<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_22_0024210</id>
	<title>Tor Users Urged To Update After Security Breach</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1264171620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"If you use Tor, you're cautioned to update now due to a security breach. In a message on the Tor mailing list dated Jan 20, 2010, Tor developer Roger Dingledine outlines <a href="http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/Jan-2010/msg00161.html">the issue and why you should upgrade</a> to Tor 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha now: 'In early January we discovered that two of the seven directory authorities were compromised (moria1 and gabelmoo), along with <a href="http://metrics.torproject.org/">metrics.torproject.org</a>, a new server we'd recently set up to serve metrics data and graphs. The three servers have since been reinstalled with service migrated to other servers.' Tor users should <a href="https://www.torproject.org/download.html.en">visit the download page and update</a> ASAP."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " If you use Tor , you 're cautioned to update now due to a security breach .
In a message on the Tor mailing list dated Jan 20 , 2010 , Tor developer Roger Dingledine outlines the issue and why you should upgrade to Tor 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha now : 'In early January we discovered that two of the seven directory authorities were compromised ( moria1 and gabelmoo ) , along with metrics.torproject.org , a new server we 'd recently set up to serve metrics data and graphs .
The three servers have since been reinstalled with service migrated to other servers .
' Tor users should visit the download page and update ASAP .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "If you use Tor, you're cautioned to update now due to a security breach.
In a message on the Tor mailing list dated Jan 20, 2010, Tor developer Roger Dingledine outlines the issue and why you should upgrade to Tor 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha now: 'In early January we discovered that two of the seven directory authorities were compromised (moria1 and gabelmoo), along with metrics.torproject.org, a new server we'd recently set up to serve metrics data and graphs.
The three servers have since been reinstalled with service migrated to other servers.
' Tor users should visit the download page and update ASAP.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30864184</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute...</title>
	<author>harmonise</author>
	<datestamp>1264158120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How do you update a Tor SF paparback book?</p></div></blockquote><p>With new pieces of papar.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you update a Tor SF paparback book ? With new pieces of papar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you update a Tor SF paparback book?With new pieces of papar.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30866950</id>
	<title>Re:Tor WILL get people killed, if it hasn't alread</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264181040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right. We had better just give up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
We had better just give up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
We had better just give up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30858914</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264173120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; it will be used, primarily by people using it to hide illegal activities.</p><p>I can list dozens of activities which harm nobody,<br>damage no property, yet are illegal for various reasons.</p><p>Law stems from power, and in many cases,<br>ethics has surprisingly little to do with it.<br>There is value in building a society somewhat *resistant* to laws,<br>so unjust laws or unjust enforcement won't lead to its demise.</p><p>Meanwhile, TOR is often used as a pre-emptive defense.<br>One of the messages TOR use sends from activist to government<br>simply reads:</p><p>"We encrypt everything, legal or otherwise,<br>since we intend to keep our privacy. Our thoughts and plans,<br>as well as our identities, are *not* your business. To compromise them,<br>you need to do actual work and pay actual money. So think twice."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; it will be used , primarily by people using it to hide illegal activities.I can list dozens of activities which harm nobody,damage no property , yet are illegal for various reasons.Law stems from power , and in many cases,ethics has surprisingly little to do with it.There is value in building a society somewhat * resistant * to laws,so unjust laws or unjust enforcement wo n't lead to its demise.Meanwhile , TOR is often used as a pre-emptive defense.One of the messages TOR use sends from activist to governmentsimply reads : " We encrypt everything , legal or otherwise,since we intend to keep our privacy .
Our thoughts and plans,as well as our identities , are * not * your business .
To compromise them,you need to do actual work and pay actual money .
So think twice .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; it will be used, primarily by people using it to hide illegal activities.I can list dozens of activities which harm nobody,damage no property, yet are illegal for various reasons.Law stems from power, and in many cases,ethics has surprisingly little to do with it.There is value in building a society somewhat *resistant* to laws,so unjust laws or unjust enforcement won't lead to its demise.Meanwhile, TOR is often used as a pre-emptive defense.One of the messages TOR use sends from activist to governmentsimply reads:"We encrypt everything, legal or otherwise,since we intend to keep our privacy.
Our thoughts and plans,as well as our identities, are *not* your business.
To compromise them,you need to do actual work and pay actual money.
So think twice.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264098780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the government created it, this is well known.  They created it so they could securely communicate by bouncing signals off of unsecured ships, like your random cruise ship or an allied warship.</p><p>They were involved with its creation, of course the watch it.  So do lots of other people.</p><p>As a general rule, people hiding their activities DO HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE.  The minority use something like this for legitimate uses.  However, our founding fathers had the opinion that until we know you're hiding something bad, you can hide it so no one can come after your for something you do in private that doesn't bother anyone else.  This helps to prevent people from having a bad opinion of you, prejudice and hate.</p><p>It doesn't however change the fact that it will be used, primarily by people using it to hide illegal activities.  It would be retarded if they DIDN'T watch it and as a tax payer I'd be pissed if they didn't.</p><p>Reality says that most people have no need to use this sort of protection and that its of very little use to the majority of the people on the planet, even those doing minor illegal activities.</p><p>I've talked about plenty of things over the phone, email and hell, even posted on bulletin boards (the real ones, cork board and paper with pushpins) at grocery stores about illegal activities.  None of it was anything major of course, minor little crap, all of which were misdemeanors.  There are 2 reasons why nothing ever came of it.</p><p>A.  It was minor crap, no one actually cares about what I did unless I was stupid enough to do it in front of an ON DUTY cop.</p><p>B.  Hiding in plain site and blending in with the crowd makes you a lot less obviously a target than the person hiding things, regardless of what you are hiding.</p><p>So yes, when you make it obvious you're trying to hide something people are going to pay attention to try and figure out what you're hiding, thats being a good detective and what I expect from people who's job is to detect stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the government created it , this is well known .
They created it so they could securely communicate by bouncing signals off of unsecured ships , like your random cruise ship or an allied warship.They were involved with its creation , of course the watch it .
So do lots of other people.As a general rule , people hiding their activities DO HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE .
The minority use something like this for legitimate uses .
However , our founding fathers had the opinion that until we know you 're hiding something bad , you can hide it so no one can come after your for something you do in private that does n't bother anyone else .
This helps to prevent people from having a bad opinion of you , prejudice and hate.It does n't however change the fact that it will be used , primarily by people using it to hide illegal activities .
It would be retarded if they DID N'T watch it and as a tax payer I 'd be pissed if they did n't.Reality says that most people have no need to use this sort of protection and that its of very little use to the majority of the people on the planet , even those doing minor illegal activities.I 've talked about plenty of things over the phone , email and hell , even posted on bulletin boards ( the real ones , cork board and paper with pushpins ) at grocery stores about illegal activities .
None of it was anything major of course , minor little crap , all of which were misdemeanors .
There are 2 reasons why nothing ever came of it.A .
It was minor crap , no one actually cares about what I did unless I was stupid enough to do it in front of an ON DUTY cop.B .
Hiding in plain site and blending in with the crowd makes you a lot less obviously a target than the person hiding things , regardless of what you are hiding.So yes , when you make it obvious you 're trying to hide something people are going to pay attention to try and figure out what you 're hiding , thats being a good detective and what I expect from people who 's job is to detect stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the government created it, this is well known.
They created it so they could securely communicate by bouncing signals off of unsecured ships, like your random cruise ship or an allied warship.They were involved with its creation, of course the watch it.
So do lots of other people.As a general rule, people hiding their activities DO HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE.
The minority use something like this for legitimate uses.
However, our founding fathers had the opinion that until we know you're hiding something bad, you can hide it so no one can come after your for something you do in private that doesn't bother anyone else.
This helps to prevent people from having a bad opinion of you, prejudice and hate.It doesn't however change the fact that it will be used, primarily by people using it to hide illegal activities.
It would be retarded if they DIDN'T watch it and as a tax payer I'd be pissed if they didn't.Reality says that most people have no need to use this sort of protection and that its of very little use to the majority of the people on the planet, even those doing minor illegal activities.I've talked about plenty of things over the phone, email and hell, even posted on bulletin boards (the real ones, cork board and paper with pushpins) at grocery stores about illegal activities.
None of it was anything major of course, minor little crap, all of which were misdemeanors.
There are 2 reasons why nothing ever came of it.A.
It was minor crap, no one actually cares about what I did unless I was stupid enough to do it in front of an ON DUTY cop.B.
Hiding in plain site and blending in with the crowd makes you a lot less obviously a target than the person hiding things, regardless of what you are hiding.So yes, when you make it obvious you're trying to hide something people are going to pay attention to try and figure out what you're hiding, thats being a good detective and what I expect from people who's job is to detect stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30867328</id>
	<title>Re:Tor weaknesses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264185900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea- of course it helps to have a Russian, Chinese, US, or some other corrupt government or official paid off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea- of course it helps to have a Russian , Chinese , US , or some other corrupt government or official paid off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea- of course it helps to have a Russian, Chinese, US, or some other corrupt government or official paid off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857622</id>
	<title>Hmmm, Tor vs IPREDATOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264156860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A better proxy VPN?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A better proxy VPN ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A better proxy VPN?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856258</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute...</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1264094340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With a trilogy. The last two books add depth and detail to the initial book which was mostly inane and lacking in depth. The new details of course reinterpret all the facts, plot, and characters of the first book till the first book is almost unrecognizable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With a trilogy .
The last two books add depth and detail to the initial book which was mostly inane and lacking in depth .
The new details of course reinterpret all the facts , plot , and characters of the first book till the first book is almost unrecognizable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With a trilogy.
The last two books add depth and detail to the initial book which was mostly inane and lacking in depth.
The new details of course reinterpret all the facts, plot, and characters of the first book till the first book is almost unrecognizable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855804</id>
	<title>Re:From: Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264089900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what's so unexpected about it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what 's so unexpected about it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what's so unexpected about it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856024</id>
	<title>Re:Sooo......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264091940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is this modded troll? This is a valid notion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is this modded troll ?
This is a valid notion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is this modded troll?
This is a valid notion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856892</id>
	<title>Re:Tor weaknesses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264102140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There's a lot to be said for hiding in a crowd though.</p> </div><p>Not when the IP headers of every packet sent through every major peer exchange point on this continent is recorded by this government, and the governments that control the intercontinental links each have peering arrangements so that said data is available on a reciprocal basis with other intelligence agencies operating under their respective governments worldwide.</p><p>Most TCP/IP sessions can be reconstructed for months after their original transmission, because the cost of storing said data is so low and there's an intelligence value in having it accessible. Thanks to delta compression algorithms, they don't need to store the complete packet log at each collection point -- because the data is largely the same.</p><p>All of this depends on an interesting fact about entropy: Very little of what you transmit is actually unique. Most of the traffic online is just a retransmit of something sent earlier, which makes the computational resources required to log all internet traffic and store it for months at a time make it a reasonably easy problem to solve. Easy, I mean, for a government with hundreds of millions to throw at the problem, not mere mortals like you or I. And of course there's ways to pair petabytes off the dataset using whitelisting and other data management methods.</p><p>It honestly impresses me that people think that the internet is a substantial barrier to this kind of intelligence gathering; Since it runs on the same networks, uses largely the same technologies, and is often run by the same companies that deliver telecommunications services... Which anyone will tell you give full access to their lines and equipment with the flashing of a badge and a post-it note. You don't even have to buy them a beer after.</p><p>Hiding in a crowd only works if you've done nothing to attract attention to yourself and can hide in statistical obscurity, surfing the noise floor. The moment you do anything even remotely interesting (and using Tor qualifies), bend over and kiss your anonymity goodbye.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a lot to be said for hiding in a crowd though .
Not when the IP headers of every packet sent through every major peer exchange point on this continent is recorded by this government , and the governments that control the intercontinental links each have peering arrangements so that said data is available on a reciprocal basis with other intelligence agencies operating under their respective governments worldwide.Most TCP/IP sessions can be reconstructed for months after their original transmission , because the cost of storing said data is so low and there 's an intelligence value in having it accessible .
Thanks to delta compression algorithms , they do n't need to store the complete packet log at each collection point -- because the data is largely the same.All of this depends on an interesting fact about entropy : Very little of what you transmit is actually unique .
Most of the traffic online is just a retransmit of something sent earlier , which makes the computational resources required to log all internet traffic and store it for months at a time make it a reasonably easy problem to solve .
Easy , I mean , for a government with hundreds of millions to throw at the problem , not mere mortals like you or I. And of course there 's ways to pair petabytes off the dataset using whitelisting and other data management methods.It honestly impresses me that people think that the internet is a substantial barrier to this kind of intelligence gathering ; Since it runs on the same networks , uses largely the same technologies , and is often run by the same companies that deliver telecommunications services... Which anyone will tell you give full access to their lines and equipment with the flashing of a badge and a post-it note .
You do n't even have to buy them a beer after.Hiding in a crowd only works if you 've done nothing to attract attention to yourself and can hide in statistical obscurity , surfing the noise floor .
The moment you do anything even remotely interesting ( and using Tor qualifies ) , bend over and kiss your anonymity goodbye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a lot to be said for hiding in a crowd though.
Not when the IP headers of every packet sent through every major peer exchange point on this continent is recorded by this government, and the governments that control the intercontinental links each have peering arrangements so that said data is available on a reciprocal basis with other intelligence agencies operating under their respective governments worldwide.Most TCP/IP sessions can be reconstructed for months after their original transmission, because the cost of storing said data is so low and there's an intelligence value in having it accessible.
Thanks to delta compression algorithms, they don't need to store the complete packet log at each collection point -- because the data is largely the same.All of this depends on an interesting fact about entropy: Very little of what you transmit is actually unique.
Most of the traffic online is just a retransmit of something sent earlier, which makes the computational resources required to log all internet traffic and store it for months at a time make it a reasonably easy problem to solve.
Easy, I mean, for a government with hundreds of millions to throw at the problem, not mere mortals like you or I. And of course there's ways to pair petabytes off the dataset using whitelisting and other data management methods.It honestly impresses me that people think that the internet is a substantial barrier to this kind of intelligence gathering; Since it runs on the same networks, uses largely the same technologies, and is often run by the same companies that deliver telecommunications services... Which anyone will tell you give full access to their lines and equipment with the flashing of a badge and a post-it note.
You don't even have to buy them a beer after.Hiding in a crowd only works if you've done nothing to attract attention to yourself and can hide in statistical obscurity, surfing the noise floor.
The moment you do anything even remotely interesting (and using Tor qualifies), bend over and kiss your anonymity goodbye.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857542</id>
	<title>Re:Tor weaknesses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264155480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm surprised. That seems very insightful for a girl.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised .
That seems very insightful for a girl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised.
That seems very insightful for a girl.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30869910</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute...</title>
	<author>docwatson223</author>
	<datestamp>1264264860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Online Editions, Kindle,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pdf and for backup you can go Hardback.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Online Editions , Kindle , .pdf and for backup you can go Hardback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Online Editions, Kindle, .pdf and for backup you can go Hardback.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857388</id>
	<title>Oh no!</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1264152900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is torrible news!  The torror...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is torrible news !
The torror.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is torrible news!
The torror...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</id>
	<title>US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264091340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean. That's where I'd go fishing for people trying to communicate secrets,<br>if I was them.</p><p>Now I don't want to spread paranoia, but<br>did you know that the patent on Onion Routing was filed by the US Department of the Navy?<br>Look it up.</p><p>Remember kiddies. Always use your own encryption layer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean .
That 's where I 'd go fishing for people trying to communicate secrets,if I was them.Now I do n't want to spread paranoia , butdid you know that the patent on Onion Routing was filed by the US Department of the Navy ? Look it up.Remember kiddies .
Always use your own encryption layer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean.
That's where I'd go fishing for people trying to communicate secrets,if I was them.Now I don't want to spread paranoia, butdid you know that the patent on Onion Routing was filed by the US Department of the Navy?Look it up.Remember kiddies.
Always use your own encryption layer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856944</id>
	<title>No, they CAN'T all be compromised</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264103040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt that FBI, NSA, CIA, GRU, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_intelligence\_agencies" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">etc.</a> [wikipedia.org] all share their nodes with each other. As such, it is reasonable assumption that each node only belongs to one (or two at most) intelligence agency.</p><p>Now, if there are enough of such agencies, each controls so small partition of the nodes that it isn't a problem. On the other hand, if one agency has a wide control over the network, it means that the other agencies have very limited control. That leads us to a situation where Tor is useful against all but one agency, which isn't that shabby either.</p><p>There are some problems - it might be that all nodes in russia are controlled by GRU (though I really doubt CIA would let that happen) - but most of such are negated as long as the routing goes through nodes in several countries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt that FBI , NSA , CIA , GRU , etc .
[ wikipedia.org ] all share their nodes with each other .
As such , it is reasonable assumption that each node only belongs to one ( or two at most ) intelligence agency.Now , if there are enough of such agencies , each controls so small partition of the nodes that it is n't a problem .
On the other hand , if one agency has a wide control over the network , it means that the other agencies have very limited control .
That leads us to a situation where Tor is useful against all but one agency , which is n't that shabby either.There are some problems - it might be that all nodes in russia are controlled by GRU ( though I really doubt CIA would let that happen ) - but most of such are negated as long as the routing goes through nodes in several countries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt that FBI, NSA, CIA, GRU, etc.
[wikipedia.org] all share their nodes with each other.
As such, it is reasonable assumption that each node only belongs to one (or two at most) intelligence agency.Now, if there are enough of such agencies, each controls so small partition of the nodes that it isn't a problem.
On the other hand, if one agency has a wide control over the network, it means that the other agencies have very limited control.
That leads us to a situation where Tor is useful against all but one agency, which isn't that shabby either.There are some problems - it might be that all nodes in russia are controlled by GRU (though I really doubt CIA would let that happen) - but most of such are negated as long as the routing goes through nodes in several countries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856066</id>
	<title>I'll be the lemming this time...the obligatory:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264092360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the chinese did it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the chinese did it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the chinese did it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722</id>
	<title>From: Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264089300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone else find it so funny that a news story about anonymity is suggested to slashdot by anonymous coward?</p><p>I think it's the best form of joke... one with an epic amount of unexpected expectedness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else find it so funny that a news story about anonymity is suggested to slashdot by anonymous coward ? I think it 's the best form of joke... one with an epic amount of unexpected expectedness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else find it so funny that a news story about anonymity is suggested to slashdot by anonymous coward?I think it's the best form of joke... one with an epic amount of unexpected expectedness.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790</id>
	<title>Tor weaknesses</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1264089840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with Tor is that there's no way to detect compromises -- every node on the network could be compromised and you'd never know. Authors of botnets have greater anonymity than we do -- ironically because it's run by a central authority. An illegal and immoral one, yes, but one that comes with a measure of anonymity. Few botnet authors are actually caught even with the most primitive security methods. They don't even use encryption and they often can't be found...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Tor is that there 's no way to detect compromises -- every node on the network could be compromised and you 'd never know .
Authors of botnets have greater anonymity than we do -- ironically because it 's run by a central authority .
An illegal and immoral one , yes , but one that comes with a measure of anonymity .
Few botnet authors are actually caught even with the most primitive security methods .
They do n't even use encryption and they often ca n't be found.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Tor is that there's no way to detect compromises -- every node on the network could be compromised and you'd never know.
Authors of botnets have greater anonymity than we do -- ironically because it's run by a central authority.
An illegal and immoral one, yes, but one that comes with a measure of anonymity.
Few botnet authors are actually caught even with the most primitive security methods.
They don't even use encryption and they often can't be found...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856594</id>
	<title>Wow, that's a lot of porn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264098120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>May be they trying to enter adult content industry...</htmltext>
<tokenext>May be they trying to enter adult content industry.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>May be they trying to enter adult content industry...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856682</id>
	<title>Re:From: Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1264099260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A joke?  How, exactly, is it funny?  I'm curious to know.  Who cares who submits the stories, anyway?  Half of them turn out to be fakes or misleading anyway.<p>The real TOR way to do it would <b>not</b> be anonymously, but instead giving it to another person's slashdot account, who submits it for you.  But go ahead with the "funny" "jokes".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A joke ?
How , exactly , is it funny ?
I 'm curious to know .
Who cares who submits the stories , anyway ?
Half of them turn out to be fakes or misleading anyway.The real TOR way to do it would not be anonymously , but instead giving it to another person 's slashdot account , who submits it for you .
But go ahead with the " funny " " jokes " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A joke?
How, exactly, is it funny?
I'm curious to know.
Who cares who submits the stories, anyway?
Half of them turn out to be fakes or misleading anyway.The real TOR way to do it would not be anonymously, but instead giving it to another person's slashdot account, who submits it for you.
But go ahead with the "funny" "jokes".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30858036</id>
	<title>Re:Sooo......</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1264162980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The price of freedom isn't vigilance in this time and age, it's having to deal with unpopular content.</p><p>Is tor used by people who want to circumvent laws for whatever reason? Yes. Duh. Basically that's what it was created for. We deem it positive that tor allows dissidents to avoid their laws concerning the freedom of speech, but we don't deem it positive that it also allows the circumvention of our laws. That's very human, but also quite a bit of a double standard.</p><p>I hope<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is a bit above the killer arguments of "think of the children" (honestly, if you think of the children all the time, you're prolly a pedo yourself) and we're able to look at it from a bit of a detached position. Because that's what we have to deal with here. Basically swapping child porn in the US is, at least from a purely content point of view, not different from swapping anti-government ideas in China: Both is illegal, and both requires additional security to be done without prosecution. The question is now whether we're willing to accept the existance of the former to enable the latter. You will only get them together. Is the freedom of the Chinese people (and, given the recent development in the west, probably ours soon, too) worth it, knowing that this will also allow communication of pedophiles, terrorists, spies and maybe even worse? Or should we toss both? That's basically the options we have.</p><p>And before someone replies with "but tor doesn't allow chinese to discuss freely, isn't secure, etc": This isn't just about tor. That question affects all tools that allow free speech. The question is, is free speech worth dealing with the effects of free speech that you do not want to exist?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The price of freedom is n't vigilance in this time and age , it 's having to deal with unpopular content.Is tor used by people who want to circumvent laws for whatever reason ?
Yes. Duh .
Basically that 's what it was created for .
We deem it positive that tor allows dissidents to avoid their laws concerning the freedom of speech , but we do n't deem it positive that it also allows the circumvention of our laws .
That 's very human , but also quite a bit of a double standard.I hope / .
is a bit above the killer arguments of " think of the children " ( honestly , if you think of the children all the time , you 're prolly a pedo yourself ) and we 're able to look at it from a bit of a detached position .
Because that 's what we have to deal with here .
Basically swapping child porn in the US is , at least from a purely content point of view , not different from swapping anti-government ideas in China : Both is illegal , and both requires additional security to be done without prosecution .
The question is now whether we 're willing to accept the existance of the former to enable the latter .
You will only get them together .
Is the freedom of the Chinese people ( and , given the recent development in the west , probably ours soon , too ) worth it , knowing that this will also allow communication of pedophiles , terrorists , spies and maybe even worse ?
Or should we toss both ?
That 's basically the options we have.And before someone replies with " but tor does n't allow chinese to discuss freely , is n't secure , etc " : This is n't just about tor .
That question affects all tools that allow free speech .
The question is , is free speech worth dealing with the effects of free speech that you do not want to exist ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The price of freedom isn't vigilance in this time and age, it's having to deal with unpopular content.Is tor used by people who want to circumvent laws for whatever reason?
Yes. Duh.
Basically that's what it was created for.
We deem it positive that tor allows dissidents to avoid their laws concerning the freedom of speech, but we don't deem it positive that it also allows the circumvention of our laws.
That's very human, but also quite a bit of a double standard.I hope /.
is a bit above the killer arguments of "think of the children" (honestly, if you think of the children all the time, you're prolly a pedo yourself) and we're able to look at it from a bit of a detached position.
Because that's what we have to deal with here.
Basically swapping child porn in the US is, at least from a purely content point of view, not different from swapping anti-government ideas in China: Both is illegal, and both requires additional security to be done without prosecution.
The question is now whether we're willing to accept the existance of the former to enable the latter.
You will only get them together.
Is the freedom of the Chinese people (and, given the recent development in the west, probably ours soon, too) worth it, knowing that this will also allow communication of pedophiles, terrorists, spies and maybe even worse?
Or should we toss both?
That's basically the options we have.And before someone replies with "but tor doesn't allow chinese to discuss freely, isn't secure, etc": This isn't just about tor.
That question affects all tools that allow free speech.
The question is, is free speech worth dealing with the effects of free speech that you do not want to exist?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855738</id>
	<title>Por</title>
	<author>hoboroadie</author>
	<datestamp>1264089420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>quoi?</htmltext>
<tokenext>quoi ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>quoi?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856314</id>
	<title>Re:Snail Mail</title>
	<author>MrNaz</author>
	<datestamp>1264094880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear John &amp; Cynthia.<br>Thank you for all your support this year, and I wish you all the best for the next.<br>Yours truly,<br>John and Sarah.</p><p>P.S., Attack at dawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear John &amp; Cynthia.Thank you for all your support this year , and I wish you all the best for the next.Yours truly,John and Sarah.P.S. , Attack at dawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear John &amp; Cynthia.Thank you for all your support this year, and I wish you all the best for the next.Yours truly,John and Sarah.P.S., Attack at dawn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855964</id>
	<title>Re:From: Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264091280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you think that's funny, why not gather some Tor Bridges for each day's use and use them instead of regularly connecting to Tor?</p><p><a href="https://bridges.torproject.org/" title="torproject.org" rel="nofollow">https://bridges.torproject.org/</a> [torproject.org]</p><p>Here's some useful tor bridges from today:</p><p>bridge 212.185.225.5:443<br>bridge 109.120.56.218:443<br>bridge 203.153.227.210:5557<br>bridge 174.22.134.22:443<br>bridge 68.52.174.15:443<br>bridge 79.84.34.209:443<br>bridge 18.85.46.218:14242<br>bridge 74.82.1.191:19030<br>bridge 24.110.168.130:443<br>bridge 78.34.108.121:443<br>bridge 94.23.58.19:1443<br>bridge 72.24.220.108:443<br>bridge 74.207.232.33:443<br>bridge 77.251.74.120:443<br>bridge 72.174.8.28:443<br>bridge 91.6.174.212:8888<br>bridge 169.234.106.251:9001<br>bridge 69.62.132.186:443<br>bridge 97.102.122.25:443<br>bridge 129.244.144.200:9001<br>bridge 83.169.1.47:442<br>bridge 188.40.112.195:443<br>bridge 92.107.52.186:9001<br>bridge 79.6.97.120:443<br>bridge 66.51.242.115:9001<br>bridge 92.25.201.211:443<br>bridge 93.194.192.154:8080<br>bridge 121.190.2.55:443</p><p>just add them to your torrc file along with:</p><p>UseBridges 1</p><p>And enjoy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think that 's funny , why not gather some Tor Bridges for each day 's use and use them instead of regularly connecting to Tor ? https : //bridges.torproject.org/ [ torproject.org ] Here 's some useful tor bridges from today : bridge 212.185.225.5 : 443bridge 109.120.56.218 : 443bridge 203.153.227.210 : 5557bridge 174.22.134.22 : 443bridge 68.52.174.15 : 443bridge 79.84.34.209 : 443bridge 18.85.46.218 : 14242bridge 74.82.1.191 : 19030bridge 24.110.168.130 : 443bridge 78.34.108.121 : 443bridge 94.23.58.19 : 1443bridge 72.24.220.108 : 443bridge 74.207.232.33 : 443bridge 77.251.74.120 : 443bridge 72.174.8.28 : 443bridge 91.6.174.212 : 8888bridge 169.234.106.251 : 9001bridge 69.62.132.186 : 443bridge 97.102.122.25 : 443bridge 129.244.144.200 : 9001bridge 83.169.1.47 : 442bridge 188.40.112.195 : 443bridge 92.107.52.186 : 9001bridge 79.6.97.120 : 443bridge 66.51.242.115 : 9001bridge 92.25.201.211 : 443bridge 93.194.192.154 : 8080bridge 121.190.2.55 : 443just add them to your torrc file along with : UseBridges 1And enjoy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think that's funny, why not gather some Tor Bridges for each day's use and use them instead of regularly connecting to Tor?https://bridges.torproject.org/ [torproject.org]Here's some useful tor bridges from today:bridge 212.185.225.5:443bridge 109.120.56.218:443bridge 203.153.227.210:5557bridge 174.22.134.22:443bridge 68.52.174.15:443bridge 79.84.34.209:443bridge 18.85.46.218:14242bridge 74.82.1.191:19030bridge 24.110.168.130:443bridge 78.34.108.121:443bridge 94.23.58.19:1443bridge 72.24.220.108:443bridge 74.207.232.33:443bridge 77.251.74.120:443bridge 72.174.8.28:443bridge 91.6.174.212:8888bridge 169.234.106.251:9001bridge 69.62.132.186:443bridge 97.102.122.25:443bridge 129.244.144.200:9001bridge 83.169.1.47:442bridge 188.40.112.195:443bridge 92.107.52.186:9001bridge 79.6.97.120:443bridge 66.51.242.115:9001bridge 92.25.201.211:443bridge 93.194.192.154:8080bridge 121.190.2.55:443just add them to your torrc file along with:UseBridges 1And enjoy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768</id>
	<title>Sooo......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264089600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many child porn downloaders and uploaders are shitting their pants right about now? My guess is more than spies and Chinese dissidents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many child porn downloaders and uploaders are shitting their pants right about now ?
My guess is more than spies and Chinese dissidents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many child porn downloaders and uploaders are shitting their pants right about now?
My guess is more than spies and Chinese dissidents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856186</id>
	<title>New Tor attacks and anonimity attacks all the time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264093620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <b>Attacking Tor at the Application Layer</b> </p><p> <a href="http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-gregory\_fleischer-attacking\_tor.pdf" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-gregory\_fleischer-attacking\_tor.pdf</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Slides.m4v" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Slides.m4v</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/audio/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Audio.m4b" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/audio/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Audio.m4b</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <b>Sniff Keystrokes With Lasers/Voltmeters - Side Channel Attacks Using Optical Sampling Of Mechanical Energy And Power Line<br>Leakage:</b> </p><p> <a href="http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff\_keystrokes.pdf" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff\_keystrokes.pdf</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/Andrea\_Barisani-Daniele\_\%20Bianco/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff\_keystrokes-wp.pdf" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/Andrea\_Barisani-Daniele\_\%20Bianco/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff\_keystrokes-wp.pdf</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Andrea\%20Barisani\%20and\%20Daniele\%20Bianco\%20-\%20Sniffing\%20Keystrockes\%20with\%20Lasers\%20and\%20Voltmeters\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Andrea\%20Barisani\%20and\%20Daniele\%20Bianco\%20-\%20Sniffing\%20Keystrockes\%20with\%20Lasers\%20and\%20Voltmeters\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <b>Router Exploitation</b> </p><p> <a href="http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-fx-wp.pdf" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-fx-wp.pdf</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20FX\%20-\%20Router\%20Exploitation\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20FX\%20-\%20Router\%20Exploitation\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <a href="https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20FX\%20-\%20Router\%20Exploitation\%20-\%20Slides.m4v" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20FX\%20-\%20Router\%20Exploitation\%20-\%20Slides.m4v</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <b>Unmasking You</b> </p><p> <a href="http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-abraham-hansen-unmasking\_you.pdf" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-abraham-hansen-unmasking\_you.pdf</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <b>Tactical Fingerprinting Using Metadata, Hidden Info and Lost Data</b> </p><p> <a href="http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-alonso-palazon-tactical\_fingerprinting.pdf" title="defcon.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-alonso-palazon-tactical\_fingerprinting.pdf</a> [defcon.org] </p><p> <b>Down the R</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attacking Tor at the Application Layer http : //www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-gregory \ _fleischer-attacking \ _tor.pdf [ defcon.org ] https : //media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON \ % 2017 \ % 20Hacking \ % 20Conference \ % 20Presentation \ % 20By \ % 20Gregory \ % 20Fleischer \ % 20- \ % 20Attacking \ % 20Tor \ % 20and \ % 20the \ % 20Application \ % 20Layer \ % 20- \ % 20Video \ % 20and \ % 20Slides.m4v [ defcon.org ] https : //media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON \ % 2017 \ % 20Hacking \ % 20Conference \ % 20Presentation \ % 20By \ % 20Gregory \ % 20Fleischer \ % 20- \ % 20Attacking \ % 20Tor \ % 20and \ % 20the \ % 20Application \ % 20Layer \ % 20- \ % 20Slides.m4v [ defcon.org ] https : //media.defcon.org/dc-17/audio/DEFCON \ % 2017 \ % 20Hacking \ % 20Conference \ % 20Presentation \ % 20By \ % 20Gregory \ % 20Fleischer \ % 20- \ % 20Attacking \ % 20Tor \ % 20and \ % 20the \ % 20Application \ % 20Layer \ % 20- \ % 20Audio.m4b [ defcon.org ] Sniff Keystrokes With Lasers/Voltmeters - Side Channel Attacks Using Optical Sampling Of Mechanical Energy And Power LineLeakage : http : //www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff \ _keystrokes.pdf [ defcon.org ] http : //www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/Andrea \ _Barisani-Daniele \ _ \ % 20Bianco/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff \ _keystrokes-wp.pdf [ defcon.org ] https : //media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON \ % 2017 \ % 20Hacking \ % 20Conference \ % 20Presentation \ % 20By \ % 20Andrea \ % 20Barisani \ % 20and \ % 20Daniele \ % 20Bianco \ % 20- \ % 20Sniffing \ % 20Keystrockes \ % 20with \ % 20Lasers \ % 20and \ % 20Voltmeters \ % 20- \ % 20Video \ % 20and \ % 20Slides.m4v [ defcon.org ] Router Exploitation http : //www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-fx-wp.pdf [ defcon.org ] https : //media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON \ % 2017 \ % 20Hacking \ % 20Conference \ % 20Presentation \ % 20By \ % 20FX \ % 20- \ % 20Router \ % 20Exploitation \ % 20- \ % 20Video \ % 20and \ % 20Slides.m4v [ defcon.org ] https : //media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON \ % 2017 \ % 20Hacking \ % 20Conference \ % 20Presentation \ % 20By \ % 20FX \ % 20- \ % 20Router \ % 20Exploitation \ % 20- \ % 20Slides.m4v [ defcon.org ] Unmasking You http : //www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-abraham-hansen-unmasking \ _you.pdf [ defcon.org ] Tactical Fingerprinting Using Metadata , Hidden Info and Lost Data http : //www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-alonso-palazon-tactical \ _fingerprinting.pdf [ defcon.org ] Down the R</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Attacking Tor at the Application Layer  http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-gregory\_fleischer-attacking\_tor.pdf [defcon.org]  https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v [defcon.org]  https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Slides.m4v [defcon.org]  https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/audio/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Gregory\%20Fleischer\%20-\%20Attacking\%20Tor\%20and\%20the\%20Application\%20Layer\%20-\%20Audio.m4b [defcon.org]  Sniff Keystrokes With Lasers/Voltmeters - Side Channel Attacks Using Optical Sampling Of Mechanical Energy And Power LineLeakage:  http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff\_keystrokes.pdf [defcon.org]  http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/Andrea\_Barisani-Daniele\_\%20Bianco/defcon-17-barisani-bianco-sniff\_keystrokes-wp.pdf [defcon.org]  https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20Andrea\%20Barisani\%20and\%20Daniele\%20Bianco\%20-\%20Sniffing\%20Keystrockes\%20with\%20Lasers\%20and\%20Voltmeters\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v [defcon.org]  Router Exploitation  http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-fx-wp.pdf [defcon.org]  https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20FX\%20-\%20Router\%20Exploitation\%20-\%20Video\%20and\%20Slides.m4v [defcon.org]  https://media.defcon.org/dc-17/video/DEFCON\%2017\%20Hacking\%20Conference\%20Presentation\%20By\%20FX\%20-\%20Router\%20Exploitation\%20-\%20Slides.m4v [defcon.org]  Unmasking You  http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-abraham-hansen-unmasking\_you.pdf [defcon.org]  Tactical Fingerprinting Using Metadata, Hidden Info and Lost Data  http://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-17/dc-17-presentations/defcon-17-alonso-palazon-tactical\_fingerprinting.pdf [defcon.org]  Down the R</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859684</id>
	<title>Tin Foil Hat Securely On</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTA: "A friendly anonymous sponsor has provided a pile of new servers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p><p>Hairs standing on the back of my neck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : " A friendly anonymous sponsor has provided a pile of new servers ... " Hairs standing on the back of my neck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: "A friendly anonymous sponsor has provided a pile of new servers ..."Hairs standing on the back of my neck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855690</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264089000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>post</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859580</id>
	<title>Re:Tor WILL get people killed, if it hasn't alread</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1264176660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fighting oppression has always gotten people killed.  If Tor allows people to speak out with less risk, it's done it's job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fighting oppression has always gotten people killed .
If Tor allows people to speak out with less risk , it 's done it 's job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fighting oppression has always gotten people killed.
If Tor allows people to speak out with less risk, it's done it's job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857234</id>
	<title>Tor WILL get people killed, if it hasn't already</title>
	<author>jyoull</author>
	<datestamp>1264193220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TOR apologists, no fair modding down these comments just because you don't like them.</p><p>I wish the holier than thous behind the Tor movement would stop with their outrageous and indefensible claims about the protections Tor allegedly provides.</p><p>I tried to have this discussion with, among others, people who've made "names for themselves" traveling from conference to conference blustering about how Tor is making the Internet safe for unpopular opinions in places where an unpopular opinion can get you disappeared right quick (hello China)... shouted down every time because it's not a POPULAR point of view.</p><p>I see that I'm not the only one in this discussion with concerns. Thank god things are changing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TOR apologists , no fair modding down these comments just because you do n't like them.I wish the holier than thous behind the Tor movement would stop with their outrageous and indefensible claims about the protections Tor allegedly provides.I tried to have this discussion with , among others , people who 've made " names for themselves " traveling from conference to conference blustering about how Tor is making the Internet safe for unpopular opinions in places where an unpopular opinion can get you disappeared right quick ( hello China ) ... shouted down every time because it 's not a POPULAR point of view.I see that I 'm not the only one in this discussion with concerns .
Thank god things are changing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TOR apologists, no fair modding down these comments just because you don't like them.I wish the holier than thous behind the Tor movement would stop with their outrageous and indefensible claims about the protections Tor allegedly provides.I tried to have this discussion with, among others, people who've made "names for themselves" traveling from conference to conference blustering about how Tor is making the Internet safe for unpopular opinions in places where an unpopular opinion can get you disappeared right quick (hello China)... shouted down every time because it's not a POPULAR point of view.I see that I'm not the only one in this discussion with concerns.
Thank god things are changing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856326</id>
	<title>Re:Further Details From Roger On or-talk mailing l</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264095000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"A friendly anonymous sponsor has provided a pile of new servers, and git and svn are now up in their new locations."</p><p>Am I the only one to find this suspiciously timely? Did the "anonymous sponsor" guarantee that none of the onboard chips/chipset were made in China or tampered with?</p><p>I think I just stopped using Tor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" A friendly anonymous sponsor has provided a pile of new servers , and git and svn are now up in their new locations .
" Am I the only one to find this suspiciously timely ?
Did the " anonymous sponsor " guarantee that none of the onboard chips/chipset were made in China or tampered with ? I think I just stopped using Tor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A friendly anonymous sponsor has provided a pile of new servers, and git and svn are now up in their new locations.
"Am I the only one to find this suspiciously timely?
Did the "anonymous sponsor" guarantee that none of the onboard chips/chipset were made in China or tampered with?I think I just stopped using Tor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856228</id>
	<title>Re:From: Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264094100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's funny that the only person who is not anonymous is Roger Dingledingle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's funny that the only person who is not anonymous is Roger Dingledingle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's funny that the only person who is not anonymous is Roger Dingledingle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854</id>
	<title>Wait a minute...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264090200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you update a Tor SF paparback book?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you update a Tor SF paparback book ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you update a Tor SF paparback book?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857962</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1264162020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You better stop using the internet. Remember who invented it? Hint: It wasn't Al Gore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You better stop using the internet .
Remember who invented it ?
Hint : It was n't Al Gore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You better stop using the internet.
Remember who invented it?
Hint: It wasn't Al Gore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855820</id>
	<title>Further Details From Roger On or-talk mailing list</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264090080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Roger's entries to date on the subject (excluding first page linked within<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. summary):</p><p>(this is for those who are too lazy to page through mailing list threads, this post is<br>missing other individuals replies as well as future replies from Roger and others)</p><p> <a href="http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/Jan-2010/msg00165.html" title="seul.org" rel="nofollow">http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/Jan-2010/msg00165.html</a> [seul.org] </p><p>Here are some more technical details about the potential impacts, for<br>those who want to know more about Tor's innards:</p><p>----- #1: Directory authority keys</p><p>Owning two out of seven directory authorities isn't enough to make a new<br>networkstatus consensus (you need four for that), but it means you've<br>only got two more to go. We've generated new v3 long-term identity keys<br>for these two authorities.</p><p>The old v3 long-term identity keys probably aren't compromised, since<br>they weren't stored on the affected machines, but they signed v3 signing<br>keys that are valid until 2010-04-12 in the case of moria1 and until<br>2010-05-04 in the case of gabelmoo. That's still a pretty big window,<br>so it's best to upgrade clients away from trusting those keys.</p><p>You should upgrade to 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha, which uses the new v3<br>long-term identity keys (with a new set of signing keys).</p><p>----- #2: Relay identity keys</p><p>We already have a way to cleanly migrate to a new v3 long-term identity<br>key, because we needed one for the Debian weak RNG bug:<br> <a href="http://archives.seul.org/or/announce/May-2008/msg00000.html" title="seul.org" rel="nofollow">http://archives.seul.org/or/announce/May-2008/msg00000.html</a> [seul.org] </p><p>But we don't have a way to cleanly migrate relay identity keys. An<br>attacker who knows moria1's relay identity key can craft a new descriptor<br>for it with a new onion key (or even a new IP address), and then<br>man-in-the-middle traffic coming to the relay. They wouldn't be able to<br>spoof directory statements, or break the encryption for further relays<br>in the path, but it still removes one layer of the defense-in-depth.</p><p>Normally there's nothing special about the relay identity key (if you<br>lose yours, just generate another one), but relay identity keys for<br>directory authorities are hard-coded in the Tor bundle so the client<br>can detect man-in-the-middle attacks on bootstrapping.</p><p>So we abandoned the old relay identity keys too. That means abandoning<br>the old IP:port the authorities were listening on, or older clients will<br>produce warn messages whenever they connect to the new authority. Older<br>Tor clients can now take longer to bootstrap if they try the abandoned<br>addresses first. (You should upgrade.)</p><p>----- #3: Infrastructure services</p><p>Moria also hosted our git repository and svn repository. I took the<br>services offline as soon as we learned of the breach -- in theory a clever<br>attacker could give out altered files to people who check out the source,<br>or even tailor his answers based on who's doing the git update. We're<br>in pretty good shape for git though: the git tree is a set of hashes<br>all the way back to the root, so when you update your git tree, it will<br>automatically notice any tampering.</p><p>As explained in the last mail, it appears the attackers didn't realize<br>what they broke into. We had already been slowly migrating Tor services<br>off of moria (it runs too many services for too many different projects),<br>so we took this opportunity to speed up that plan. A friendly anonymous<br>sponsor has provided a pile of new servers, and git and svn are now up<br>in their new locations. The only remaining Tor infrastructure services on<br>moria are the directory authority, the mailing lists, and a DNS secondary.</p><p>----- #4: Bridge descriptors</p><p>The metrics server had an archive of bridge descriptors from 2009.<br>We used the descriptors to create summary graphs of bridge count and<br>bridge usage by country, like the ones you can see at<br> <a href="http://metrics.torproject.org/graphs.html" title="torproject.org" rel="nofollow">http://metrics.torproject.</a> [torproject.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Roger 's entries to date on the subject ( excluding first page linked within / .
summary ) : ( this is for those who are too lazy to page through mailing list threads , this post ismissing other individuals replies as well as future replies from Roger and others ) http : //archives.seul.org/or/talk/Jan-2010/msg00165.html [ seul.org ] Here are some more technical details about the potential impacts , forthose who want to know more about Tor 's innards : ----- # 1 : Directory authority keysOwning two out of seven directory authorities is n't enough to make a newnetworkstatus consensus ( you need four for that ) , but it means you'veonly got two more to go .
We 've generated new v3 long-term identity keysfor these two authorities.The old v3 long-term identity keys probably are n't compromised , sincethey were n't stored on the affected machines , but they signed v3 signingkeys that are valid until 2010-04-12 in the case of moria1 and until2010-05-04 in the case of gabelmoo .
That 's still a pretty big window,so it 's best to upgrade clients away from trusting those keys.You should upgrade to 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha , which uses the new v3long-term identity keys ( with a new set of signing keys ) .----- # 2 : Relay identity keysWe already have a way to cleanly migrate to a new v3 long-term identitykey , because we needed one for the Debian weak RNG bug : http : //archives.seul.org/or/announce/May-2008/msg00000.html [ seul.org ] But we do n't have a way to cleanly migrate relay identity keys .
Anattacker who knows moria1 's relay identity key can craft a new descriptorfor it with a new onion key ( or even a new IP address ) , and thenman-in-the-middle traffic coming to the relay .
They would n't be able tospoof directory statements , or break the encryption for further relaysin the path , but it still removes one layer of the defense-in-depth.Normally there 's nothing special about the relay identity key ( if youlose yours , just generate another one ) , but relay identity keys fordirectory authorities are hard-coded in the Tor bundle so the clientcan detect man-in-the-middle attacks on bootstrapping.So we abandoned the old relay identity keys too .
That means abandoningthe old IP : port the authorities were listening on , or older clients willproduce warn messages whenever they connect to the new authority .
OlderTor clients can now take longer to bootstrap if they try the abandonedaddresses first .
( You should upgrade .
) ----- # 3 : Infrastructure servicesMoria also hosted our git repository and svn repository .
I took theservices offline as soon as we learned of the breach -- in theory a cleverattacker could give out altered files to people who check out the source,or even tailor his answers based on who 's doing the git update .
We'rein pretty good shape for git though : the git tree is a set of hashesall the way back to the root , so when you update your git tree , it willautomatically notice any tampering.As explained in the last mail , it appears the attackers did n't realizewhat they broke into .
We had already been slowly migrating Tor servicesoff of moria ( it runs too many services for too many different projects ) ,so we took this opportunity to speed up that plan .
A friendly anonymoussponsor has provided a pile of new servers , and git and svn are now upin their new locations .
The only remaining Tor infrastructure services onmoria are the directory authority , the mailing lists , and a DNS secondary.----- # 4 : Bridge descriptorsThe metrics server had an archive of bridge descriptors from 2009.We used the descriptors to create summary graphs of bridge count andbridge usage by country , like the ones you can see at http : //metrics.torproject .
[ torproject.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roger's entries to date on the subject (excluding first page linked within /.
summary):(this is for those who are too lazy to page through mailing list threads, this post ismissing other individuals replies as well as future replies from Roger and others) http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/Jan-2010/msg00165.html [seul.org] Here are some more technical details about the potential impacts, forthose who want to know more about Tor's innards:----- #1: Directory authority keysOwning two out of seven directory authorities isn't enough to make a newnetworkstatus consensus (you need four for that), but it means you'veonly got two more to go.
We've generated new v3 long-term identity keysfor these two authorities.The old v3 long-term identity keys probably aren't compromised, sincethey weren't stored on the affected machines, but they signed v3 signingkeys that are valid until 2010-04-12 in the case of moria1 and until2010-05-04 in the case of gabelmoo.
That's still a pretty big window,so it's best to upgrade clients away from trusting those keys.You should upgrade to 0.2.1.22 or 0.2.2.7-alpha, which uses the new v3long-term identity keys (with a new set of signing keys).----- #2: Relay identity keysWe already have a way to cleanly migrate to a new v3 long-term identitykey, because we needed one for the Debian weak RNG bug: http://archives.seul.org/or/announce/May-2008/msg00000.html [seul.org] But we don't have a way to cleanly migrate relay identity keys.
Anattacker who knows moria1's relay identity key can craft a new descriptorfor it with a new onion key (or even a new IP address), and thenman-in-the-middle traffic coming to the relay.
They wouldn't be able tospoof directory statements, or break the encryption for further relaysin the path, but it still removes one layer of the defense-in-depth.Normally there's nothing special about the relay identity key (if youlose yours, just generate another one), but relay identity keys fordirectory authorities are hard-coded in the Tor bundle so the clientcan detect man-in-the-middle attacks on bootstrapping.So we abandoned the old relay identity keys too.
That means abandoningthe old IP:port the authorities were listening on, or older clients willproduce warn messages whenever they connect to the new authority.
OlderTor clients can now take longer to bootstrap if they try the abandonedaddresses first.
(You should upgrade.
)----- #3: Infrastructure servicesMoria also hosted our git repository and svn repository.
I took theservices offline as soon as we learned of the breach -- in theory a cleverattacker could give out altered files to people who check out the source,or even tailor his answers based on who's doing the git update.
We'rein pretty good shape for git though: the git tree is a set of hashesall the way back to the root, so when you update your git tree, it willautomatically notice any tampering.As explained in the last mail, it appears the attackers didn't realizewhat they broke into.
We had already been slowly migrating Tor servicesoff of moria (it runs too many services for too many different projects),so we took this opportunity to speed up that plan.
A friendly anonymoussponsor has provided a pile of new servers, and git and svn are now upin their new locations.
The only remaining Tor infrastructure services onmoria are the directory authority, the mailing lists, and a DNS secondary.----- #4: Bridge descriptorsThe metrics server had an archive of bridge descriptors from 2009.We used the descriptors to create summary graphs of bridge count andbridge usage by country, like the ones you can see at http://metrics.torproject.
[torproject.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856436</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>noz</author>
	<datestamp>1264096260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is because the US Navy are the initial authors of Tor. It was opened when they no longer withed to maintain it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is because the US Navy are the initial authors of Tor .
It was opened when they no longer withed to maintain it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is because the US Navy are the initial authors of Tor.
It was opened when they no longer withed to maintain it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856126</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264093020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They probably do more than just monitor. They almost certainly run their own exit nodes so they can log everything flowing through what they pwn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They probably do more than just monitor .
They almost certainly run their own exit nodes so they can log everything flowing through what they pwn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They probably do more than just monitor.
They almost certainly run their own exit nodes so they can log everything flowing through what they pwn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857176</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>djupedal</author>
	<datestamp>1264192440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>&gt;Hiding in plain site and blending in with the crowd makes you a lot less obviously a target than the person hiding things, regardless of what you are hiding.</i>
<br>
<br>
Comparing your anecdote about hiding inside a group of grocery store customers doesn't apply to the debate at hand. How does one 'hide' in the manner you propose when they elect to do it inside a (tor) group that is already flagged as being watch-worthy?
<br>
<br>
If the group was looting the store, and you wanted to loot too, would there be any logic to stating "I'm hiding by being inside the group of looters!"? At that point you are either a tor user or you're not. If you're a tor user it is silly to claim hiding rights inside the group.
<br>
<br>
Reset and try again, please, thanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Hiding in plain site and blending in with the crowd makes you a lot less obviously a target than the person hiding things , regardless of what you are hiding .
Comparing your anecdote about hiding inside a group of grocery store customers does n't apply to the debate at hand .
How does one 'hide ' in the manner you propose when they elect to do it inside a ( tor ) group that is already flagged as being watch-worthy ?
If the group was looting the store , and you wanted to loot too , would there be any logic to stating " I 'm hiding by being inside the group of looters ! " ?
At that point you are either a tor user or you 're not .
If you 're a tor user it is silly to claim hiding rights inside the group .
Reset and try again , please , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Hiding in plain site and blending in with the crowd makes you a lot less obviously a target than the person hiding things, regardless of what you are hiding.
Comparing your anecdote about hiding inside a group of grocery store customers doesn't apply to the debate at hand.
How does one 'hide' in the manner you propose when they elect to do it inside a (tor) group that is already flagged as being watch-worthy?
If the group was looting the store, and you wanted to loot too, would there be any logic to stating "I'm hiding by being inside the group of looters!"?
At that point you are either a tor user or you're not.
If you're a tor user it is silly to claim hiding rights inside the group.
Reset and try again, please, thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855992</id>
	<title>Re:Sooo......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264091580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love it when clueless people comment and show their ignorance, it's good for future reference.<p><div class="quote"><p>It still seems this breach is unrelated to Tor itself. To be clear, it doesn't
seem that anyone specifically attacked our servers to get at Tor. It
seems we were attacked for the cpu capacity and bandwidth of the servers,
and the servers just happened to also carry out functions for Tor.<br>
<br>
* Does this mean someone could have matched users up to their
destinations?<br>
No....<br>
<br>
* Does this mean someone could have learned more about Tor than an
ordinary user?<br>
Since our software and specifications are open, everyone already has
access to almost everything on these machines...</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love it when clueless people comment and show their ignorance , it 's good for future reference.It still seems this breach is unrelated to Tor itself .
To be clear , it does n't seem that anyone specifically attacked our servers to get at Tor .
It seems we were attacked for the cpu capacity and bandwidth of the servers , and the servers just happened to also carry out functions for Tor .
* Does this mean someone could have matched users up to their destinations ?
No... . * Does this mean someone could have learned more about Tor than an ordinary user ?
Since our software and specifications are open , everyone already has access to almost everything on these machines.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love it when clueless people comment and show their ignorance, it's good for future reference.It still seems this breach is unrelated to Tor itself.
To be clear, it doesn't
seem that anyone specifically attacked our servers to get at Tor.
It
seems we were attacked for the cpu capacity and bandwidth of the servers,
and the servers just happened to also carry out functions for Tor.
* Does this mean someone could have matched users up to their
destinations?
No....

* Does this mean someone could have learned more about Tor than an
ordinary user?
Since our software and specifications are open, everyone already has
access to almost everything on these machines...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857950</id>
	<title>What was the cause of the breach?</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1264161900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The links are not very informative about what allowed the breach to happen. Was a security model vulnerability? man-in-the-middle attack? buffer overflow?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The links are not very informative about what allowed the breach to happen .
Was a security model vulnerability ?
man-in-the-middle attack ?
buffer overflow ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The links are not very informative about what allowed the breach to happen.
Was a security model vulnerability?
man-in-the-middle attack?
buffer overflow?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856250</id>
	<title>Snail Mail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264094280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IMHO sending a message inside a birthday card draws a LOT less attention than using obscure and suspicious looking encryption software. But thats just my opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO sending a message inside a birthday card draws a LOT less attention than using obscure and suspicious looking encryption software .
But thats just my opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO sending a message inside a birthday card draws a LOT less attention than using obscure and suspicious looking encryption software.
But thats just my opinion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30864980</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a minute...</title>
	<author>ShaunC</author>
	<datestamp>1264163220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By visiting <a href="http://us.macmillan.com/TorForge.aspx" title="macmillan.com" rel="nofollow">TORForge</a> [macmillan.com], of course...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By visiting TORForge [ macmillan.com ] , of course.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By visiting TORForge [macmillan.com], of course...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856830</id>
	<title>Re:Tor weaknesses</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1264101420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;They don't even use encryption and they often can't be found...</p><p>Also, they used "123456" and "iloveyou" as the master password on 2 of the 7 nodes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; They do n't even use encryption and they often ca n't be found...Also , they used " 123456 " and " iloveyou " as the master password on 2 of the 7 nodes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;They don't even use encryption and they often can't be found...Also, they used "123456" and "iloveyou" as the master password on 2 of the 7 nodes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857658</id>
	<title>Re:From: Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264157460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if the intruder was using Tor when they broke in ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if the intruder was using Tor when they broke in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if the intruder was using Tor when they broke in ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855826</id>
	<title>oh god oh god oh god</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264090080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>now the cia + barack obama know i was browsing cp</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>now the cia + barack obama know i was browsing cp</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now the cia + barack obama know i was browsing cp</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856924</id>
	<title>Tor is going to get people killed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264102800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish the holier than thous behind the Tor movement would stop with their outrageous and indefensible claims about the protections Tor allegedly provides.</p><p>I tried to have this discussion with, among others, people who've made "names for themselves" traveling from conference to conference blustering about how Tor is making the Internet safe for unpopular opinions in places where an unpopular opinion can get you disappeared right quick (hello China)... shouted down every time because it's not a POPULAR point of view.</p><p>I see that I'm not the only one in this discussion with concerns. Thank god things are changing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish the holier than thous behind the Tor movement would stop with their outrageous and indefensible claims about the protections Tor allegedly provides.I tried to have this discussion with , among others , people who 've made " names for themselves " traveling from conference to conference blustering about how Tor is making the Internet safe for unpopular opinions in places where an unpopular opinion can get you disappeared right quick ( hello China ) ... shouted down every time because it 's not a POPULAR point of view.I see that I 'm not the only one in this discussion with concerns .
Thank god things are changing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish the holier than thous behind the Tor movement would stop with their outrageous and indefensible claims about the protections Tor allegedly provides.I tried to have this discussion with, among others, people who've made "names for themselves" traveling from conference to conference blustering about how Tor is making the Internet safe for unpopular opinions in places where an unpopular opinion can get you disappeared right quick (hello China)... shouted down every time because it's not a POPULAR point of view.I see that I'm not the only one in this discussion with concerns.
Thank god things are changing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30865432</id>
	<title>Tor - Wonderland's Largest Honeypot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Though the looking glass, Alice wrote:</p><p>Dear Trusting Fools,</p><p>I invited the jabberwocky and his friends into the white rabbit's house where I'm staying and he slipped something into the sauce. It's for your own good, you know.</p><p>Love,</p><p>Alice</p><p>++</p><p>The note is slipped through the looking glass and on the other side it reads:</p><p>Dear Friends,</p><p>Goodness! I've had some troubled times here in Wonderland, but everything is resolved and it has nothing to do with the sauce, everything is fine!</p><p>Love,</p><p>Alice</p><p>PS. I have a whole new batch of sauce you really should try! We're switching to the new batch now, we urge you to switch, too, for the sake of your health! We've added new vitamins!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Though the looking glass , Alice wrote : Dear Trusting Fools,I invited the jabberwocky and his friends into the white rabbit 's house where I 'm staying and he slipped something into the sauce .
It 's for your own good , you know.Love,Alice + + The note is slipped through the looking glass and on the other side it reads : Dear Friends,Goodness !
I 've had some troubled times here in Wonderland , but everything is resolved and it has nothing to do with the sauce , everything is fine ! Love,AlicePS .
I have a whole new batch of sauce you really should try !
We 're switching to the new batch now , we urge you to switch , too , for the sake of your health !
We 've added new vitamins !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though the looking glass, Alice wrote:Dear Trusting Fools,I invited the jabberwocky and his friends into the white rabbit's house where I'm staying and he slipped something into the sauce.
It's for your own good, you know.Love,Alice++The note is slipped through the looking glass and on the other side it reads:Dear Friends,Goodness!
I've had some troubled times here in Wonderland, but everything is resolved and it has nothing to do with the sauce, everything is fine!Love,AlicePS.
I have a whole new batch of sauce you really should try!
We're switching to the new batch now, we urge you to switch, too, for the sake of your health!
We've added new vitamins!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855874</id>
	<title>Re:Tor weaknesses</title>
	<author>snowgirl</author>
	<datestamp>1264090320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem with Tor is that there's no way to detect compromises -- every node on the network could be compromised and you'd never know. Authors of botnets have greater anonymity than we do -- ironically because it's run by a central authority. An illegal and immoral one, yes, but one that comes with a measure of anonymity. Few botnet authors are actually caught even with the most primitive security methods. They don't even use encryption and they often can't be found...</p></div><p>There's a lot to be said for hiding in a crowd though.  While it is true that every node in the network could be compromised, and we'd never know, collecting all that data together to target you individually becomes more and more difficult the more people use the network... and we're not talking about big-O of n, we're talking at least big-O n squared or so.</p><p>As with <b>all</b> forms of security, there's nothing you can do to guarantee security, you simply raise the burden of breaching that security until the opportunity to breach you is not worth the cost to breach you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Tor is that there 's no way to detect compromises -- every node on the network could be compromised and you 'd never know .
Authors of botnets have greater anonymity than we do -- ironically because it 's run by a central authority .
An illegal and immoral one , yes , but one that comes with a measure of anonymity .
Few botnet authors are actually caught even with the most primitive security methods .
They do n't even use encryption and they often ca n't be found...There 's a lot to be said for hiding in a crowd though .
While it is true that every node in the network could be compromised , and we 'd never know , collecting all that data together to target you individually becomes more and more difficult the more people use the network... and we 're not talking about big-O of n , we 're talking at least big-O n squared or so.As with all forms of security , there 's nothing you can do to guarantee security , you simply raise the burden of breaching that security until the opportunity to breach you is not worth the cost to breach you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Tor is that there's no way to detect compromises -- every node on the network could be compromised and you'd never know.
Authors of botnets have greater anonymity than we do -- ironically because it's run by a central authority.
An illegal and immoral one, yes, but one that comes with a measure of anonymity.
Few botnet authors are actually caught even with the most primitive security methods.
They don't even use encryption and they often can't be found...There's a lot to be said for hiding in a crowd though.
While it is true that every node in the network could be compromised, and we'd never know, collecting all that data together to target you individually becomes more and more difficult the more people use the network... and we're not talking about big-O of n, we're talking at least big-O n squared or so.As with all forms of security, there's nothing you can do to guarantee security, you simply raise the burden of breaching that security until the opportunity to breach you is not worth the cost to breach you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859562</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1264176540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As a general rule, people hiding their activities DO HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE</p></div></blockquote><p>Whether they are watching banned movies in your living room, or watching Shrek with your children, I bet most people close their curtains when it gets dark.  What are they hiding?</p><p>Let me guess, you're the cop who pulled me over on super bowl sunday and wanted to search my car because I blew 0.00 on your breathalyzer.  I was speeding, so the pullover was valid.  I have anxiety problems, and being pulled over at night by a single cop is not the most comfortable experience.  You thought I was acting suspiciously because of my general anxiety and wanted to search my car.</p><p>"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about."</p><p>So, that's wrong.  I'm not hiding anything, I'm enforcing my rights.  Ignorance of the law is no excuse, right?  So you expect people to know the law.  But if they call you on it, all of a sudden it's suspicious.  That's a double standard, and you as an authority figure are applying pressure to get me to do something I don't feel like doing, which is pretty much an abuse of power.</p><p>"Hi judge, I just pulled this guy over and he said I couldn't search his car, that makes me think something's up.  Can I have a warrant?"</p><p>Sorry, that wouldn't work (that part didn't actually happen, because he knew it wouldn't work).  The proper way to search is to ask my permission or get a warrant.  Since I said no, now you have to get a warrant.  If you can't convince a judge, you never had probable cause.  Here's my legally owned prescription anxiety drugs in a properly labeled container, still think I'm acting suspiciously?  You already gave me a field sobriety test which came back negative or I'd already be in the back seat of your car, so I'm not impaired by those drugs, and if I were under their influence I wouldn't seem so anxious, eh?  Still think I'm acting suspiciously?</p><p>"Yes, you're hiding something.  What's wrong, you have a joint in there you don't want me to find?  An unregistered gun?"</p><p>OK, fine.  You know what, search my car.  No ticket, nothing turned up in the search, I got an apology and a warning.  An apology, and no ticket, from a cop who pulled me over for going 75 in a 60 zone.  Did I have something to hide?  Yes, my personal belongings from someone who has no reason to see what I'm doing.  I'm hiding from the government and its agencies anything it does not have, by the laws of the land, any right to see.</p><p>When you have probable cause you can come for me, until then go away.</p><p>They might be crazy, but I'd expect anyone who believes in UFOs and thinks Roswell was a coverup would use TOR to gather and share evidence that "the gvmt doesn't want you to see."  Or people sharing "true stories from 9/11 workers showing it's an inside job" or "OKC bombing was an inside job and we just found a patsy to blame"  and "John Wilkes Booth was hired by the CIA" and "Lee Harvey Oswald worked for Hoover".  These people are mostly harmless and think they have something to hide - the opposite of your supposition.  They are hiding despite having nothing to hide.  Nothing substantial of course, but they think they do.</p><p>Even more important, which I should have listed first, is the idea of free speech.  People can't make changes if the government hides things from them, so it makes sense to create software that lets people share ideas.  Silly harmless ones like above, or profound movements where the people force change in their government by revealing information.  Someone sharing old 1970s era pictures of naked children is doing no actual harm (unless you want to conflate and suppose and imagine and maybe project, the pictures already exist).  Someone working to free the Chinese people from a protective government is doing a great service (*in my opinion at least).  Subverting your own government is treason, but I can freely say that I believe other citizens should subvert their governments without fear.  What if I send that sentiment to my friend in Tibet, and the packets have to travel through China to get there?  I don't route packets, so I have no way to know where my ideas might end up, or whom I might endanger by sending them.  Unless I use Tor.</p><p>Think about it this way - the Constitution of the US of A says that people shouldn't be searched unless there is a clear reason.  You can do all the drugs and prostitution and whatever else you want in your basement, away from people, until it causes problems and people complain.  Too many cars around, shady people making neighbors nervous, a few small thefts, used condoms in the street, several OD reports at the same address - these are legitimate complaints which need to be investigated.</p><p>When you close your curtains, you could be hiding anything.  When you use Tor, you could be hiding anything.  To me, Tor just lets you extend your curtains virtually, so you can have the same private conversation with someone across the world you would if they were able to travel to your living room.  Regardless of whether you're subverting the government or arguing Ginger vs. Mary Anne.</p><p>Disclaimer: I have not ever used Tor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a general rule , people hiding their activities DO HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDEWhether they are watching banned movies in your living room , or watching Shrek with your children , I bet most people close their curtains when it gets dark .
What are they hiding ? Let me guess , you 're the cop who pulled me over on super bowl sunday and wanted to search my car because I blew 0.00 on your breathalyzer .
I was speeding , so the pullover was valid .
I have anxiety problems , and being pulled over at night by a single cop is not the most comfortable experience .
You thought I was acting suspiciously because of my general anxiety and wanted to search my car .
" If you have nothing to hide , you have nothing to worry about .
" So , that 's wrong .
I 'm not hiding anything , I 'm enforcing my rights .
Ignorance of the law is no excuse , right ?
So you expect people to know the law .
But if they call you on it , all of a sudden it 's suspicious .
That 's a double standard , and you as an authority figure are applying pressure to get me to do something I do n't feel like doing , which is pretty much an abuse of power .
" Hi judge , I just pulled this guy over and he said I could n't search his car , that makes me think something 's up .
Can I have a warrant ?
" Sorry , that would n't work ( that part did n't actually happen , because he knew it would n't work ) .
The proper way to search is to ask my permission or get a warrant .
Since I said no , now you have to get a warrant .
If you ca n't convince a judge , you never had probable cause .
Here 's my legally owned prescription anxiety drugs in a properly labeled container , still think I 'm acting suspiciously ?
You already gave me a field sobriety test which came back negative or I 'd already be in the back seat of your car , so I 'm not impaired by those drugs , and if I were under their influence I would n't seem so anxious , eh ?
Still think I 'm acting suspiciously ?
" Yes , you 're hiding something .
What 's wrong , you have a joint in there you do n't want me to find ?
An unregistered gun ?
" OK , fine .
You know what , search my car .
No ticket , nothing turned up in the search , I got an apology and a warning .
An apology , and no ticket , from a cop who pulled me over for going 75 in a 60 zone .
Did I have something to hide ?
Yes , my personal belongings from someone who has no reason to see what I 'm doing .
I 'm hiding from the government and its agencies anything it does not have , by the laws of the land , any right to see.When you have probable cause you can come for me , until then go away.They might be crazy , but I 'd expect anyone who believes in UFOs and thinks Roswell was a coverup would use TOR to gather and share evidence that " the gvmt does n't want you to see .
" Or people sharing " true stories from 9/11 workers showing it 's an inside job " or " OKC bombing was an inside job and we just found a patsy to blame " and " John Wilkes Booth was hired by the CIA " and " Lee Harvey Oswald worked for Hoover " .
These people are mostly harmless and think they have something to hide - the opposite of your supposition .
They are hiding despite having nothing to hide .
Nothing substantial of course , but they think they do.Even more important , which I should have listed first , is the idea of free speech .
People ca n't make changes if the government hides things from them , so it makes sense to create software that lets people share ideas .
Silly harmless ones like above , or profound movements where the people force change in their government by revealing information .
Someone sharing old 1970s era pictures of naked children is doing no actual harm ( unless you want to conflate and suppose and imagine and maybe project , the pictures already exist ) .
Someone working to free the Chinese people from a protective government is doing a great service ( * in my opinion at least ) .
Subverting your own government is treason , but I can freely say that I believe other citizens should subvert their governments without fear .
What if I send that sentiment to my friend in Tibet , and the packets have to travel through China to get there ?
I do n't route packets , so I have no way to know where my ideas might end up , or whom I might endanger by sending them .
Unless I use Tor.Think about it this way - the Constitution of the US of A says that people should n't be searched unless there is a clear reason .
You can do all the drugs and prostitution and whatever else you want in your basement , away from people , until it causes problems and people complain .
Too many cars around , shady people making neighbors nervous , a few small thefts , used condoms in the street , several OD reports at the same address - these are legitimate complaints which need to be investigated.When you close your curtains , you could be hiding anything .
When you use Tor , you could be hiding anything .
To me , Tor just lets you extend your curtains virtually , so you can have the same private conversation with someone across the world you would if they were able to travel to your living room .
Regardless of whether you 're subverting the government or arguing Ginger vs. Mary Anne.Disclaimer : I have not ever used Tor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a general rule, people hiding their activities DO HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDEWhether they are watching banned movies in your living room, or watching Shrek with your children, I bet most people close their curtains when it gets dark.
What are they hiding?Let me guess, you're the cop who pulled me over on super bowl sunday and wanted to search my car because I blew 0.00 on your breathalyzer.
I was speeding, so the pullover was valid.
I have anxiety problems, and being pulled over at night by a single cop is not the most comfortable experience.
You thought I was acting suspiciously because of my general anxiety and wanted to search my car.
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about.
"So, that's wrong.
I'm not hiding anything, I'm enforcing my rights.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, right?
So you expect people to know the law.
But if they call you on it, all of a sudden it's suspicious.
That's a double standard, and you as an authority figure are applying pressure to get me to do something I don't feel like doing, which is pretty much an abuse of power.
"Hi judge, I just pulled this guy over and he said I couldn't search his car, that makes me think something's up.
Can I have a warrant?
"Sorry, that wouldn't work (that part didn't actually happen, because he knew it wouldn't work).
The proper way to search is to ask my permission or get a warrant.
Since I said no, now you have to get a warrant.
If you can't convince a judge, you never had probable cause.
Here's my legally owned prescription anxiety drugs in a properly labeled container, still think I'm acting suspiciously?
You already gave me a field sobriety test which came back negative or I'd already be in the back seat of your car, so I'm not impaired by those drugs, and if I were under their influence I wouldn't seem so anxious, eh?
Still think I'm acting suspiciously?
"Yes, you're hiding something.
What's wrong, you have a joint in there you don't want me to find?
An unregistered gun?
"OK, fine.
You know what, search my car.
No ticket, nothing turned up in the search, I got an apology and a warning.
An apology, and no ticket, from a cop who pulled me over for going 75 in a 60 zone.
Did I have something to hide?
Yes, my personal belongings from someone who has no reason to see what I'm doing.
I'm hiding from the government and its agencies anything it does not have, by the laws of the land, any right to see.When you have probable cause you can come for me, until then go away.They might be crazy, but I'd expect anyone who believes in UFOs and thinks Roswell was a coverup would use TOR to gather and share evidence that "the gvmt doesn't want you to see.
"  Or people sharing "true stories from 9/11 workers showing it's an inside job" or "OKC bombing was an inside job and we just found a patsy to blame"  and "John Wilkes Booth was hired by the CIA" and "Lee Harvey Oswald worked for Hoover".
These people are mostly harmless and think they have something to hide - the opposite of your supposition.
They are hiding despite having nothing to hide.
Nothing substantial of course, but they think they do.Even more important, which I should have listed first, is the idea of free speech.
People can't make changes if the government hides things from them, so it makes sense to create software that lets people share ideas.
Silly harmless ones like above, or profound movements where the people force change in their government by revealing information.
Someone sharing old 1970s era pictures of naked children is doing no actual harm (unless you want to conflate and suppose and imagine and maybe project, the pictures already exist).
Someone working to free the Chinese people from a protective government is doing a great service (*in my opinion at least).
Subverting your own government is treason, but I can freely say that I believe other citizens should subvert their governments without fear.
What if I send that sentiment to my friend in Tibet, and the packets have to travel through China to get there?
I don't route packets, so I have no way to know where my ideas might end up, or whom I might endanger by sending them.
Unless I use Tor.Think about it this way - the Constitution of the US of A says that people shouldn't be searched unless there is a clear reason.
You can do all the drugs and prostitution and whatever else you want in your basement, away from people, until it causes problems and people complain.
Too many cars around, shady people making neighbors nervous, a few small thefts, used condoms in the street, several OD reports at the same address - these are legitimate complaints which need to be investigated.When you close your curtains, you could be hiding anything.
When you use Tor, you could be hiding anything.
To me, Tor just lets you extend your curtains virtually, so you can have the same private conversation with someone across the world you would if they were able to travel to your living room.
Regardless of whether you're subverting the government or arguing Ginger vs. Mary Anne.Disclaimer: I have not ever used Tor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856354</id>
	<title>Re:US Intelligence almost certainly monitors TOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264095300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I never thought about it. But if you ask me, important secrets shouldn't be massive amount of data, and there are plenty algorithms that you could use altogether with encryption. Steganography on facebook media or Flickr pictures or YouTube videos? Imagine hiding data in a Rick Astley video, and then try to figure out who downloaded it? Best way, if you ask me? Go mainstream, it will go easily unnoticed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never thought about it .
But if you ask me , important secrets should n't be massive amount of data , and there are plenty algorithms that you could use altogether with encryption .
Steganography on facebook media or Flickr pictures or YouTube videos ?
Imagine hiding data in a Rick Astley video , and then try to figure out who downloaded it ?
Best way , if you ask me ?
Go mainstream , it will go easily unnoticed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never thought about it.
But if you ask me, important secrets shouldn't be massive amount of data, and there are plenty algorithms that you could use altogether with encryption.
Steganography on facebook media or Flickr pictures or YouTube videos?
Imagine hiding data in a Rick Astley video, and then try to figure out who downloaded it?
Best way, if you ask me?
Go mainstream, it will go easily unnoticed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30867328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30864184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30864980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30869910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30858914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30858036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30866950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_0024210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30864184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30864980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30869910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30867328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855874
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856892
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30866950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30858036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_0024210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30855968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856650
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30859562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30857176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30858914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856126
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_0024210.30856594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
