<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_05_0413228</id>
	<title>Kodak Wireless Picture Frames Open To Public</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1262696820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Jaxoreth writes <i>"The Kodak Easyshare Wireless Digital Picture Frame displays images via a per-frame RSS feed hosted by FrameChannel. Each frame's URL is identical except for a parameter matching its particular MAC address, <a href="http://seattlewireless.net/~casey/?p=13">enabling public browsing of users' feeds</a>. And worse, if you reach the feed of a not-yet-activated frame, it gives you the code to activate it, allowing you to preload it with whatever content you choose."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jaxoreth writes " The Kodak Easyshare Wireless Digital Picture Frame displays images via a per-frame RSS feed hosted by FrameChannel .
Each frame 's URL is identical except for a parameter matching its particular MAC address , enabling public browsing of users ' feeds .
And worse , if you reach the feed of a not-yet-activated frame , it gives you the code to activate it , allowing you to preload it with whatever content you choose .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jaxoreth writes "The Kodak Easyshare Wireless Digital Picture Frame displays images via a per-frame RSS feed hosted by FrameChannel.
Each frame's URL is identical except for a parameter matching its particular MAC address, enabling public browsing of users' feeds.
And worse, if you reach the feed of a not-yet-activated frame, it gives you the code to activate it, allowing you to preload it with whatever content you choose.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654376</id>
	<title>Re:Competition:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262704800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would guess that <a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6a" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">this one</a> [framechannel.com] has been gotten at.<br>Apologies to Mr. Goatse2600 if I'm wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would guess that this one [ framechannel.com ] has been gotten at.Apologies to Mr. Goatse2600 if I 'm wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would guess that this one [framechannel.com] has been gotten at.Apologies to Mr. Goatse2600 if I'm wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656554</id>
	<title>Re:How many people will get their brand new frame.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262713920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how many of them will realize they like it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how many of them will realize they like it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how many of them will realize they like it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1262703780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anybody else notice the "/productId=KD9371" bit of the URL? It would appear that this "framechannel" service either is, or is designed to be able to be, the backend to multiple digital-photo-frame products, possibly including those from other manufacturers. I couldn't find any other valid product IDs, but that was only in 30 seconds of putting in random strings, not a real effort.(and they claim <a href="http://www.wirelesspictureframe.com/company-listing/" title="wirelesspictureframe.com">)</a> [wirelesspictureframe.com]<br> <br>

I'd say, until given compelling evidence otherwise, that <i>any</i> product using FrameChannel as a backend is <i>Fucked</i>. Worse, there may well be nothing that FrameChannel can do about it without breaking the service for all existing devices in the field. I'm sure, in principle, that those devices are firmware upgradeable(almost definitely just an embedded OS on a chunk of flash, with a weedy little ARM or MIPS SoC); but there is no assurance at all that the device manufacturers will offer one, nor does having to apply a critical firmware upgrade really fit well with the "ready for use by Grandma" image that the photoframes would really like to cultivate.<br> <br>

I would say that we are looking at a much wider problem. This isn't just some hardware company fucking up the service that they hacked together as an afterthought to support their hardware product. This is a <i>service provider</i> company, whose service is integrated into hardware from over a dozen manufacturers, whose core service is <b>completely broken</b> and absurdly insecure. All it would take is one marginally tech-competent journalist to find a couple of baby pictures and/or a frame preloaded with 2-girls 1-cup to kick these guys so hard in the stock price that their investors' children won't be able to sit down for a month....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anybody else notice the " /productId = KD9371 " bit of the URL ?
It would appear that this " framechannel " service either is , or is designed to be able to be , the backend to multiple digital-photo-frame products , possibly including those from other manufacturers .
I could n't find any other valid product IDs , but that was only in 30 seconds of putting in random strings , not a real effort .
( and they claim ) [ wirelesspictureframe.com ] I 'd say , until given compelling evidence otherwise , that any product using FrameChannel as a backend is Fucked .
Worse , there may well be nothing that FrameChannel can do about it without breaking the service for all existing devices in the field .
I 'm sure , in principle , that those devices are firmware upgradeable ( almost definitely just an embedded OS on a chunk of flash , with a weedy little ARM or MIPS SoC ) ; but there is no assurance at all that the device manufacturers will offer one , nor does having to apply a critical firmware upgrade really fit well with the " ready for use by Grandma " image that the photoframes would really like to cultivate .
I would say that we are looking at a much wider problem .
This is n't just some hardware company fucking up the service that they hacked together as an afterthought to support their hardware product .
This is a service provider company , whose service is integrated into hardware from over a dozen manufacturers , whose core service is completely broken and absurdly insecure .
All it would take is one marginally tech-competent journalist to find a couple of baby pictures and/or a frame preloaded with 2-girls 1-cup to kick these guys so hard in the stock price that their investors ' children wo n't be able to sit down for a month... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anybody else notice the "/productId=KD9371" bit of the URL?
It would appear that this "framechannel" service either is, or is designed to be able to be, the backend to multiple digital-photo-frame products, possibly including those from other manufacturers.
I couldn't find any other valid product IDs, but that was only in 30 seconds of putting in random strings, not a real effort.
(and they claim ) [wirelesspictureframe.com] 

I'd say, until given compelling evidence otherwise, that any product using FrameChannel as a backend is Fucked.
Worse, there may well be nothing that FrameChannel can do about it without breaking the service for all existing devices in the field.
I'm sure, in principle, that those devices are firmware upgradeable(almost definitely just an embedded OS on a chunk of flash, with a weedy little ARM or MIPS SoC); but there is no assurance at all that the device manufacturers will offer one, nor does having to apply a critical firmware upgrade really fit well with the "ready for use by Grandma" image that the photoframes would really like to cultivate.
I would say that we are looking at a much wider problem.
This isn't just some hardware company fucking up the service that they hacked together as an afterthought to support their hardware product.
This is a service provider company, whose service is integrated into hardware from over a dozen manufacturers, whose core service is completely broken and absurdly insecure.
All it would take is one marginally tech-competent journalist to find a couple of baby pictures and/or a frame preloaded with 2-girls 1-cup to kick these guys so hard in the stock price that their investors' children won't be able to sit down for a month....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653840</id>
	<title>so now we know the main plot point</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1262700960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for "the ring ii"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for " the ring ii "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for "the ring ii"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653920</id>
	<title>Re:zero day vulnerability?</title>
	<author>burni2</author>
	<datestamp>1262701560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No don't mess yourself up in the first place.</p><p>It's called a cloudfeature being so it's not a bug it's a KODAK<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Share your memories and your nude girlfriends with your friends, enemies, law enforcement agencies and employers - and clouds[1].</p><p>[1]http://www.myspace.com/developerchallenge</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No do n't mess yourself up in the first place.It 's called a cloudfeature being so it 's not a bug it 's a KODAK ; ) Share your memories and your nude girlfriends with your friends , enemies , law enforcement agencies and employers - and clouds [ 1 ] .
[ 1 ] http : //www.myspace.com/developerchallenge</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No don't mess yourself up in the first place.It's called a cloudfeature being so it's not a bug it's a KODAK ;)Share your memories and your nude girlfriends with your friends, enemies, law enforcement agencies and employers - and clouds[1].
[1]http://www.myspace.com/developerchallenge</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30661854</id>
	<title>redirect...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262691240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems they now redirect everything to there default National Geographic feed..  Did they already implement Bretski's idea and starting filtering on useragent ? Anybody got this model that can validate if its still working on the device and if so sniff and see what useragent it is using..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems they now redirect everything to there default National Geographic feed.. Did they already implement Bretski 's idea and starting filtering on useragent ?
Anybody got this model that can validate if its still working on the device and if so sniff and see what useragent it is using. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems they now redirect everything to there default National Geographic feed..  Did they already implement Bretski's idea and starting filtering on useragent ?
Anybody got this model that can validate if its still working on the device and if so sniff and see what useragent it is using..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657236</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>yacc143</author>
	<datestamp>1262715960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, ideally you should do that out of a country, that has a more strict definition of child pornography. Then mail the frames with a believable cover letter,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>And then post the URLs to the news media and the FBI, ideally anonymously<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , ideally you should do that out of a country , that has a more strict definition of child pornography .
Then mail the frames with a believable cover letter , ...And then post the URLs to the news media and the FBI , ideally anonymously : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, ideally you should do that out of a country, that has a more strict definition of child pornography.
Then mail the frames with a believable cover letter, ...And then post the URLs to the news media and the FBI, ideally anonymously :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656260</id>
	<title>"Easyshare" - no kidding.</title>
	<author>kriegsman</author>
	<datestamp>1262712780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I gave a couple of these for the holidays this year thinking that this would be a great way for family to share pictures but we had an unbelievably difficult time getting them to share what we wanted when we wanted.

<p>Thank goodness that's all solved now!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I gave a couple of these for the holidays this year thinking that this would be a great way for family to share pictures but we had an unbelievably difficult time getting them to share what we wanted when we wanted .
Thank goodness that 's all solved now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I gave a couple of these for the holidays this year thinking that this would be a great way for family to share pictures but we had an unbelievably difficult time getting them to share what we wanted when we wanted.
Thank goodness that's all solved now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654436</id>
	<title>New Name for company (or device)</title>
	<author>galego</author>
	<datestamp>1262705220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>PwnDak</htmltext>
<tokenext>PwnDak</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PwnDak</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30664202</id>
	<title>Re:Not cool...</title>
	<author>maokh</author>
	<datestamp>1262703120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It was my own RSS link I posted, which the service provider provided me to share with whomever.  You are looking at pictures of my family, my kids, my facebook, etc.    How is this poor form?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It was my own RSS link I posted , which the service provider provided me to share with whomever .
You are looking at pictures of my family , my kids , my facebook , etc .
How is this poor form ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was my own RSS link I posted, which the service provider provided me to share with whomever.
You are looking at pictures of my family, my kids, my facebook, etc.
How is this poor form?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656332</id>
	<title>Other things to think about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262713080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>remember that framechannel also has plugins for ROKU boxes and many many other devices other than frames.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>remember that framechannel also has plugins for ROKU boxes and many many other devices other than frames .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>remember that framechannel also has plugins for ROKU boxes and many many other devices other than frames.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654098</id>
	<title>Let's get it on...</title>
	<author>Dri</author>
	<datestamp>1262703120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:8a" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:8a</a> [framechannel.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 8a [ framechannel.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:8a [framechannel.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248</id>
	<title>Looks like you can also reset accounts.....</title>
	<author>Ernesto Alvarez</author>
	<datestamp>1262704080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was checking some of the links and noticed a few interesting parameters</p><p><a href="http://www.framechannel.com/feeds/pair/index.php/r=1/frameModelCode=KD9372/frameModelId=1/frameId=PAPAPA/reset=0/language=en/7072.jpg" title="framechannel.com">http://www.framechannel.com/feeds/pair/index.php/r=1/frameModelCode=KD9372/frameModelId=1/frameId=PAPAPA/reset=0/language=en/7072.jpg</a> [framechannel.com]</p><p>See that parameter named reset? I activated an account and verified it as activating. Then I triggered that reset parameter to 1 and it went back to the pre-activation state!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was checking some of the links and noticed a few interesting parametershttp : //www.framechannel.com/feeds/pair/index.php/r = 1/frameModelCode = KD9372/frameModelId = 1/frameId = PAPAPA/reset = 0/language = en/7072.jpg [ framechannel.com ] See that parameter named reset ?
I activated an account and verified it as activating .
Then I triggered that reset parameter to 1 and it went back to the pre-activation state !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was checking some of the links and noticed a few interesting parametershttp://www.framechannel.com/feeds/pair/index.php/r=1/frameModelCode=KD9372/frameModelId=1/frameId=PAPAPA/reset=0/language=en/7072.jpg [framechannel.com]See that parameter named reset?
I activated an account and verified it as activating.
Then I triggered that reset parameter to 1 and it went back to the pre-activation state!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657778</id>
	<title>Not Just Kodak?</title>
	<author>ralphrmartin</author>
	<datestamp>1262717760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>If you go to the framechannel website, you can find a link claiming you can share photos with a whole bunch of manufacturers' devices:<br><br>The FAQ here:http://www.framechannel.com/FAQ/#FRAME\_LIST<br>sends you here: http://www.wirelesspictureframe.com/company-listing/<br>where you can see this list:<br><br>FrameChannel Wireless Digital Picture Frames<br>Kodak<br>D-Link<br>Philips Electronics<br>Samsung<br>Digital Spectrum, Inc.<br>PhotoVu<br>Edge Tech Corporation<br>InTouch<br>Motorola<br>Pix-Star<br>Toshiba<br><br>Other Digital Picture Frames<br>Bigeframe<br>Fidelity Electronics, Inc.<br>KoolVu<br>Pandigital<br>Parrot<br>PF Digital, Inc.<br>Polaroid Corpoation [their typo, not mine!]<br>Portable USA<br>Royal<br>Sungale Group, Inc.<br>Westinghouse Digital Electronics</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you go to the framechannel website , you can find a link claiming you can share photos with a whole bunch of manufacturers ' devices : The FAQ here : http : //www.framechannel.com/FAQ/ # FRAME \ _LISTsends you here : http : //www.wirelesspictureframe.com/company-listing/where you can see this list : FrameChannel Wireless Digital Picture FramesKodakD-LinkPhilips ElectronicsSamsungDigital Spectrum , Inc.PhotoVuEdge Tech CorporationInTouchMotorolaPix-StarToshibaOther Digital Picture FramesBigeframeFidelity Electronics , Inc.KoolVuPandigitalParrotPF Digital , Inc.Polaroid Corpoation [ their typo , not mine !
] Portable USARoyalSungale Group , Inc.Westinghouse Digital Electronics</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you go to the framechannel website, you can find a link claiming you can share photos with a whole bunch of manufacturers' devices:The FAQ here:http://www.framechannel.com/FAQ/#FRAME\_LISTsends you here: http://www.wirelesspictureframe.com/company-listing/where you can see this list:FrameChannel Wireless Digital Picture FramesKodakD-LinkPhilips ElectronicsSamsungDigital Spectrum, Inc.PhotoVuEdge Tech CorporationInTouchMotorolaPix-StarToshibaOther Digital Picture FramesBigeframeFidelity Electronics, Inc.KoolVuPandigitalParrotPF Digital, Inc.Polaroid Corpoation [their typo, not mine!
]Portable USARoyalSungale Group, Inc.Westinghouse Digital Electronics</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654126</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262703420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The probability of one or two really nice racy pictures in there will no doubt motivate someone to search the space eventually though.</p></div><p>Just remember, goatse works both ways....</p><p>Buy a frame for $50, upload goatse to it, for gods sake put the frame face down on the desk with a post it ordering everyone to not look at it, if not outright duct taping it, and you can goatse a "frame-scanner" or whatever you want to call them...</p><p>As a side issue, Kodak probably knows what MACs they've sold (or do they?) so they could put up a VERY special page for framescanners of MACs that have never been manufactured.  Two girls one frame, or something.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The probability of one or two really nice racy pictures in there will no doubt motivate someone to search the space eventually though.Just remember , goatse works both ways....Buy a frame for $ 50 , upload goatse to it , for gods sake put the frame face down on the desk with a post it ordering everyone to not look at it , if not outright duct taping it , and you can goatse a " frame-scanner " or whatever you want to call them...As a side issue , Kodak probably knows what MACs they 've sold ( or do they ?
) so they could put up a VERY special page for framescanners of MACs that have never been manufactured .
Two girls one frame , or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The probability of one or two really nice racy pictures in there will no doubt motivate someone to search the space eventually though.Just remember, goatse works both ways....Buy a frame for $50, upload goatse to it, for gods sake put the frame face down on the desk with a post it ordering everyone to not look at it, if not outright duct taping it, and you can goatse a "frame-scanner" or whatever you want to call them...As a side issue, Kodak probably knows what MACs they've sold (or do they?
) so they could put up a VERY special page for framescanners of MACs that have never been manufactured.
Two girls one frame, or something.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30665508</id>
	<title>Re:Simple reason WHY they did it...</title>
	<author>RealGrouchy</author>
	<datestamp>1262711820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>UNPREDICTABLE serial number</p></div><p>Aren't serial numbers by definition produced in order?</p><p>(Of course this is just semantic; "ID number" would work.)</p><p>- RG&gt;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>UNPREDICTABLE serial numberAre n't serial numbers by definition produced in order ?
( Of course this is just semantic ; " ID number " would work .
) - RG &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UNPREDICTABLE serial numberAren't serial numbers by definition produced in order?
(Of course this is just semantic; "ID number" would work.
)- RG&gt;
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654542</id>
	<title>Re:Looks like you can also reset accounts.....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262705820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, verified.<br>Mod parent up - as someone else said, this enables a whole new level of nastiness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , verified.Mod parent up - as someone else said , this enables a whole new level of nastiness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, verified.Mod parent up - as someone else said, this enables a whole new level of nastiness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654742</id>
	<title>So so bored</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too many 'junk' characters to post directly, however: http://pastebin.com/f16f4aedb </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too many 'junk ' characters to post directly , however : http : //pastebin.com/f16f4aedb</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too many 'junk' characters to post directly, however: http://pastebin.com/f16f4aedb </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102</id>
	<title>Not difficult to track down actual users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262703180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1.  Play with the MAC address to find a live frame.  It took me 4 tries.<br>2.  Scroll down and see if one of their images is the weather forecast, complete with the city and state for the forecast.<br>3.  Now look at the userid.  It likely contains a first initial and a last name.<br>4.  City, state, last name, first initial -- that may very well be enough to get a street address.<br>5.  Most people have pics of their family, including their kids.  You've got a name, address, and photos of the fam.</p><p>It seems to me that goatse/tubgirl -ing these things is the only responsible thing to do.  Sure, a few dozen (hundred?) people will have to gouge their eyes out, but it's a small sacrifice necessary to generate consumer push back on this kind of nonsense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Play with the MAC address to find a live frame .
It took me 4 tries.2 .
Scroll down and see if one of their images is the weather forecast , complete with the city and state for the forecast.3 .
Now look at the userid .
It likely contains a first initial and a last name.4 .
City , state , last name , first initial -- that may very well be enough to get a street address.5 .
Most people have pics of their family , including their kids .
You 've got a name , address , and photos of the fam.It seems to me that goatse/tubgirl -ing these things is the only responsible thing to do .
Sure , a few dozen ( hundred ?
) people will have to gouge their eyes out , but it 's a small sacrifice necessary to generate consumer push back on this kind of nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Play with the MAC address to find a live frame.
It took me 4 tries.2.
Scroll down and see if one of their images is the weather forecast, complete with the city and state for the forecast.3.
Now look at the userid.
It likely contains a first initial and a last name.4.
City, state, last name, first initial -- that may very well be enough to get a street address.5.
Most people have pics of their family, including their kids.
You've got a name, address, and photos of the fam.It seems to me that goatse/tubgirl -ing these things is the only responsible thing to do.
Sure, a few dozen (hundred?
) people will have to gouge their eyes out, but it's a small sacrifice necessary to generate consumer push back on this kind of nonsense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656134</id>
	<title>Re:How many people will get their brand new frame.</title>
	<author>darthnoodles</author>
	<datestamp>1262712360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All unregistered frames now go to an error image. It states that they can't provide a registration number at this time. Looks like they caught on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All unregistered frames now go to an error image .
It states that they ca n't provide a registration number at this time .
Looks like they caught on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All unregistered frames now go to an error image.
It states that they can't provide a registration number at this time.
Looks like they caught on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655256</id>
	<title>Re:Competition:</title>
	<author>mike260</author>
	<datestamp>1262709000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looks like the <a href="http://seattlewireless.net/~casey/?p=13&amp;cpage=1" title="seattlewireless.net">guy who broke the story</a> [seattlewireless.net] has been visited by <a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6D" title="framechannel.com">the frame-fairy</a> [framechannel.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like the guy who broke the story [ seattlewireless.net ] has been visited by the frame-fairy [ framechannel.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like the guy who broke the story [seattlewireless.net] has been visited by the frame-fairy [framechannel.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656438</id>
	<title>Unique IDs are there, but unused</title>
	<author>Exp315</author>
	<datestamp>1262713440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have the Kodak W1020 10" WiFi frame. It does have a unique serial number which is available on the web interface. When I signed up for FrameChannel, I had to provide a 4-digit ID displayed by the frame (don't remember now what it was, or whether it was related to the serial number or the MAC address, and it can't be displayed again without re-initializing the frame). To connect to my Kodak Gallery online account, I had to provide the frame with my email address and password. To sign in to FrameChannel on the web, I have to provide a username and password. In the My FrameChannel Advanced Settings there is a 4-digit PIN number (purpose undocumented).<br> <br>
So, in summary, every bit of capability needed for security is there, awaiting a quick firmware update. It was just a bit of carelessness that FrameChannel didn't think hard enough about security in the first place. I'm willing to forgive this as long as they get together with Kodak quickly and issue a security update - it's a pretty new service, and they are still evolving rapidly. I certainly would never put any private/confidential photos on a web server of any kind. Anyone that does is naive to think it's secure. But I don't want morons defacing my frame contents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the Kodak W1020 10 " WiFi frame .
It does have a unique serial number which is available on the web interface .
When I signed up for FrameChannel , I had to provide a 4-digit ID displayed by the frame ( do n't remember now what it was , or whether it was related to the serial number or the MAC address , and it ca n't be displayed again without re-initializing the frame ) .
To connect to my Kodak Gallery online account , I had to provide the frame with my email address and password .
To sign in to FrameChannel on the web , I have to provide a username and password .
In the My FrameChannel Advanced Settings there is a 4-digit PIN number ( purpose undocumented ) .
So , in summary , every bit of capability needed for security is there , awaiting a quick firmware update .
It was just a bit of carelessness that FrameChannel did n't think hard enough about security in the first place .
I 'm willing to forgive this as long as they get together with Kodak quickly and issue a security update - it 's a pretty new service , and they are still evolving rapidly .
I certainly would never put any private/confidential photos on a web server of any kind .
Anyone that does is naive to think it 's secure .
But I do n't want morons defacing my frame contents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the Kodak W1020 10" WiFi frame.
It does have a unique serial number which is available on the web interface.
When I signed up for FrameChannel, I had to provide a 4-digit ID displayed by the frame (don't remember now what it was, or whether it was related to the serial number or the MAC address, and it can't be displayed again without re-initializing the frame).
To connect to my Kodak Gallery online account, I had to provide the frame with my email address and password.
To sign in to FrameChannel on the web, I have to provide a username and password.
In the My FrameChannel Advanced Settings there is a 4-digit PIN number (purpose undocumented).
So, in summary, every bit of capability needed for security is there, awaiting a quick firmware update.
It was just a bit of carelessness that FrameChannel didn't think hard enough about security in the first place.
I'm willing to forgive this as long as they get together with Kodak quickly and issue a security update - it's a pretty new service, and they are still evolving rapidly.
I certainly would never put any private/confidential photos on a web server of any kind.
Anyone that does is naive to think it's secure.
But I don't want morons defacing my frame contents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654514</id>
	<title>Switch activation codes, get someone elses pics?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262705640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could be funny to swap the default activation pics (with the activation codes) so you upload your photos to someone elses photo frame and you get some randoms...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be funny to swap the default activation pics ( with the activation codes ) so you upload your photos to someone elses photo frame and you get some randoms.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be funny to swap the default activation pics (with the activation codes) so you upload your photos to someone elses photo frame and you get some randoms...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30669068</id>
	<title>agent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262791200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>does anyonone know what software the useragent "AVOS/1.1" belongs to?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>does anyonone know what software the useragent " AVOS/1.1 " belongs to ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does anyonone know what software the useragent "AVOS/1.1" belongs to?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656830</id>
	<title>Re:Not difficult to track down actual users</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1262714760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With respect, your scenario is extremely impractical.   I can't think of a single benefit using a hacked Kodak frame would offer to the would-be pedophile.</p><p>Kodak frames exist across the country.  The pedophile would have to hack random frames one by one and look at pictures to narrow pictures down to:<br>(a) a victim they like,<br>(b) that they can then verify actually lives in the house and isn't a grandparent's house or something,<br>(c) whose parents have put enough information on the frame to be identified and located,<br>(d) in close enough proximity to them to make it feasible.<br>Then, they'd still have to collect enough information to figure out when the child might be unattended so they can attempt a kidnapping, or figure out some other means of luring the child away.</p><p>In other words, the frame offers them almost no useful information, and takes a great deal more time and effort than a Facebook search (which yields far more data AND offers a way to contact the victim) or just getting in their car and driving randomly around school zones watching for kids walking home alone, then figuring out what general direction they are headed.  Or just driving around looking for a kid walking alone.</p><p>If the pedophile wants pictures of your kids taking a bath, OK, I can see this being a risk if you're uncomfortable with someone spanking off to pictures of your kids. I know the concept of it happening with a picture of my daughter makes my skin crawl.</p><p>And Kodak needs to fix this or recall their frames (or sell them as an interesting social experiment in digital graffiti - I might pay a few bucks for one and publish its URL just out of sheer curiosity about what random strangers might post to it).</p><p>But they don't need to recall it to protect children from being kidnapped.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With respect , your scenario is extremely impractical .
I ca n't think of a single benefit using a hacked Kodak frame would offer to the would-be pedophile.Kodak frames exist across the country .
The pedophile would have to hack random frames one by one and look at pictures to narrow pictures down to : ( a ) a victim they like , ( b ) that they can then verify actually lives in the house and is n't a grandparent 's house or something , ( c ) whose parents have put enough information on the frame to be identified and located , ( d ) in close enough proximity to them to make it feasible.Then , they 'd still have to collect enough information to figure out when the child might be unattended so they can attempt a kidnapping , or figure out some other means of luring the child away.In other words , the frame offers them almost no useful information , and takes a great deal more time and effort than a Facebook search ( which yields far more data AND offers a way to contact the victim ) or just getting in their car and driving randomly around school zones watching for kids walking home alone , then figuring out what general direction they are headed .
Or just driving around looking for a kid walking alone.If the pedophile wants pictures of your kids taking a bath , OK , I can see this being a risk if you 're uncomfortable with someone spanking off to pictures of your kids .
I know the concept of it happening with a picture of my daughter makes my skin crawl.And Kodak needs to fix this or recall their frames ( or sell them as an interesting social experiment in digital graffiti - I might pay a few bucks for one and publish its URL just out of sheer curiosity about what random strangers might post to it ) .But they do n't need to recall it to protect children from being kidnapped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With respect, your scenario is extremely impractical.
I can't think of a single benefit using a hacked Kodak frame would offer to the would-be pedophile.Kodak frames exist across the country.
The pedophile would have to hack random frames one by one and look at pictures to narrow pictures down to:(a) a victim they like,(b) that they can then verify actually lives in the house and isn't a grandparent's house or something,(c) whose parents have put enough information on the frame to be identified and located,(d) in close enough proximity to them to make it feasible.Then, they'd still have to collect enough information to figure out when the child might be unattended so they can attempt a kidnapping, or figure out some other means of luring the child away.In other words, the frame offers them almost no useful information, and takes a great deal more time and effort than a Facebook search (which yields far more data AND offers a way to contact the victim) or just getting in their car and driving randomly around school zones watching for kids walking home alone, then figuring out what general direction they are headed.
Or just driving around looking for a kid walking alone.If the pedophile wants pictures of your kids taking a bath, OK, I can see this being a risk if you're uncomfortable with someone spanking off to pictures of your kids.
I know the concept of it happening with a picture of my daughter makes my skin crawl.And Kodak needs to fix this or recall their frames (or sell them as an interesting social experiment in digital graffiti - I might pay a few bucks for one and publish its URL just out of sheer curiosity about what random strangers might post to it).But they don't need to recall it to protect children from being kidnapped.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</id>
	<title>Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>Arker</author>
	<datestamp>1262700960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Havent thought about this for awhile, but IIRC the first three octets are supposed to indicate the manufacturer of the device, so if we can assume the NIC in these frames is always from the same manufacturer, the address space to search becomes much smaller. Still, it's going to be pretty huge, with probably the largest number of possible URLs invalid, and most of the valid ones full of normal junk no one but family/friends really want to see anyhow. The probability of one or two really nice racy pictures in there will no doubt motivate someone to search the space eventually though.</p><p>If you see anything good, or even just really strange, be sure and post it here!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Havent thought about this for awhile , but IIRC the first three octets are supposed to indicate the manufacturer of the device , so if we can assume the NIC in these frames is always from the same manufacturer , the address space to search becomes much smaller .
Still , it 's going to be pretty huge , with probably the largest number of possible URLs invalid , and most of the valid ones full of normal junk no one but family/friends really want to see anyhow .
The probability of one or two really nice racy pictures in there will no doubt motivate someone to search the space eventually though.If you see anything good , or even just really strange , be sure and post it here !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Havent thought about this for awhile, but IIRC the first three octets are supposed to indicate the manufacturer of the device, so if we can assume the NIC in these frames is always from the same manufacturer, the address space to search becomes much smaller.
Still, it's going to be pretty huge, with probably the largest number of possible URLs invalid, and most of the valid ones full of normal junk no one but family/friends really want to see anyhow.
The probability of one or two really nice racy pictures in there will no doubt motivate someone to search the space eventually though.If you see anything good, or even just really strange, be sure and post it here!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654550</id>
	<title>firstname and lastname are XML tags in the source</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262705880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3 is much easier -- users provide their first and last name for your convenience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3 is much easier -- users provide their first and last name for your convenience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3 is much easier -- users provide their first and last name for your convenience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657092</id>
	<title>"Flight to Vegas Delayed"</title>
	<author>DingerX</author>
	<datestamp>1262715480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, someone sure is getting a jump on the pre-CES media hype. A conspiracy theorist would suggest that this Corey Halverson dude over in Seattle was slipped some info by his buddies over in Redmond working on a <a href="http://frameit.live.com/" title="live.com">competing product</a> [live.com], and looking to exclude a VC-funded <a href="http://www.thinkingscreen.com/about.html" title="thinkingscreen.com">startup</a> [thinkingscreen.com] right when they start gaining traction. That would explain why his blog only has three posts, and why he brought this up right before CES.<br> <br>Me, I take this as an object lesson for what happens when you dump your product on woot, and when you don't bother to make even the slightest effort at security.<br> <br>This truly is a PR nightmare, but will make a good plot mechanic in next season's procedural dramas.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , someone sure is getting a jump on the pre-CES media hype .
A conspiracy theorist would suggest that this Corey Halverson dude over in Seattle was slipped some info by his buddies over in Redmond working on a competing product [ live.com ] , and looking to exclude a VC-funded startup [ thinkingscreen.com ] right when they start gaining traction .
That would explain why his blog only has three posts , and why he brought this up right before CES .
Me , I take this as an object lesson for what happens when you dump your product on woot , and when you do n't bother to make even the slightest effort at security .
This truly is a PR nightmare , but will make a good plot mechanic in next season 's procedural dramas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, someone sure is getting a jump on the pre-CES media hype.
A conspiracy theorist would suggest that this Corey Halverson dude over in Seattle was slipped some info by his buddies over in Redmond working on a competing product [live.com], and looking to exclude a VC-funded startup [thinkingscreen.com] right when they start gaining traction.
That would explain why his blog only has three posts, and why he brought this up right before CES.
Me, I take this as an object lesson for what happens when you dump your product on woot, and when you don't bother to make even the slightest effort at security.
This truly is a PR nightmare, but will make a good plot mechanic in next season's procedural dramas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654004</id>
	<title>Re:Competition:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262702520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure <a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:D6" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">this URL</a> [framechannel.com] was activated by someone who read TFA or this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. story. Note the 'hackers123' username and the update timestamp. Pretty innocuous pictures so far, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure this URL [ framechannel.com ] was activated by someone who read TFA or this / .
story. Note the 'hackers123 ' username and the update timestamp .
Pretty innocuous pictures so far , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure this URL [framechannel.com] was activated by someone who read TFA or this /.
story. Note the 'hackers123' username and the update timestamp.
Pretty innocuous pictures so far, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654626</id>
	<title>Serves them right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They deserve this for gutting their engineering operations in Rochester. This is what you get when you farm out your product design to the lowest bidder in a far off land.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They deserve this for gutting their engineering operations in Rochester .
This is what you get when you farm out your product design to the lowest bidder in a far off land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They deserve this for gutting their engineering operations in Rochester.
This is what you get when you farm out your product design to the lowest bidder in a far off land.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655580</id>
	<title>Re:zero day vulnerability?</title>
	<author>FatdogHaiku</author>
	<datestamp>1262710320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability?</p></div><p>ummm, do you have something less than that? The account can be pooched before the user ever opens the box containing the device... to me that's less than zero. I just tried the RSS feed in the story, altered the hex address and yes, I could have set up a device that has yet to be unboxed... Wow, someone's ass is going on the block because you just know that a ton of goatsee, porn, and disturbing images are going to go into these accounts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability ? ummm , do you have something less than that ?
The account can be pooched before the user ever opens the box containing the device... to me that 's less than zero .
I just tried the RSS feed in the story , altered the hex address and yes , I could have set up a device that has yet to be unboxed... Wow , someone 's ass is going on the block because you just know that a ton of goatsee , porn , and disturbing images are going to go into these accounts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability?ummm, do you have something less than that?
The account can be pooched before the user ever opens the box containing the device... to me that's less than zero.
I just tried the RSS feed in the story, altered the hex address and yes, I could have set up a device that has yet to be unboxed... Wow, someone's ass is going on the block because you just know that a ton of goatsee, porn, and disturbing images are going to go into these accounts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30729200</id>
	<title>Re:Simple reason WHY they did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263206220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Well, any not completely insane programmer (are there still any?) would use public/private key to encode the MAC + salt and some checksum data into some hash like value, and send that one. Server would decypher by private key, validate MAC and salt and send content back.</p><p>
&nbsp; You can still break into the firmware and extract the public key + salt data, so you would be able to predict key values of other frames with guessed MAC address, but then again, there's some difference in effort needed to break into firmware vs copying plain text URL - then blindly change couple of numbers... (unless the firmware is some well known FOSS library with well know jpeg exploitable bug with some bash script generating the key value stored in unencrypted file in well known fs in some easily readable block device.... I mean, you can make this hack easy on so many levels, that maybe they should rather label the box "insecure" and sell it anyway)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , any not completely insane programmer ( are there still any ?
) would use public/private key to encode the MAC + salt and some checksum data into some hash like value , and send that one .
Server would decypher by private key , validate MAC and salt and send content back .
  You can still break into the firmware and extract the public key + salt data , so you would be able to predict key values of other frames with guessed MAC address , but then again , there 's some difference in effort needed to break into firmware vs copying plain text URL - then blindly change couple of numbers... ( unless the firmware is some well known FOSS library with well know jpeg exploitable bug with some bash script generating the key value stored in unencrypted file in well known fs in some easily readable block device.... I mean , you can make this hack easy on so many levels , that maybe they should rather label the box " insecure " and sell it anyway )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Well, any not completely insane programmer (are there still any?
) would use public/private key to encode the MAC + salt and some checksum data into some hash like value, and send that one.
Server would decypher by private key, validate MAC and salt and send content back.
  You can still break into the firmware and extract the public key + salt data, so you would be able to predict key values of other frames with guessed MAC address, but then again, there's some difference in effort needed to break into firmware vs copying plain text URL - then blindly change couple of numbers... (unless the firmware is some well known FOSS library with well know jpeg exploitable bug with some bash script generating the key value stored in unencrypted file in well known fs in some easily readable block device.... I mean, you can make this hack easy on so many levels, that maybe they should rather label the box "insecure" and sell it anyway)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656686</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>Tensor</author>
	<datestamp>1262714340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>racy like this ? NSFW obviously<br><br>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e</htmltext>
<tokenext>racy like this ?
NSFW obviouslyhttp : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6e</tokentext>
<sentencetext>racy like this ?
NSFW obviouslyhttp://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just playing with the provided URL, going back one "number" at a time quickly <a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6a" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">provided another one</a> [framechannel.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just playing with the provided URL , going back one " number " at a time quickly provided another one [ framechannel.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just playing with the provided URL, going back one "number" at a time quickly provided another one [framechannel.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653940</id>
	<title>Not cool...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take the links down, theres innocent peoples photographs being put up on the net.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:\  I stumbled across some family photos, I know I wouldn't be happy if it was my kids. Poor form by the source of this article.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take the links down , theres innocent peoples photographs being put up on the net .
: \ I stumbled across some family photos , I know I would n't be happy if it was my kids .
Poor form by the source of this article .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take the links down, theres innocent peoples photographs being put up on the net.
:\  I stumbled across some family photos, I know I wouldn't be happy if it was my kids.
Poor form by the source of this article.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653856</id>
	<title>cue ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>/. effect across the entire product line.

Be polite and don''t load them with tubgirl.</htmltext>
<tokenext>/ .
effect across the entire product line .
Be polite and don''t load them with tubgirl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>/.
effect across the entire product line.
Be polite and don''t load them with tubgirl.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654342</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262704680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just swap the last hex digit with a different one<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:69" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:69</a> [framechannel.com] <br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6a" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6a</a> [framechannel.com] <br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6b" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6b</a> [framechannel.com] <br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6c" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6c</a> [framechannel.com] <br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6d" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6d</a> [framechannel.com] <br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e</a> [framechannel.com] <br>
No way predictable!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just swap the last hex digit with a different one http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 69 [ framechannel.com ] http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6a [ framechannel.com ] http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6b [ framechannel.com ] http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6c [ framechannel.com ] http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6d [ framechannel.com ] http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6e [ framechannel.com ] No way predictable !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just swap the last hex digit with a different one
http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:69 [framechannel.com] 
http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6a [framechannel.com] 
http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6b [framechannel.com] 
http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6c [framechannel.com] 
http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6d [framechannel.com] 
http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e [framechannel.com] 
No way predictable!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880</id>
	<title>Simple reason WHY they did it...</title>
	<author>nweaver</author>
	<datestamp>1262707260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its sloppy to do, but here's why they did it....</p><p>Each device needs a unique serial number, something to identify it.  But at the same time, they didn't want to customize the firmware for each device to include a serial number.</p><p>So instead, some brilliant programmer observed that the embedded processor can get the MAC address from the NIC and use that as a serial number for accessing the web page.</p><p>This is an old and useful trick, but the only problem is although it gives you a unique serial number per device, it gives you a predictable serial number per device and because of the nature of the back-end service, they didn't just need a UNIQUE serial number, but also an UNPREDICTABLE serial number.  Ooops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its sloppy to do , but here 's why they did it....Each device needs a unique serial number , something to identify it .
But at the same time , they did n't want to customize the firmware for each device to include a serial number.So instead , some brilliant programmer observed that the embedded processor can get the MAC address from the NIC and use that as a serial number for accessing the web page.This is an old and useful trick , but the only problem is although it gives you a unique serial number per device , it gives you a predictable serial number per device and because of the nature of the back-end service , they did n't just need a UNIQUE serial number , but also an UNPREDICTABLE serial number .
Ooops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its sloppy to do, but here's why they did it....Each device needs a unique serial number, something to identify it.
But at the same time, they didn't want to customize the firmware for each device to include a serial number.So instead, some brilliant programmer observed that the embedded processor can get the MAC address from the NIC and use that as a serial number for accessing the web page.This is an old and useful trick, but the only problem is although it gives you a unique serial number per device, it gives you a predictable serial number per device and because of the nature of the back-end service, they didn't just need a UNIQUE serial number, but also an UNPREDICTABLE serial number.
Ooops.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658146</id>
	<title>Wonder if they can block by User-Agent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262719080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A quick fix that would get 99.9\% of us out of people's pics, if the User-Agent string is something unique to the frames. This would only allow HTTP requests from frames, not from desktop browsers. Yes, we can change our user agent string on the desktop browser to match, but like I say - 99.9\% of people wouldn't know how.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A quick fix that would get 99.9 \ % of us out of people 's pics , if the User-Agent string is something unique to the frames .
This would only allow HTTP requests from frames , not from desktop browsers .
Yes , we can change our user agent string on the desktop browser to match , but like I say - 99.9 \ % of people would n't know how .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A quick fix that would get 99.9\% of us out of people's pics, if the User-Agent string is something unique to the frames.
This would only allow HTTP requests from frames, not from desktop browsers.
Yes, we can change our user agent string on the desktop browser to match, but like I say - 99.9\% of people wouldn't know how.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656216</id>
	<title>Any firmware hacks for older models?</title>
	<author>Oyjord</author>
	<datestamp>1262712660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have Kodak's Easyshare EX811, one of their earlier models, and like some of the above posters, it's simply shocking how poor the firmware is in the device.  It's a real near miss.  The tech is there, the hardware is there, but the software feels like shackles on the user.  Surely there are folks smarter than I in the open source community who've come up with their own, better firmware.  I tried to Google some, but came up empty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have Kodak 's Easyshare EX811 , one of their earlier models , and like some of the above posters , it 's simply shocking how poor the firmware is in the device .
It 's a real near miss .
The tech is there , the hardware is there , but the software feels like shackles on the user .
Surely there are folks smarter than I in the open source community who 've come up with their own , better firmware .
I tried to Google some , but came up empty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have Kodak's Easyshare EX811, one of their earlier models, and like some of the above posters, it's simply shocking how poor the firmware is in the device.
It's a real near miss.
The tech is there, the hardware is there, but the software feels like shackles on the user.
Surely there are folks smarter than I in the open source community who've come up with their own, better firmware.
I tried to Google some, but came up empty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658762</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262721480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>its more obvious than that.<br>they dont expect a user to remember or know the mac.  the user just turns the thing on and says "framechannel".  it does a GET of the as-yet-undefined feed.  The feed it gets back has an image that says "log into framechannel.com and enter this confirmation code: XXXXXX". the user does that, and thus attaches their new device to the account.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>its more obvious than that.they dont expect a user to remember or know the mac .
the user just turns the thing on and says " framechannel " .
it does a GET of the as-yet-undefined feed .
The feed it gets back has an image that says " log into framechannel.com and enter this confirmation code : XXXXXX " .
the user does that , and thus attaches their new device to the account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its more obvious than that.they dont expect a user to remember or know the mac.
the user just turns the thing on and says "framechannel".
it does a GET of the as-yet-undefined feed.
The feed it gets back has an image that says "log into framechannel.com and enter this confirmation code: XXXXXX".
the user does that, and thus attaches their new device to the account.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657738</id>
	<title>FrameChannel is on facebook and twitter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262717640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>  Get the word out to non-slashdot reading folks.. this is too ridiculous for this company not to have it spread all over the internet.

<a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wellesley-Hills-MA/FrameChannel/103020166321?v=wall" title="facebook.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wellesley-Hills-MA/FrameChannel/103020166321?v=wall</a> [facebook.com]

<a href="http://twitter.com/FrameChannel" title="twitter.com" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/FrameChannel</a> [twitter.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get the word out to non-slashdot reading folks.. this is too ridiculous for this company not to have it spread all over the internet .
http : //www.facebook.com/pages/Wellesley-Hills-MA/FrameChannel/103020166321 ? v = wall [ facebook.com ] http : //twitter.com/FrameChannel [ twitter.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Get the word out to non-slashdot reading folks.. this is too ridiculous for this company not to have it spread all over the internet.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wellesley-Hills-MA/FrameChannel/103020166321?v=wall [facebook.com]

http://twitter.com/FrameChannel [twitter.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654370</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1262704800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I messed up the link. It should be <a href="http://www.wirelesspictureframe.com/company-listing/" title="wirelesspictureframe.com">their claimed list of devices</a> [wirelesspictureframe.com].<br> <br>

Also, the company behind this service is <a href="http://www.thinkingscreen.com/about.html" title="thinkingscreen.com">Thinking Screen Media</a> [thinkingscreen.com]. This sort of thing is, in fact, their core business.<br> <br>

The above link has linkedin profiles for their entire management team and board of directors. Who wants to break the news?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I messed up the link .
It should be their claimed list of devices [ wirelesspictureframe.com ] .
Also , the company behind this service is Thinking Screen Media [ thinkingscreen.com ] .
This sort of thing is , in fact , their core business .
The above link has linkedin profiles for their entire management team and board of directors .
Who wants to break the news ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I messed up the link.
It should be their claimed list of devices [wirelesspictureframe.com].
Also, the company behind this service is Thinking Screen Media [thinkingscreen.com].
This sort of thing is, in fact, their core business.
The above link has linkedin profiles for their entire management team and board of directors.
Who wants to break the news?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30663372</id>
	<title>Re:Simple reason WHY they did it...</title>
	<author>iburrell</author>
	<datestamp>1262698440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they had just hashed the MAC address, it would be harder to predict and not obvious it came from the MAC address. Hashing it with a secret key (but shared key) would probably have been enough security. They would have a problem if the key was compromised but it could be model or firmware version specific.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they had just hashed the MAC address , it would be harder to predict and not obvious it came from the MAC address .
Hashing it with a secret key ( but shared key ) would probably have been enough security .
They would have a problem if the key was compromised but it could be model or firmware version specific .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they had just hashed the MAC address, it would be harder to predict and not obvious it came from the MAC address.
Hashing it with a secret key (but shared key) would probably have been enough security.
They would have a problem if the key was compromised but it could be model or firmware version specific.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654778</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>MartinSchou</author>
	<datestamp>1262706840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> All it would take is one marginally tech-competent journalist to find a couple of baby pictures and/or a frame preloaded with 2-girls 1-cup</p></div> </blockquote><p>Remember that even possessing child pornography is a federal offence or something like that in the US. Even (probably especially) if you then delete the pictures without notifying the authorities.</p><p>Wouldn't it be interesting if someone were to send one of these picture frames to all the federal politicians in the US. And then made sure their particular frame would pull up such pictures? Instant slammer time for all politicians. Imagine how much fun the news networks would have with that.</p><p>&lt;/evil grin&gt;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All it would take is one marginally tech-competent journalist to find a couple of baby pictures and/or a frame preloaded with 2-girls 1-cup Remember that even possessing child pornography is a federal offence or something like that in the US .
Even ( probably especially ) if you then delete the pictures without notifying the authorities.Would n't it be interesting if someone were to send one of these picture frames to all the federal politicians in the US .
And then made sure their particular frame would pull up such pictures ?
Instant slammer time for all politicians .
Imagine how much fun the news networks would have with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> All it would take is one marginally tech-competent journalist to find a couple of baby pictures and/or a frame preloaded with 2-girls 1-cup Remember that even possessing child pornography is a federal offence or something like that in the US.
Even (probably especially) if you then delete the pictures without notifying the authorities.Wouldn't it be interesting if someone were to send one of these picture frames to all the federal politicians in the US.
And then made sure their particular frame would pull up such pictures?
Instant slammer time for all politicians.
Imagine how much fun the news networks would have with that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880</id>
	<title>How many people will get their brand new frame...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many people will get their brand new frame home, plug it in and find that it displays a "preloaded" goatse</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many people will get their brand new frame home , plug it in and find that it displays a " preloaded " goatse</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many people will get their brand new frame home, plug it in and find that it displays a "preloaded" goatse</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657616</id>
	<title>An interesting feed....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262717280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e</a> [framechannel.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6e [ framechannel.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6e [framechannel.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30659318</id>
	<title>Re:zero day vulnerability?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262724180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability?</p></div></blockquote><p>Since everyone wants to claim a zero day vulnerability, I've watch the definition weaken to the point it's useless.  As far as I'm concerned lets just call everything zero day and make it entirely meaningless.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability ? Since everyone wants to claim a zero day vulnerability , I 've watch the definition weaken to the point it 's useless .
As far as I 'm concerned lets just call everything zero day and make it entirely meaningless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability?Since everyone wants to claim a zero day vulnerability, I've watch the definition weaken to the point it's useless.
As far as I'm concerned lets just call everything zero day and make it entirely meaningless.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654968</id>
	<title>Re:How many people will get their brand new frame.</title>
	<author>mortonda</author>
	<datestamp>1262707680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I felt a great disturbance in the Force. As if millions of eyes all cried out in terror, and were suddenly blinded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I felt a great disturbance in the Force .
As if millions of eyes all cried out in terror , and were suddenly blinded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I felt a great disturbance in the Force.
As if millions of eyes all cried out in terror, and were suddenly blinded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655022</id>
	<title>Its all in a name!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262707980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With a name like "EasyShare" what do you expect ?</p><p>N...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With a name like " EasyShare " what do you expect ? N.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With a name like "EasyShare" what do you expect ?N...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654058</id>
	<title>The sad thing is...</title>
	<author>jomegat</author>
	<datestamp>1262702880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The really sad thing here is that if some white hat wrote a script to find these and upload to them an image warning the owners of the vulnerability, said white hat would almost certainly get smacked down by a DMCA suit or face civil/criminal penalties.  No good deed goes unpunished.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The really sad thing here is that if some white hat wrote a script to find these and upload to them an image warning the owners of the vulnerability , said white hat would almost certainly get smacked down by a DMCA suit or face civil/criminal penalties .
No good deed goes unpunished .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really sad thing here is that if some white hat wrote a script to find these and upload to them an image warning the owners of the vulnerability, said white hat would almost certainly get smacked down by a DMCA suit or face civil/criminal penalties.
No good deed goes unpunished.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654418</id>
	<title>Re:Not difficult to track down actual users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262705160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, most of the ones I found were either in France or California, so you'll need more than goatse or tubgirl on them things...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , most of the ones I found were either in France or California , so you 'll need more than goatse or tubgirl on them things.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, most of the ones I found were either in France or California, so you'll need more than goatse or tubgirl on them things...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654118</id>
	<title>Doesn't surprise me</title>
	<author>Kaz Riprock</author>
	<datestamp>1262703360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given how rudimentary and just plain awful Kodak's interface was for their WiFi picture frames from 2 years ago when I bought a few for the family to share the same albums with each other across the nation, this story doesn't surprise me in the least.</p><p>I mean, who lets the frame go on the internet and builds in a timer for when to turn the frame off and on at night...but then when it comes back on it ONLY goes to its own internal memory and NOT the last gallery you were viewing via the WiFi??  Every morning you have to reconnect it to the internet galleries...and its ability to cache the pics from the internet is so poor that it will often claim it has an "error" and...REVERT BACK TO INTERNAL MEMORY!  It's next to impossible to use it to view galleries on the internet...that can ONLY be on their website...AND that they're now CHARGING you to keep "active"!</p><p>So, no, it doesn't surprise me at all that they could screw even this basic security up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given how rudimentary and just plain awful Kodak 's interface was for their WiFi picture frames from 2 years ago when I bought a few for the family to share the same albums with each other across the nation , this story does n't surprise me in the least.I mean , who lets the frame go on the internet and builds in a timer for when to turn the frame off and on at night...but then when it comes back on it ONLY goes to its own internal memory and NOT the last gallery you were viewing via the WiFi ? ?
Every morning you have to reconnect it to the internet galleries...and its ability to cache the pics from the internet is so poor that it will often claim it has an " error " and...REVERT BACK TO INTERNAL MEMORY !
It 's next to impossible to use it to view galleries on the internet...that can ONLY be on their website...AND that they 're now CHARGING you to keep " active " ! So , no , it does n't surprise me at all that they could screw even this basic security up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given how rudimentary and just plain awful Kodak's interface was for their WiFi picture frames from 2 years ago when I bought a few for the family to share the same albums with each other across the nation, this story doesn't surprise me in the least.I mean, who lets the frame go on the internet and builds in a timer for when to turn the frame off and on at night...but then when it comes back on it ONLY goes to its own internal memory and NOT the last gallery you were viewing via the WiFi??
Every morning you have to reconnect it to the internet galleries...and its ability to cache the pics from the internet is so poor that it will often claim it has an "error" and...REVERT BACK TO INTERNAL MEMORY!
It's next to impossible to use it to view galleries on the internet...that can ONLY be on their website...AND that they're now CHARGING you to keep "active"!So, no, it doesn't surprise me at all that they could screw even this basic security up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654262</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>mike260</author>
	<datestamp>1262704140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whoever owns that frame sure has some interesting family photos...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoever owns that frame sure has some interesting family photos.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoever owns that frame sure has some interesting family photos...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854</id>
	<title>Luckily...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1262701080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>MAC addresses are in no way predictable based on the company producing the product in question, so we should be perfectly safe.<br> <br>

Sarcasm aside, how could they <i>possibly</i> have thought that this was a good idea? Nobody expects Joe Consumer to remember something as hostile as a MAC address, so there isn't a "user convenience" argument to be made, and anything with enough processor power and mass storage to run these sorts of web functions could have gotten away with cramming in an onboard GUID or some certs or something. WTF?</htmltext>
<tokenext>MAC addresses are in no way predictable based on the company producing the product in question , so we should be perfectly safe .
Sarcasm aside , how could they possibly have thought that this was a good idea ?
Nobody expects Joe Consumer to remember something as hostile as a MAC address , so there is n't a " user convenience " argument to be made , and anything with enough processor power and mass storage to run these sorts of web functions could have gotten away with cramming in an onboard GUID or some certs or something .
WTF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MAC addresses are in no way predictable based on the company producing the product in question, so we should be perfectly safe.
Sarcasm aside, how could they possibly have thought that this was a good idea?
Nobody expects Joe Consumer to remember something as hostile as a MAC address, so there isn't a "user convenience" argument to be made, and anything with enough processor power and mass storage to run these sorts of web functions could have gotten away with cramming in an onboard GUID or some certs or something.
WTF?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658168</id>
	<title>Re:Looks like you can also reset accounts.....</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1262719200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, a script that changes the content for a video of Obama looking around the room for a few seconds at a random time every few days and then restores the original content. That would probably send some paranoid folks nucular.</p></div><p>*Smoke*<br> <br> <br>*Smoke*<br> <br>Are you smoking yet?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , a script that changes the content for a video of Obama looking around the room for a few seconds at a random time every few days and then restores the original content .
That would probably send some paranoid folks nucular .
* Smoke * * Smoke * Are you smoking yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, a script that changes the content for a video of Obama looking around the room for a few seconds at a random time every few days and then restores the original content.
That would probably send some paranoid folks nucular.
*Smoke*  *Smoke* Are you smoking yet?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656012</id>
	<title>Looks like Kodak got Slashdotted...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262711940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Error generating activation code. We are unable to activate your frame at this time. Please email support@framemedia.com for help resolving this issue."
</p><p>Oh, and not to mention the streams near the example address (xx:B8:07:6C) seem to be having a high turnover in user name and content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Error generating activation code .
We are unable to activate your frame at this time .
Please email support @ framemedia.com for help resolving this issue .
" Oh , and not to mention the streams near the example address ( xx : B8 : 07 : 6C ) seem to be having a high turnover in user name and content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Error generating activation code.
We are unable to activate your frame at this time.
Please email support@framemedia.com for help resolving this issue.
"
Oh, and not to mention the streams near the example address (xx:B8:07:6C) seem to be having a high turnover in user name and content.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654682</id>
	<title>Re:Looks like you can also reset accounts.....</title>
	<author>laughing\_badger</author>
	<datestamp>1262706480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, a script that changes the content for a video of Obama looking around the room for a few seconds at a random time every few days and then restores the original content. That would probably send some paranoid folks nucular.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , a script that changes the content for a video of Obama looking around the room for a few seconds at a random time every few days and then restores the original content .
That would probably send some paranoid folks nucular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, a script that changes the content for a video of Obama looking around the room for a few seconds at a random time every few days and then restores the original content.
That would probably send some paranoid folks nucular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790</id>
	<title>zero day vulnerability?</title>
	<author>Froeschle</author>
	<datestamp>1262700600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would this constitute a zero day vulnerability?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654150</id>
	<title>Re:Luckily...</title>
	<author>Stenchwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1262703540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody expects Joe Consumer to remember something as hostile as a MAC address, so there isn't a "user convenience" argument to be made</p></div><p>Then maybe they will implement MNS (Mac Name Service)?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody expects Joe Consumer to remember something as hostile as a MAC address , so there is n't a " user convenience " argument to be madeThen maybe they will implement MNS ( Mac Name Service ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody expects Joe Consumer to remember something as hostile as a MAC address, so there isn't a "user convenience" argument to be madeThen maybe they will implement MNS (Mac Name Service)?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657374</id>
	<title>1st try, found nudity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262716440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just picked up the URL on the blog and change last cipher... et voila!</p><p>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6E</p><p>Usually MAC addresses are progressive like serial numbers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just picked up the URL on the blog and change last cipher... et voila ! http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 6EUsually MAC addresses are progressive like serial numbers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just picked up the URL on the blog and change last cipher... et voila!http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:6EUsually MAC addresses are progressive like serial numbers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657104</id>
	<title>Re:Well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262715600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heh..<br>Worse still, you can directly retrieve content from http://fs.framechannel.com/<br>Looks like the filesystem is described in the XML returned<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p><p>0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg<br>2009-10-22T04:02:13.000Z<br>"3ec327314496f0d6d92467f399bfdba8"<br>114017<br>STANDARD</p><p>http://fs.framechannel.com/0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg ( the Key value )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh..Worse still , you can directly retrieve content from http : //fs.framechannel.com/Looks like the filesystem is described in the XML returned ..0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg2009-10-22T04 : 02 : 13.000Z " 3ec327314496f0d6d92467f399bfdba8 " 114017STANDARDhttp : //fs.framechannel.com/0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg ( the Key value )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh..Worse still, you can directly retrieve content from http://fs.framechannel.com/Looks like the filesystem is described in the XML returned ..0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg2009-10-22T04:02:13.000Z"3ec327314496f0d6d92467f399bfdba8"114017STANDARDhttp://fs.framechannel.com/0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg ( the Key value )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656106</id>
	<title>The actual image storage filesystem..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262712240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://fs.framechannel.com/</p><p>returns an xml document with :</p><p>fs.framechannel.com</p><p>1000<br>true<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.jpg<br>2008-11-12T18:43:37.000Z<br>"25b2916b5c49db617f52fa5ea48efee7"<br>4<br>STANDARD</p><p>0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg<br>2009-10-22T04:02:13.000Z<br>"3ec327314496f0d6d92467f399bfdba8"</p><p>http://fs.framechannel.com/0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg</p><p>gives you the image<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p><p>This appears to be for all the "personal" content displayed in the frame..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //fs.framechannel.com/returns an xml document with : fs.framechannel.com1000true .jpg2008-11-12T18 : 43 : 37.000Z " 25b2916b5c49db617f52fa5ea48efee7 " 4STANDARD0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg2009-10-22T04 : 02 : 13.000Z " 3ec327314496f0d6d92467f399bfdba8 " http : //fs.framechannel.com/0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpggives you the image ..This appears to be for all the " personal " content displayed in the frame. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://fs.framechannel.com/returns an xml document with :fs.framechannel.com1000true .jpg2008-11-12T18:43:37.000Z"25b2916b5c49db617f52fa5ea48efee7"4STANDARD0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpg2009-10-22T04:02:13.000Z"3ec327314496f0d6d92467f399bfdba8"http://fs.framechannel.com/0000193a728fd00b6cff91b8840bbf8d.jpggives you the image ..This appears to be for all the "personal" content displayed in the frame..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653904</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>benjymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems you get an RSS feed with an activation code no matter what you enter for the frameid (it doesn't even seem to have to be a valid MAC address) so it seems they're not filtering on the server for addresses that actually belong to frames</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems you get an RSS feed with an activation code no matter what you enter for the frameid ( it does n't even seem to have to be a valid MAC address ) so it seems they 're not filtering on the server for addresses that actually belong to frames</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems you get an RSS feed with an activation code no matter what you enter for the frameid (it doesn't even seem to have to be a valid MAC address) so it seems they're not filtering on the server for addresses that actually belong to frames</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655624</id>
	<title>Re:Competition:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262710500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am just browsing, but a simple flip of the original author's mac, swapping a 1 for a 6 and we get <a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:1D" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">this page</a> [framechannel.com] someone from 4chan must have hit and another swaps of MAC and we get <a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=01:23:4D:B8:17:1D" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">this page</a> [framechannel.com] with the amusing registration password of "PEEPU".  hahah.  PEE POO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am just browsing , but a simple flip of the original author 's mac , swapping a 1 for a 6 and we get this page [ framechannel.com ] someone from 4chan must have hit and another swaps of MAC and we get this page [ framechannel.com ] with the amusing registration password of " PEEPU " .
hahah. PEE POO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am just browsing, but a simple flip of the original author's mac, swapping a 1 for a 6 and we get this page [framechannel.com] someone from 4chan must have hit and another swaps of MAC and we get this page [framechannel.com] with the amusing registration password of "PEEPU".
hahah.  PEE POO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654032</id>
	<title>Pictures of dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262702700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And of course, we live in a world where every 13 year old is going to look at this and go, "Sweet!  When the next guy buys one of these things, he's going to see pictures of dicks!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>And of course , we live in a world where every 13 year old is going to look at this and go , " Sweet !
When the next guy buys one of these things , he 's going to see pictures of dicks !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And of course, we live in a world where every 13 year old is going to look at this and go, "Sweet!
When the next guy buys one of these things, he's going to see pictures of dicks!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657042</id>
	<title>Re:Not difficult to track down actual users</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262715300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First one I found with actual personal photos.</p><p>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:62</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First one I found with actual personal photos.http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : 62</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First one I found with actual personal photos.http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:62</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654204</id>
	<title>Re:How many people will get their brand new frame.</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1262703900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"How many people will get their brand new frame home, plug it in and find that it displays a "preloaded" goatse"</p><p>I now have a gift idea my friends will remember.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" How many people will get their brand new frame home , plug it in and find that it displays a " preloaded " goatse " I now have a gift idea my friends will remember .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How many people will get their brand new frame home, plug it in and find that it displays a "preloaded" goatse"I now have a gift idea my friends will remember.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654658</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1262706360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>with probably the largest number of possible URLs invalid</p></div></blockquote><p>What are the chances they are sequentially numbered?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>with probably the largest number of possible URLs invalidWhat are the chances they are sequentially numbered ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with probably the largest number of possible URLs invalidWhat are the chances they are sequentially numbered?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30660212</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't surprise me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262684640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought a kodak frame last year for the in-laws as a x-mas gift for the very purpose of being able to share photos from afar and it was a nightmare to get set up.  This was a pre-frame channer model (not that Kodak ever told me that, despite my numerous hours spent with them on customer suport.)  I never got Kodak's own system for sharing photos to work and I tried everything.  The thing has wifi but it's useless and never did what was advertised.  This debacle serves them right as far as I'm concerned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a kodak frame last year for the in-laws as a x-mas gift for the very purpose of being able to share photos from afar and it was a nightmare to get set up .
This was a pre-frame channer model ( not that Kodak ever told me that , despite my numerous hours spent with them on customer suport .
) I never got Kodak 's own system for sharing photos to work and I tried everything .
The thing has wifi but it 's useless and never did what was advertised .
This debacle serves them right as far as I 'm concerned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a kodak frame last year for the in-laws as a x-mas gift for the very purpose of being able to share photos from afar and it was a nightmare to get set up.
This was a pre-frame channer model (not that Kodak ever told me that, despite my numerous hours spent with them on customer suport.
)  I never got Kodak's own system for sharing photos to work and I tried everything.
The thing has wifi but it's useless and never did what was advertised.
This debacle serves them right as far as I'm concerned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656384</id>
	<title>Hack: Use other RSS feed via redirects</title>
	<author>superswede</author>
	<datestamp>1262713140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hardware seems to be hardwired to framechannel.com.  By using a (wireless) router that can either</p><p>
&nbsp; 1. do URL redirects, or<br>
&nbsp; 2. use a custom DNS service</p><p>it should be possible to use an alternative service, or setup your own RSS feed.  There are lots of things you then could to.</p><p>Also, it would be possible to "hide" behind a hard-to-guess RSS URL, or possibly have the RSS server to only respond to certain IP numbers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hardware seems to be hardwired to framechannel.com .
By using a ( wireless ) router that can either   1. do URL redirects , or   2. use a custom DNS serviceit should be possible to use an alternative service , or setup your own RSS feed .
There are lots of things you then could to.Also , it would be possible to " hide " behind a hard-to-guess RSS URL , or possibly have the RSS server to only respond to certain IP numbers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hardware seems to be hardwired to framechannel.com.
By using a (wireless) router that can either
  1. do URL redirects, or
  2. use a custom DNS serviceit should be possible to use an alternative service, or setup your own RSS feed.
There are lots of things you then could to.Also, it would be possible to "hide" behind a hard-to-guess RSS URL, or possibly have the RSS server to only respond to certain IP numbers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654998</id>
	<title>Re:Not difficult to track down actual users</title>
	<author>radish</author>
	<datestamp>1262707860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Drive down random street.<br>2. Stop outside random house.<br>3. Check inside mailbox - you now have name &amp; address.<br>4. Hang around a bit on a weekend, you now have an actual family in front of you!</p><p>I'm all about protecting privacy, but the ability to get the name and address of a random person is hardly new. What's more dangerous (and I don't think is really possible here) is the ability to get the name and address of a \_specific\_ person. The security concern in this situation (AFAIC) is the ability for people to randomly snarf photos you thought were at least reasonably private, and the ability to insert stuff into your frame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Drive down random street.2 .
Stop outside random house.3 .
Check inside mailbox - you now have name &amp; address.4 .
Hang around a bit on a weekend , you now have an actual family in front of you ! I 'm all about protecting privacy , but the ability to get the name and address of a random person is hardly new .
What 's more dangerous ( and I do n't think is really possible here ) is the ability to get the name and address of a \ _specific \ _ person .
The security concern in this situation ( AFAIC ) is the ability for people to randomly snarf photos you thought were at least reasonably private , and the ability to insert stuff into your frame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Drive down random street.2.
Stop outside random house.3.
Check inside mailbox - you now have name &amp; address.4.
Hang around a bit on a weekend, you now have an actual family in front of you!I'm all about protecting privacy, but the ability to get the name and address of a random person is hardly new.
What's more dangerous (and I don't think is really possible here) is the ability to get the name and address of a \_specific\_ person.
The security concern in this situation (AFAIC) is the ability for people to randomly snarf photos you thought were at least reasonably private, and the ability to insert stuff into your frame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655852</id>
	<title>Change the 6D to 6E</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262711280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NSFW - Change the example at the end from 6D to 6E for a nice viewing.  Bet she isn't happy about her boyfriend's photostream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NSFW - Change the example at the end from 6D to 6E for a nice viewing .
Bet she is n't happy about her boyfriend 's photostream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NSFW - Change the example at the end from 6D to 6E for a nice viewing.
Bet she isn't happy about her boyfriend's photostream.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658922</id>
	<title>to be fair</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262722320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be fair to kodak, yes, their frames are "hackable".  However, it is framechannel that is completely wide open.  The frames also talk to the kodak gallery. I'm not sure how that part works as I've never set up an account.</p><p>So they're somewhat not to blame for that.</p><p>However, they *are* to blame for the fact that the web interface of the frame doesn't have a password, nor does it allow the user to set one.</p><p>So, if you connect this frame to any public-ish network, anyone can administer your frame (adding other rss feeds, changing settings<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... ) by its http admin interface.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair to kodak , yes , their frames are " hackable " .
However , it is framechannel that is completely wide open .
The frames also talk to the kodak gallery .
I 'm not sure how that part works as I 've never set up an account.So they 're somewhat not to blame for that.However , they * are * to blame for the fact that the web interface of the frame does n't have a password , nor does it allow the user to set one.So , if you connect this frame to any public-ish network , anyone can administer your frame ( adding other rss feeds , changing settings ... ) by its http admin interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair to kodak, yes, their frames are "hackable".
However, it is framechannel that is completely wide open.
The frames also talk to the kodak gallery.
I'm not sure how that part works as I've never set up an account.So they're somewhat not to blame for that.However, they *are* to blame for the fact that the web interface of the frame doesn't have a password, nor does it allow the user to set one.So, if you connect this frame to any public-ish network, anyone can administer your frame (adding other rss feeds, changing settings ... ) by its http admin interface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653922</id>
	<title>Re:Competition:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Prediction: It's going to include Goatse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Prediction : It 's going to include Goatse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prediction: It's going to include Goatse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30665418</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>kadey</author>
	<datestamp>1262711100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.power4game.com/" title="power4game.com" rel="nofollow">wow gold</a> [power4game.com]
<a href="http://www.power4game.com/" title="power4game.com" rel="nofollow">cheap wow gold</a> [power4game.com]
<a href="http://www.panjewellery.com/" title="panjewellery.com" rel="nofollow">pandora jewellery</a> [panjewellery.com]
<a href="http://www.power4game.com/" title="power4game.com" rel="nofollow">buy wow gold</a> [power4game.com]
<a href="http://www.pandora-diy.com/" title="pandora-diy.com" rel="nofollow">pandora jewellery</a> [pandora-diy.com]
<a href="http://www.tiffanys-store.com/" title="tiffanys-store.com" rel="nofollow">tiffany jewellery</a> [tiffanys-store.com]
<a href="http://www.panjewellery.com/" title="panjewellery.com" rel="nofollow">pandora charms</a> [panjewellery.com]
<a href="http://www.tiffanys-store.com/" title="tiffanys-store.com" rel="nofollow">tiffany</a> [tiffanys-store.com]
<a href="http://www.pandora-diy.com/" title="pandora-diy.com" rel="nofollow">pandora bracelets</a> [pandora-diy.com]
<a href="http://www.tiffanys-store.com/" title="tiffanys-store.com" rel="nofollow">tiffany jewelry</a> [tiffanys-store.com]
<a href="http://www.swisswatches-shop.com/" title="swisswatches-shop.com" rel="nofollow">rolex watches</a> [swisswatches-shop.com]
<a href="http://www.swisswatches-shop.com/" title="swisswatches-shop.com" rel="nofollow">replica rolex</a> [swisswatches-shop.com]
<a href="http://www.swisswatches-shop.com/" title="swisswatches-shop.com" rel="nofollow">replica rolex watches</a> [swisswatches-shop.com]
<a href="http://www.swisswatches-shop.com/" title="swisswatches-shop.com" rel="nofollow">rolex</a> [swisswatches-shop.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>wow gold [ power4game.com ] cheap wow gold [ power4game.com ] pandora jewellery [ panjewellery.com ] buy wow gold [ power4game.com ] pandora jewellery [ pandora-diy.com ] tiffany jewellery [ tiffanys-store.com ] pandora charms [ panjewellery.com ] tiffany [ tiffanys-store.com ] pandora bracelets [ pandora-diy.com ] tiffany jewelry [ tiffanys-store.com ] rolex watches [ swisswatches-shop.com ] replica rolex [ swisswatches-shop.com ] replica rolex watches [ swisswatches-shop.com ] rolex [ swisswatches-shop.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wow gold [power4game.com]
cheap wow gold [power4game.com]
pandora jewellery [panjewellery.com]
buy wow gold [power4game.com]
pandora jewellery [pandora-diy.com]
tiffany jewellery [tiffanys-store.com]
pandora charms [panjewellery.com]
tiffany [tiffanys-store.com]
pandora bracelets [pandora-diy.com]
tiffany jewelry [tiffanys-store.com]
rolex watches [swisswatches-shop.com]
replica rolex [swisswatches-shop.com]
replica rolex watches [swisswatches-shop.com]
rolex [swisswatches-shop.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653972</id>
	<title>ScaredOf TheMan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262702220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pheeeeww Sure am glad I keep my online photos safe on facebook, you know, where no one can see them without my.......What the!?!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pheeeeww Sure am glad I keep my online photos safe on facebook , you know , where no one can see them without my.......What the ! ? !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pheeeeww Sure am glad I keep my online photos safe on facebook, you know, where no one can see them without my.......What the!?!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654064</id>
	<title>This is hilarious!</title>
	<author>Dri</author>
	<datestamp>1262702940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd pay a grand to see the system design behind the "frame" and what decisions were made on what grounds. The arguments like, -"Hey, there is this thing called a MAC address, it's like, globally unique and stuff!"</p><p>Kodak, you're toast!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd pay a grand to see the system design behind the " frame " and what decisions were made on what grounds .
The arguments like , - " Hey , there is this thing called a MAC address , it 's like , globally unique and stuff !
" Kodak , you 're toast !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd pay a grand to see the system design behind the "frame" and what decisions were made on what grounds.
The arguments like, -"Hey, there is this thing called a MAC address, it's like, globally unique and stuff!
"Kodak, you're toast!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653994</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1262702460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>00:DE:AD:BE:EF</p><p>Only the finest MAC address white-listing security for MY wireless gear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>00 : DE : AD : BE : EFOnly the finest MAC address white-listing security for MY wireless gear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>00:DE:AD:BE:EFOnly the finest MAC address white-listing security for MY wireless gear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656006</id>
	<title>Re:Mac address anatomy</title>
	<author>darthnoodles</author>
	<datestamp>1262711880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>All unregistered frames now go to an error image.  It states that they can't provide a registration number at this time.  Looks like they caught on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All unregistered frames now go to an error image .
It states that they ca n't provide a registration number at this time .
Looks like they caught on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All unregistered frames now go to an error image.
It states that they can't provide a registration number at this time.
Looks like they caught on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658010</id>
	<title>MIT's Account?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262718480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:A6</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //rss.framechannel.com//productId = KD9371/frameId = 00 : 23 : 4D : B8 : 07 : A6</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:A6</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838</id>
	<title>Competition:</title>
	<author>RMH101</author>
	<datestamp>1262700960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Best "you've been p0wned" slideshow set.  Post URL when done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Best " you 've been p0wned " slideshow set .
Post URL when done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best "you've been p0wned" slideshow set.
Post URL when done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655654</id>
	<title>Family Photos abound</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262710560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:82" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Someone has a new baby (possible NSFW? baby nudity)</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:50" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Someone recently graduated, and really likes hot air balloons</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:41" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">many random -- changed twice while posting this</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:44" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Nice travel photography</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:33" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Meh.</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:29" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">VERY NSFW - I'd hate to be the one who got this frame for grandma!</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:2a" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Stunning photography, too good to be theirs... damned image pirates</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:1e" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Cute kid; mom needs to wear sunblock</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
<a href="http://rss.framechannel.com//productId=KD9371/frameId=00:23:4D:B8:07:05" title="framechannel.com" rel="nofollow">Cute baby pics</a> [framechannel.com]
<br>
Wow. it's amazing what I'll do when bored, while WoW servers are down for patching.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone has a new baby ( possible NSFW ?
baby nudity ) [ framechannel.com ] Someone recently graduated , and really likes hot air balloons [ framechannel.com ] many random -- changed twice while posting this [ framechannel.com ] Nice travel photography [ framechannel.com ] Meh .
[ framechannel.com ] VERY NSFW - I 'd hate to be the one who got this frame for grandma !
[ framechannel.com ] Stunning photography , too good to be theirs... damned image pirates [ framechannel.com ] Cute kid ; mom needs to wear sunblock [ framechannel.com ] Cute baby pics [ framechannel.com ] Wow .
it 's amazing what I 'll do when bored , while WoW servers are down for patching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone has a new baby (possible NSFW?
baby nudity) [framechannel.com]

Someone recently graduated, and really likes hot air balloons [framechannel.com]

many random -- changed twice while posting this [framechannel.com]

Nice travel photography [framechannel.com]

Meh.
[framechannel.com]

VERY NSFW - I'd hate to be the one who got this frame for grandma!
[framechannel.com]

Stunning photography, too good to be theirs... damned image pirates [framechannel.com]

Cute kid; mom needs to wear sunblock [framechannel.com]

Cute baby pics [framechannel.com]

Wow.
it's amazing what I'll do when bored, while WoW servers are down for patching.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655366</id>
	<title>Re:Looks like you can also reset accounts.....</title>
	<author>Edzilla2000</author>
	<datestamp>1262709480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A simple script, and every single account wiped clean... That's even better than the goatse idea!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>A simple script , and every single account wiped clean... That 's even better than the goatse idea !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A simple script, and every single account wiped clean... That's even better than the goatse idea!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30664202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30665508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30660212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30729200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30665418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30663372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30659318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0413228_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657616
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30665418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654262
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654194
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654778
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654370
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654032
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655624
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30660212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658168
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30664202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655654
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30656216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658146
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30658762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30659318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30653920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30655580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30654880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30729200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30665508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30663372
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0413228.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0413228.30657778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
