without first carefully isolating the code and analyzing what it does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453880</id>
	<title>Re:So let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260897120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You shouldn't be running closed source software on computers you keep private information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should n't be running closed source software on computers you keep private information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You shouldn't be running closed source software on computers you keep private information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457110</id>
	<title>WINNAR!</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1259680380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>there is a built-in method for bypassing its security features</p></div><p>Ding ding ding ding ding!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>there is a built-in method for bypassing its security featuresDing ding ding ding ding !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there is a built-in method for bypassing its security featuresDing ding ding ding ding!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453816</id>
	<title>This is the best idea they've come up with yet...</title>
	<author>robot256</author>
	<datestamp>1260896340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...to distribute rootkits and create botnets.  Even better than those "Free Antivirus Software" downloads.
</p><p>
Seriously, is anybody going to trust something like this without the source? Somebody intelligent enough not to open unsolicited email attachments, at any rate.
</p><p>
(And yes, I realize there might be "legitimate" reasons for keeping the source out of law enforcement's hands, but frankly [at risk of trolling] I would rather be spied on by the government than identity thieves.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...to distribute rootkits and create botnets .
Even better than those " Free Antivirus Software " downloads .
Seriously , is anybody going to trust something like this without the source ?
Somebody intelligent enough not to open unsolicited email attachments , at any rate .
( And yes , I realize there might be " legitimate " reasons for keeping the source out of law enforcement 's hands , but frankly [ at risk of trolling ] I would rather be spied on by the government than identity thieves .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...to distribute rootkits and create botnets.
Even better than those "Free Antivirus Software" downloads.
Seriously, is anybody going to trust something like this without the source?
Somebody intelligent enough not to open unsolicited email attachments, at any rate.
(And yes, I realize there might be "legitimate" reasons for keeping the source out of law enforcement's hands, but frankly [at risk of trolling] I would rather be spied on by the government than identity thieves.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30465002</id>
	<title>Re:This is the best idea they've come up with yet.</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1259665740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET and they ran Dotfuscator over it, so it's not that simple.  At this point it's pretty damned obscure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's .NET and they ran Dotfuscator over it , so it 's not that simple .
At this point it 's pretty damned obscure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's .NET and they ran Dotfuscator over it, so it's not that simple.
At this point it's pretty damned obscure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30456018</id>
	<title>DECAF is not open source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259672400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh yay! I cannot wait to install some unknown software on my computer that promises it will detect and block other unknown software.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DECAF is not open source , so you are n't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.Oh yay !
I can not wait to install some unknown software on my computer that promises it will detect and block other unknown software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.Oh yay!
I cannot wait to install some unknown software on my computer that promises it will detect and block other unknown software.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458028</id>
	<title>Re:DECAF: A welcoming news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259684700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p> Less innocent people will be going to jail. Less family will be broke up. [sic]</p></div><p> Any particular reason to think innocent people are more likely to use DECAF than the guilty? I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.</p></div><p>No correlation is implied. Fewer people go to jail, both innocent and guilty.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Less innocent people will be going to jail .
Less family will be broke up .
[ sic ] Any particular reason to think innocent people are more likely to use DECAF than the guilty ?
I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.No correlation is implied .
Fewer people go to jail , both innocent and guilty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Less innocent people will be going to jail.
Less family will be broke up.
[sic] Any particular reason to think innocent people are more likely to use DECAF than the guilty?
I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.No correlation is implied.
Fewer people go to jail, both innocent and guilty.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453974</id>
	<title>Perhaps there is more here than meets the eye.</title>
	<author>Old Flatulent 1</author>
	<datestamp>1260898560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could be that Microsoft is also really concerned about Cofee accessing protected encrypted files that would allow hackers to pirate legitimate copies of Windows if the device identity encoding within WGA is cracked!

I am afraid someone might have just let the horse out of the barn through a Windows backdoor. The heads are about to roll in Redmond again!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be that Microsoft is also really concerned about Cofee accessing protected encrypted files that would allow hackers to pirate legitimate copies of Windows if the device identity encoding within WGA is cracked !
I am afraid someone might have just let the horse out of the barn through a Windows backdoor .
The heads are about to roll in Redmond again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be that Microsoft is also really concerned about Cofee accessing protected encrypted files that would allow hackers to pirate legitimate copies of Windows if the device identity encoding within WGA is cracked!
I am afraid someone might have just let the horse out of the barn through a Windows backdoor.
The heads are about to roll in Redmond again!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454104</id>
	<title>Or...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260899820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could be that they are intending to sell it as a product in a future release.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be that they are intending to sell it as a product in a future release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be that they are intending to sell it as a product in a future release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30459974</id>
	<title>DECAF youtube video</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259691660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DECAF Developers release youtube vid explaining reasons behind release</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF-g1Pb1tGM</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DECAF Developers release youtube vid explaining reasons behind releasehttp : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = lF-g1Pb1tGM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DECAF Developers release youtube vid explaining reasons behind releasehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF-g1Pb1tGM</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453908</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260897480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> And even if they post code, they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.</p></div><p>Well yeah, until someone who has an I.Q. greater than a water buffalo compiles the source code and finds out that it doesn't match up with the finished DECAF product...</p><p>That's the point of having source code out there in the first place. It can be inspected for everything from your everyday uh-ohs to your big time no-nos.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And even if they post code , they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.Well yeah , until someone who has an I.Q .
greater than a water buffalo compiles the source code and finds out that it does n't match up with the finished DECAF product...That 's the point of having source code out there in the first place .
It can be inspected for everything from your everyday uh-ohs to your big time no-nos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> And even if they post code, they could just post any old source code and claim it was used to generate the executable.Well yeah, until someone who has an I.Q.
greater than a water buffalo compiles the source code and finds out that it doesn't match up with the finished DECAF product...That's the point of having source code out there in the first place.
It can be inspected for everything from your everyday uh-ohs to your big time no-nos.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454060</id>
	<title>Confused?</title>
	<author>BountyX</author>
	<datestamp>1260899400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a little confused, what exactly is the point of DECAF? Wouldn't encrypting your hard drive be more effective?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a little confused , what exactly is the point of DECAF ?
Would n't encrypting your hard drive be more effective ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a little confused, what exactly is the point of DECAF?
Wouldn't encrypting your hard drive be more effective?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454628</id>
	<title>Where are the</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260906180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.. about DECAF and COFEE?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.. about DECAF and COFEE ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. about DECAF and COFEE?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454410</id>
	<title>Re:Disable autorun, lock your computer</title>
	<author>JWSmythe</author>
	<datestamp>1260903360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Read the instructions.  It works with autorun, but if autorun is disabled you're suppose to use the file manager to browse to the USB device and execute it.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; If you really read into the COFEE instructions, you'd see it doesn't give too much up.  Well, it says a lot, but not about 3rd party software.  It mostly gives standard MS stuff from the registry.  Decrypted login passwords, what's set to run at boot time, etc.  It would be a good forensic tool for cleaning up after a break in though, which may be more of what it is intended for.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Now, if someone were using a P2P client to download kiddie porn, or a 3rd party mail client to talk to their underage smut peddling friends, it would be worthless.  COFEE is very primitive to say the least.  It's a start, and I'm sure by version 7 it could be something to worry about.   Well, not for me.  I don't have any smut peddling friends, and I don't have anything remotely smutty.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; I suppose for the lesser educated people who would use the same password for their Windows login as their webmail account, it could be hazardous to their freedoms.  I still don't like the idea of people snooping around my computer.  Even though I have nothing to hide, I don't like the idea of giving up my privacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>    Read the instructions .
It works with autorun , but if autorun is disabled you 're suppose to use the file manager to browse to the USB device and execute it .
    If you really read into the COFEE instructions , you 'd see it does n't give too much up .
Well , it says a lot , but not about 3rd party software .
It mostly gives standard MS stuff from the registry .
Decrypted login passwords , what 's set to run at boot time , etc .
It would be a good forensic tool for cleaning up after a break in though , which may be more of what it is intended for .
    Now , if someone were using a P2P client to download kiddie porn , or a 3rd party mail client to talk to their underage smut peddling friends , it would be worthless .
COFEE is very primitive to say the least .
It 's a start , and I 'm sure by version 7 it could be something to worry about .
Well , not for me .
I do n't have any smut peddling friends , and I do n't have anything remotely smutty .
    I suppose for the lesser educated people who would use the same password for their Windows login as their webmail account , it could be hazardous to their freedoms .
I still do n't like the idea of people snooping around my computer .
Even though I have nothing to hide , I do n't like the idea of giving up my privacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    Read the instructions.
It works with autorun, but if autorun is disabled you're suppose to use the file manager to browse to the USB device and execute it.
    If you really read into the COFEE instructions, you'd see it doesn't give too much up.
Well, it says a lot, but not about 3rd party software.
It mostly gives standard MS stuff from the registry.
Decrypted login passwords, what's set to run at boot time, etc.
It would be a good forensic tool for cleaning up after a break in though, which may be more of what it is intended for.
    Now, if someone were using a P2P client to download kiddie porn, or a 3rd party mail client to talk to their underage smut peddling friends, it would be worthless.
COFEE is very primitive to say the least.
It's a start, and I'm sure by version 7 it could be something to worry about.
Well, not for me.
I don't have any smut peddling friends, and I don't have anything remotely smutty.
    I suppose for the lesser educated people who would use the same password for their Windows login as their webmail account, it could be hazardous to their freedoms.
I still don't like the idea of people snooping around my computer.
Even though I have nothing to hide, I don't like the idea of giving up my privacy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455090</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259661960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"until someone who has an I.Q. greater than a water buffalo"<br>I won't have you besmirch the intelligence of bovine creatures with an affinity for bathing by likening to people who need to use software to defeat MS malware. Even such creatures know that if you want to do anything that the authorities or corporate oligarchy would disapprove of then you should be using Linux or better yet, OpenBSD. Please refrain from smearing the good name of our semi-aquatic hoofed friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" until someone who has an I.Q .
greater than a water buffalo " I wo n't have you besmirch the intelligence of bovine creatures with an affinity for bathing by likening to people who need to use software to defeat MS malware .
Even such creatures know that if you want to do anything that the authorities or corporate oligarchy would disapprove of then you should be using Linux or better yet , OpenBSD .
Please refrain from smearing the good name of our semi-aquatic hoofed friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"until someone who has an I.Q.
greater than a water buffalo"I won't have you besmirch the intelligence of bovine creatures with an affinity for bathing by likening to people who need to use software to defeat MS malware.
Even such creatures know that if you want to do anything that the authorities or corporate oligarchy would disapprove of then you should be using Linux or better yet, OpenBSD.
Please refrain from smearing the good name of our semi-aquatic hoofed friends.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457860</id>
	<title>Re:DECAF: A welcoming news</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1259684100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.</p></div><p>What exactly do you correlate Microsoft with?  They routinely code more backdoors than a brothel, you really think their involvement with law enforcement won't backfire?  Like you suggest, criminals are tech savvy too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.What exactly do you correlate Microsoft with ?
They routinely code more backdoors than a brothel , you really think their involvement with law enforcement wo n't backfire ?
Like you suggest , criminals are tech savvy too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fail to see why technical savvy should be correlated with innocence or guilt.What exactly do you correlate Microsoft with?
They routinely code more backdoors than a brothel, you really think their involvement with law enforcement won't backfire?
Like you suggest, criminals are tech savvy too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453752</id>
	<title>So let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>publiclurker</author>
	<datestamp>1260895680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have incriminating information on my computer so I'm supposed to download and run some closed-source software from people who now know I have this information, and it will make my problems go away.


Right.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have incriminating information on my computer so I 'm supposed to download and run some closed-source software from people who now know I have this information , and it will make my problems go away .
Right.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have incriminating information on my computer so I'm supposed to download and run some closed-source software from people who now know I have this information, and it will make my problems go away.
Right.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453808</id>
	<title>Not open source</title>
	<author>markdavis</author>
	<datestamp>1260896220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;The article notes that DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.</p><p>And most people running MS-Windows know for sure what THAT will do to their computers?</p><p>Does seem odd, though, that DECAF would not be open so people (in the know) would trust it and could learn from it.  Oh well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The article notes that DECAF is not open source , so you are n't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.And most people running MS-Windows know for sure what THAT will do to their computers ? Does seem odd , though , that DECAF would not be open so people ( in the know ) would trust it and could learn from it .
Oh well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;The article notes that DECAF is not open source, so you aren't really going to know for sure what it will do to your computer.And most people running MS-Windows know for sure what THAT will do to their computers?Does seem odd, though, that DECAF would not be open so people (in the know) would trust it and could learn from it.
Oh well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30460676</id>
	<title>This is not a conspiracy theory any more..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259694180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok this is scary... I am visiting Turkey and when i tried to visit the "who we are" link in http://www.decafme.org/ I got a ministry of whatever of the Turkish government telling me that they are breaking some law... This is fucked...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok this is scary... I am visiting Turkey and when i tried to visit the " who we are " link in http : //www.decafme.org/ I got a ministry of whatever of the Turkish government telling me that they are breaking some law... This is fucked.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok this is scary... I am visiting Turkey and when i tried to visit the "who we are" link in http://www.decafme.org/ I got a ministry of whatever of the Turkish government telling me that they are breaking some law... This is fucked...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454514</id>
	<title>simple tools</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260904620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is so much more COFEE should have done.  It looks like it takes a look at your current running state.  It grabs netwrok connections you have open, running processes, and user account names that are logged in.  Things that get lost when you power a computer off.  The autorun is just to make it simple for the user.  I don't expect this is the only tool ran. I expect it is quick snapshot before you pull the plug.</p><p>Microsoft did take care to get the correct versions of the tools for each OS. You know how you can take some utils from XP and run on 2000 or Windows 7.  This collection of tools looked like they should be able to run on any version.  But for whatever reason they had a version of netstat for every Microsoft OS.  My only reasoning for them to do it is for how it would stand up in the court room.  It could be argued that using the XP version on the vista machine could have given invalid results because it was not ment to be ran on vista.</p><p>I have not looked at DECAF yet.  But a simple root kit is all you need to defend this off.  Hide running processes and network connections.  Or better yet, stop breaking the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is so much more COFEE should have done .
It looks like it takes a look at your current running state .
It grabs netwrok connections you have open , running processes , and user account names that are logged in .
Things that get lost when you power a computer off .
The autorun is just to make it simple for the user .
I do n't expect this is the only tool ran .
I expect it is quick snapshot before you pull the plug.Microsoft did take care to get the correct versions of the tools for each OS .
You know how you can take some utils from XP and run on 2000 or Windows 7 .
This collection of tools looked like they should be able to run on any version .
But for whatever reason they had a version of netstat for every Microsoft OS .
My only reasoning for them to do it is for how it would stand up in the court room .
It could be argued that using the XP version on the vista machine could have given invalid results because it was not ment to be ran on vista.I have not looked at DECAF yet .
But a simple root kit is all you need to defend this off .
Hide running processes and network connections .
Or better yet , stop breaking the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is so much more COFEE should have done.
It looks like it takes a look at your current running state.
It grabs netwrok connections you have open, running processes, and user account names that are logged in.
Things that get lost when you power a computer off.
The autorun is just to make it simple for the user.
I don't expect this is the only tool ran.
I expect it is quick snapshot before you pull the plug.Microsoft did take care to get the correct versions of the tools for each OS.
You know how you can take some utils from XP and run on 2000 or Windows 7.
This collection of tools looked like they should be able to run on any version.
But for whatever reason they had a version of netstat for every Microsoft OS.
My only reasoning for them to do it is for how it would stand up in the court room.
It could be argued that using the XP version on the vista machine could have given invalid results because it was not ment to be ran on vista.I have not looked at DECAF yet.
But a simple root kit is all you need to defend this off.
Hide running processes and network connections.
Or better yet, stop breaking the law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454816</id>
	<title>Re:Perfect trojan horse</title>
	<author>Stoian Ivanov</author>
	<datestamp>1259700000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the beauty of Open Source - you can build your own binaries when paranoid<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the beauty of Open Source - you can build your own binaries when paranoid : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the beauty of Open Source - you can build your own binaries when paranoid :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454602</id>
	<title>How about....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260905700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get a mac?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get a mac ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get a mac?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454022</id>
	<title>Re:So let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>pitchpipe</author>
	<datestamp>1260898980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>pitchpipe's inverse to Anonymous Coward's conditional: You shouldn't be running open source software on computers you keep public information.  Oh, wait a minute!...</htmltext>
<tokenext>pitchpipe 's inverse to Anonymous Coward 's conditional : You should n't be running open source software on computers you keep public information .
Oh , wait a minute ! .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pitchpipe's inverse to Anonymous Coward's conditional: You shouldn't be running open source software on computers you keep public information.
Oh, wait a minute!...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458842</id>
	<title>Re:simple tools</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259687700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what about unjust laws?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what about unjust laws ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what about unjust laws?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454036</id>
	<title>Re:Disable autorun, lock your computer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260899160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Either that, or install Linux<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Either that , or install Linux ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either that, or install Linux ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453750</id>
	<title>The Site...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260895680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.decafme.org/" title="decafme.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.decafme.org/</a> [decafme.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.decafme.org/ [ decafme.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.decafme.org/ [decafme.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458388</id>
	<title>You don't understand! The cat *is* out of the bag!</title>
	<author>AftanGustur</author>
	<datestamp>1259685960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
People, you don't understand what this means !!
</p><p>
This marks an end of an era !  Up until now investigators could be pretty comfortable assuming that their forensics analysis were giving off accurate data about the use and activity of the computer.  Tools to analyse file, network and disk access are based on the assumption that the metadata has not been tampered with.</p><p>
It is enough that you download and run this program every now and then to render every analysis of your computer pretty meaningless as evidence.   Soon someone will write a open source program that runs as a service to ticker with your metadata just a little bit every other day or so, and that will set back forensics analysis quite a few years, and make everything so much harder.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People , you do n't understand what this means ! !
This marks an end of an era !
Up until now investigators could be pretty comfortable assuming that their forensics analysis were giving off accurate data about the use and activity of the computer .
Tools to analyse file , network and disk access are based on the assumption that the metadata has not been tampered with .
It is enough that you download and run this program every now and then to render every analysis of your computer pretty meaningless as evidence .
Soon someone will write a open source program that runs as a service to ticker with your metadata just a little bit every other day or so , and that will set back forensics analysis quite a few years , and make everything so much harder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
People, you don't understand what this means !!
This marks an end of an era !
Up until now investigators could be pretty comfortable assuming that their forensics analysis were giving off accurate data about the use and activity of the computer.
Tools to analyse file, network and disk access are based on the assumption that the metadata has not been tampered with.
It is enough that you download and run this program every now and then to render every analysis of your computer pretty meaningless as evidence.
Soon someone will write a open source program that runs as a service to ticker with your metadata just a little bit every other day or so, and that will set back forensics analysis quite a few years, and make everything so much harder.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455456</id>
	<title>Arrested Development Makes My Banana Stand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259667420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Arrested Development Makes My Banana Stand</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Arrested Development Makes My Banana Stand</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Arrested Development Makes My Banana Stand</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30491386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30465340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30466554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30459278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30460518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30470032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30465002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_0239231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30459278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30466554
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30460518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455708
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454846
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454992
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30491386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453908
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30465340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30470032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453910
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30455372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454170
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457768
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30465002
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454646
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_0239231.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30453732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30454888
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30457860
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_0239231.30458028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
