<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_02_0118213</id>
	<title>De-Anonymizing Social Network Users</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265138940000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"The H has an article about some researchers who found a <a href="http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Indiscrete-web-browsers-assist-de-anonymisation-919669.html">new way to de-anonymize people</a>. Compared to the EFF's <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/27/1638216/Tracking-Browsers-Without-Cookies-Or-IP-Addresses">Panopticlick</a>, the goal of this experiment is not to identify a user's browser uniquely, but to identify individual users. The test essentially exploits the fact that many social network users are identifiable by their membership of various groups. According to the researchers, it's very unlikelly that two people on any social network will belong to exactly the same groups. A 'group fingerprint' can thus allow websites to identify previously anonymous visitors. They describe <a href="http://www.iseclab.org/papers/sonda-TR.pdf">the setup and all details</a> and the results look very interesting. They also have a <a href="http://www.iseclab.org/people/gilbert/experiment/">live demo</a> for the social network Xing that was able to de-anonymize me."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " The H has an article about some researchers who found a new way to de-anonymize people .
Compared to the EFF 's Panopticlick , the goal of this experiment is not to identify a user 's browser uniquely , but to identify individual users .
The test essentially exploits the fact that many social network users are identifiable by their membership of various groups .
According to the researchers , it 's very unlikelly that two people on any social network will belong to exactly the same groups .
A 'group fingerprint ' can thus allow websites to identify previously anonymous visitors .
They describe the setup and all details and the results look very interesting .
They also have a live demo for the social network Xing that was able to de-anonymize me .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "The H has an article about some researchers who found a new way to de-anonymize people.
Compared to the EFF's Panopticlick, the goal of this experiment is not to identify a user's browser uniquely, but to identify individual users.
The test essentially exploits the fact that many social network users are identifiable by their membership of various groups.
According to the researchers, it's very unlikelly that two people on any social network will belong to exactly the same groups.
A 'group fingerprint' can thus allow websites to identify previously anonymous visitors.
They describe the setup and all details and the results look very interesting.
They also have a live demo for the social network Xing that was able to de-anonymize me.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30998370</id>
	<title>opting out of social networking</title>
	<author>Fuji Kitakyusho</author>
	<datestamp>1265136660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A few weeks ago, I viewed a video interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.  In the interview, he stated that privacy simply doesn't exist anymore, or rather, that the world will need to get used to a "new standard" of privacy in context to online networking.  That statement alone was sufficient impetus for me to purge my Facebook acount (I let it sit empty for a few weeks, then deleted it), as well as all other social networking profiles that I irresponsibly let sit on the web, as the statement is indicative of a mindset that will abuse my information in the future, if not now.  Many persons may think I am being overly paranoid, but this article is evidence to the contrary, and I feel vindicated in my efforts when I read this sort of thing.

On a related note, I have also taken to preferring cash to credit card transactions lately, and have a long standing habit of never disseminating personal information to retailers.  I seem to be in the minority, but I refuse to leave myself open to abuse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A few weeks ago , I viewed a video interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg .
In the interview , he stated that privacy simply does n't exist anymore , or rather , that the world will need to get used to a " new standard " of privacy in context to online networking .
That statement alone was sufficient impetus for me to purge my Facebook acount ( I let it sit empty for a few weeks , then deleted it ) , as well as all other social networking profiles that I irresponsibly let sit on the web , as the statement is indicative of a mindset that will abuse my information in the future , if not now .
Many persons may think I am being overly paranoid , but this article is evidence to the contrary , and I feel vindicated in my efforts when I read this sort of thing .
On a related note , I have also taken to preferring cash to credit card transactions lately , and have a long standing habit of never disseminating personal information to retailers .
I seem to be in the minority , but I refuse to leave myself open to abuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few weeks ago, I viewed a video interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.
In the interview, he stated that privacy simply doesn't exist anymore, or rather, that the world will need to get used to a "new standard" of privacy in context to online networking.
That statement alone was sufficient impetus for me to purge my Facebook acount (I let it sit empty for a few weeks, then deleted it), as well as all other social networking profiles that I irresponsibly let sit on the web, as the statement is indicative of a mindset that will abuse my information in the future, if not now.
Many persons may think I am being overly paranoid, but this article is evidence to the contrary, and I feel vindicated in my efforts when I read this sort of thing.
On a related note, I have also taken to preferring cash to credit card transactions lately, and have a long standing habit of never disseminating personal information to retailers.
I seem to be in the minority, but I refuse to leave myself open to abuse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992840</id>
	<title>You FAIL 1t!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265107620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">out of busineSs Else up their asses</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>out of busineSs Else up their asses [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>out of busineSs Else up their asses [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536</id>
	<title>Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>advocate\_one</author>
	<datestamp>1265101860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having gone on that panopticlick site and discovered that my browser was unique amongst some half million visitors... I was shocked that my browser was blabbing about what fonts were on my system... Why on earth would a browser transmit the list of installed fonts at all? All it needs locally are a set of alternatives, ie. if page says this font, then use this local font... wasn't that the entire point of the webfonts package?
<p>
similarly, the plugins list... another thing that doesn't need to be sent out by the browser...
</p><p>
Firefox devs, you listening here? these do not need to be transmitted so block them...
</p><p>
anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?</p><p>and why on earth is it possible to sniff the history list???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having gone on that panopticlick site and discovered that my browser was unique amongst some half million visitors... I was shocked that my browser was blabbing about what fonts were on my system... Why on earth would a browser transmit the list of installed fonts at all ?
All it needs locally are a set of alternatives , ie .
if page says this font , then use this local font... was n't that the entire point of the webfonts package ?
similarly , the plugins list... another thing that does n't need to be sent out by the browser.. . Firefox devs , you listening here ?
these do not need to be transmitted so block them.. . anyone know of a plugin that blocks them ? and why on earth is it possible to sniff the history list ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having gone on that panopticlick site and discovered that my browser was unique amongst some half million visitors... I was shocked that my browser was blabbing about what fonts were on my system... Why on earth would a browser transmit the list of installed fonts at all?
All it needs locally are a set of alternatives, ie.
if page says this font, then use this local font... wasn't that the entire point of the webfonts package?
similarly, the plugins list... another thing that doesn't need to be sent out by the browser...

Firefox devs, you listening here?
these do not need to be transmitted so block them...

anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?and why on earth is it possible to sniff the history list??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992862</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>StripedCow</author>
	<datestamp>1265108040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even more horrifying: in my case, my local username was part of the information that panopticlick found... the reason was that one of the plugin binaries was in a subdirectory of my homedir, and its path contained my username, and apparently the path of that binary was sent out by firefox. However, I'm not sure if the fault lies with firefox or with the particular plugin (citrix receiver for linux). Probably the latter, because in the plugin-box, it identifies itself with its full path.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even more horrifying : in my case , my local username was part of the information that panopticlick found... the reason was that one of the plugin binaries was in a subdirectory of my homedir , and its path contained my username , and apparently the path of that binary was sent out by firefox .
However , I 'm not sure if the fault lies with firefox or with the particular plugin ( citrix receiver for linux ) .
Probably the latter , because in the plugin-box , it identifies itself with its full path .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even more horrifying: in my case, my local username was part of the information that panopticlick found... the reason was that one of the plugin binaries was in a subdirectory of my homedir, and its path contained my username, and apparently the path of that binary was sent out by firefox.
However, I'm not sure if the fault lies with firefox or with the particular plugin (citrix receiver for linux).
Probably the latter, because in the plugin-box, it identifies itself with its full path.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993180</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1265112360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It tells you were the blame is on that site.</p><p>For example my IE at work reads<br>Marlett,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..., Kanafont, Eurofont <b>(via Flash)</b></p><p>My opera on my USB device with flash and javiscript disabled give almost no information other than the useragent (and that user-agent is not as detailed rich as my IE one.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It tells you were the blame is on that site.For example my IE at work readsMarlett , ... , Kanafont , Eurofont ( via Flash ) My opera on my USB device with flash and javiscript disabled give almost no information other than the useragent ( and that user-agent is not as detailed rich as my IE one .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It tells you were the blame is on that site.For example my IE at work readsMarlett, ..., Kanafont, Eurofont (via Flash)My opera on my USB device with flash and javiscript disabled give almost no information other than the useragent (and that user-agent is not as detailed rich as my IE one.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993796</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265117940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Easy remedy:<br>about:config</p><p>plugin.expose\_full\_path Standard boolean false.</p><p>I bet yours is set to true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy remedy : about : configplugin.expose \ _full \ _path Standard boolean false.I bet yours is set to true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy remedy:about:configplugin.expose\_full\_path Standard boolean false.I bet yours is set to true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30998706</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah because the list of fonts installed in your computer is extremely sensitive data...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah because the list of fonts installed in your computer is extremely sensitive data.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah because the list of fonts installed in your computer is extremely sensitive data...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992434</id>
	<title>Nothing new</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1265143500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is nothing new about this. This is what any human being (a PI, or a stalker) would intuitively try to do. This is just streamlining and automating that process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing new about this .
This is what any human being ( a PI , or a stalker ) would intuitively try to do .
This is just streamlining and automating that process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing new about this.
This is what any human being (a PI, or a stalker) would intuitively try to do.
This is just streamlining and automating that process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994822</id>
	<title>Use multiple pseudo-identities</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1265124480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next Slashdot poll:</p><p>I have N Facebook accounts, where N is:<br>*1-4<br>*5-9<br>*10-19<br>*20-29<br>*30-39<br>*41 or more<br>*I just "borrow" one of CowboyNeal's<br>*My probation officer won't let me use Facebook, you insensitive clod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next Slashdot poll : I have N Facebook accounts , where N is : * 1-4 * 5-9 * 10-19 * 20-29 * 30-39 * 41 or more * I just " borrow " one of CowboyNeal 's * My probation officer wo n't let me use Facebook , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next Slashdot poll:I have N Facebook accounts, where N is:*1-4*5-9*10-19*20-29*30-39*41 or more*I just "borrow" one of CowboyNeal's*My probation officer won't let me use Facebook, you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992692</id>
	<title>Re:Xing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265104260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it's the usual: only because it's big in the USA doesn't mean people all over the world use it.</p><p>AFAIK Xing is bigger than Linkedin in the EU and that's where (most of) the researchers are from.</p><p>Mainstream social sites like Facebook aren't as popular in the professional community. So I assume they were on Xing themselves and started from there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it 's the usual : only because it 's big in the USA does n't mean people all over the world use it.AFAIK Xing is bigger than Linkedin in the EU and that 's where ( most of ) the researchers are from.Mainstream social sites like Facebook are n't as popular in the professional community .
So I assume they were on Xing themselves and started from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it's the usual: only because it's big in the USA doesn't mean people all over the world use it.AFAIK Xing is bigger than Linkedin in the EU and that's where (most of) the researchers are from.Mainstream social sites like Facebook aren't as popular in the professional community.
So I assume they were on Xing themselves and started from there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995724</id>
	<title>Re:Xing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265128020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you haven't heard of it it can't be important. Just like the metric system or public transportation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have n't heard of it it ca n't be important .
Just like the metric system or public transportation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you haven't heard of it it can't be important.
Just like the metric system or public transportation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994892</id>
	<title>30 Minutes of Testing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265124780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it's been tested 30 times at about a minute per test. Do 30 minutes of testing make a tool worthy of all this press? Are these former Microsoft employees?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's been tested 30 times at about a minute per test .
Do 30 minutes of testing make a tool worthy of all this press ?
Are these former Microsoft employees ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's been tested 30 times at about a minute per test.
Do 30 minutes of testing make a tool worthy of all this press?
Are these former Microsoft employees?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993062</id>
	<title>I'd be more interested if...</title>
	<author>Dupple</author>
	<datestamp>1265110980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... they could find a way to De-annoying people on social networks</htmltext>
<tokenext>... they could find a way to De-annoying people on social networks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they could find a way to De-annoying people on social networks</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31006906</id>
	<title>Re:First Post</title>
	<author>NSN A392-99-964-5927</author>
	<datestamp>1264969980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Fuck social networks.</p></div><p>This is why slashdot needs to close their facebook account.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck social networks.This is why slashdot needs to close their facebook account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck social networks.This is why slashdot needs to close their facebook account.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992758</id>
	<title>False belief work both ways.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265105640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just as people who don't take privacy seriously aren't really anonymous, people who think that these revelations actually make people not anonymous online helps cater to said false belief, and keeping true Anonymous Cowards (who has the smarts to either not register on networking sites, or register with different false data on separate sites) safer, for the moment.</p><p>Posted as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just as people who do n't take privacy seriously are n't really anonymous , people who think that these revelations actually make people not anonymous online helps cater to said false belief , and keeping true Anonymous Cowards ( who has the smarts to either not register on networking sites , or register with different false data on separate sites ) safer , for the moment.Posted as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just as people who don't take privacy seriously aren't really anonymous, people who think that these revelations actually make people not anonymous online helps cater to said false belief, and keeping true Anonymous Cowards (who has the smarts to either not register on networking sites, or register with different false data on separate sites) safer, for the moment.Posted as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994942</id>
	<title>Re:An anonymous reader?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265124960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can they de-anonymize Anonymous Coward?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can they de-anonymize Anonymous Coward ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can they de-anonymize Anonymous Coward?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992432</id>
	<title>An anonymous reader?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265143440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably not so anonymous anymore!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably not so anonymous anymore !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably not so anonymous anymore!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992446</id>
	<title>Misleading description of what they're doing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265143680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A more accurate one, if I am RTFA right, is "by trawling through the browser history of visitors to a site it is possible to distinguish one from another so long as the user uses and regularly visits the group pages of select social networking sites and never clears their history".  At most it seems to allow them to compare the "groups" pages you have visited on, say, Facebook and possibly identify which FB user you are using that information.</p><p>I see nothing to suggest that this helps them to identify who you actually are in meatspace unless you supply those details on your public Facebook page.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A more accurate one , if I am RTFA right , is " by trawling through the browser history of visitors to a site it is possible to distinguish one from another so long as the user uses and regularly visits the group pages of select social networking sites and never clears their history " .
At most it seems to allow them to compare the " groups " pages you have visited on , say , Facebook and possibly identify which FB user you are using that information.I see nothing to suggest that this helps them to identify who you actually are in meatspace unless you supply those details on your public Facebook page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A more accurate one, if I am RTFA right, is "by trawling through the browser history of visitors to a site it is possible to distinguish one from another so long as the user uses and regularly visits the group pages of select social networking sites and never clears their history".
At most it seems to allow them to compare the "groups" pages you have visited on, say, Facebook and possibly identify which FB user you are using that information.I see nothing to suggest that this helps them to identify who you actually are in meatspace unless you supply those details on your public Facebook page.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31001350</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>equivocal</author>
	<datestamp>1265105940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>browser.display.use\_document\_colors</tt> defeats <tt>background-image</tt> in firefox.  At least I think that's the correct one.  Whatever it is, it's user accessible through the gui prefs interface.  There may be some side-effects, like not being able to buy from amazon.com, but they're pretty insignificant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>browser.display.use \ _document \ _colors defeats background-image in firefox .
At least I think that 's the correct one .
Whatever it is , it 's user accessible through the gui prefs interface .
There may be some side-effects , like not being able to buy from amazon.com , but they 're pretty insignificant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>browser.display.use\_document\_colors defeats background-image in firefox.
At least I think that's the correct one.
Whatever it is, it's user accessible through the gui prefs interface.
There may be some side-effects, like not being able to buy from amazon.com, but they're pretty insignificant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994402</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1265122320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sniffing history is basic feature of xhtml/css, price you pay for selectors. a:visited (background-image:"slashdotorg.png")</p></div><p>Why not load a:visited images unconditionally (even when they aren't displayed)? And why allow getComputedStyle on elements whose rendering depends on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:visited?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sniffing history is basic feature of xhtml/css , price you pay for selectors .
a : visited ( background-image : " slashdotorg.png " ) Why not load a : visited images unconditionally ( even when they are n't displayed ) ?
And why allow getComputedStyle on elements whose rendering depends on : visited ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sniffing history is basic feature of xhtml/css, price you pay for selectors.
a:visited (background-image:"slashdotorg.png")Why not load a:visited images unconditionally (even when they aren't displayed)?
And why allow getComputedStyle on elements whose rendering depends on :visited?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30998134</id>
	<title>Find me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who am I?</p><p>I have done nothing to especially hide myself except clicking "Post Anonymously" - I bet Cmdr Taco could make an educated guess by perusing logs though.  I've often wondered if that is the case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who am I ? I have done nothing to especially hide myself except clicking " Post Anonymously " - I bet Cmdr Taco could make an educated guess by perusing logs though .
I 've often wondered if that is the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who am I?I have done nothing to especially hide myself except clicking "Post Anonymously" - I bet Cmdr Taco could make an educated guess by perusing logs though.
I've often wondered if that is the case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530</id>
	<title>Summary is wrong; idea is worthless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265101800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The summary is incorrectly worded.  It should read "<i>Contrasted with</i> the EFF's..."<p>But worse than that, the paper itself is horribly written, especially the abstract.  The threat presented is not de-anonymization within the social network (since usually most profiles are real people anyway) but rather de-anonymization of visitors to arbitrary websites if those visitors also have social networking URLs in their browser history.</p><p>Now, the big privacy hole here is <a href="http://jeremiahgrossman.blogspot.com/2006/08/i-know-where-youve-been.html" title="blogspot.com">browser history stealing</a> [blogspot.com], which is four years old.  All this paper does is refine this mountain of privacy-invading information using social networking URLs that might be found there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary is incorrectly worded .
It should read " Contrasted with the EFF 's... " But worse than that , the paper itself is horribly written , especially the abstract .
The threat presented is not de-anonymization within the social network ( since usually most profiles are real people anyway ) but rather de-anonymization of visitors to arbitrary websites if those visitors also have social networking URLs in their browser history.Now , the big privacy hole here is browser history stealing [ blogspot.com ] , which is four years old .
All this paper does is refine this mountain of privacy-invading information using social networking URLs that might be found there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary is incorrectly worded.
It should read "Contrasted with the EFF's..."But worse than that, the paper itself is horribly written, especially the abstract.
The threat presented is not de-anonymization within the social network (since usually most profiles are real people anyway) but rather de-anonymization of visitors to arbitrary websites if those visitors also have social networking URLs in their browser history.Now, the big privacy hole here is browser history stealing [blogspot.com], which is four years old.
All this paper does is refine this mountain of privacy-invading information using social networking URLs that might be found there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993178</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265112300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Your font list is reported by flash and java."</p><p>It's javaSCRIPT not Java; two different technologies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Your font list is reported by flash and java .
" It 's javaSCRIPT not Java ; two different technologies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Your font list is reported by flash and java.
"It's javaSCRIPT not Java; two different technologies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992902</id>
	<title>Re:Xing?</title>
	<author>LKM</author>
	<datestamp>1265108640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Xing is a German site similar to LinkedIn. It's quite popular in Europe. Nothing to do with BSD, GNU or anything else along those lines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Xing is a German site similar to LinkedIn .
It 's quite popular in Europe .
Nothing to do with BSD , GNU or anything else along those lines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xing is a German site similar to LinkedIn.
It's quite popular in Europe.
Nothing to do with BSD, GNU or anything else along those lines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992454</id>
	<title>Solution: Never join any groups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265143860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just try to de-anonymize the antisocial network!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just try to de-anonymize the antisocial network !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just try to de-anonymize the antisocial network!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994192</id>
	<title>uhh, why?</title>
	<author>TechnoVooDooDaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1265121060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All you have to do is post a stupid little survey to Facebook and millions of idiots will fill the silly thing out giving you their mother's maiden name, street they grew up on, and last 4 digits of their social security in return for generating a few sentences of nonsense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All you have to do is post a stupid little survey to Facebook and millions of idiots will fill the silly thing out giving you their mother 's maiden name , street they grew up on , and last 4 digits of their social security in return for generating a few sentences of nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All you have to do is post a stupid little survey to Facebook and millions of idiots will fill the silly thing out giving you their mother's maiden name, street they grew up on, and last 4 digits of their social security in return for generating a few sentences of nonsense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992468</id>
	<title>No Groups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265144040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>people like myself who belong to no groups would like to say go fuck yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>people like myself who belong to no groups would like to say go fuck yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people like myself who belong to no groups would like to say go fuck yourself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992798</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is wrong; idea is worthless</title>
	<author>pipatron</author>
	<datestamp>1265106720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which is why browsing with NoScript should be mandatory and why we should try to stop webmasters from using unnecessary javascript on their websites.

</p><p>(Oh, and please stop mocking those of us that takes basic security precautions.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is why browsing with NoScript should be mandatory and why we should try to stop webmasters from using unnecessary javascript on their websites .
( Oh , and please stop mocking those of us that takes basic security precautions .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is why browsing with NoScript should be mandatory and why we should try to stop webmasters from using unnecessary javascript on their websites.
(Oh, and please stop mocking those of us that takes basic security precautions.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995130</id>
	<title>Lame Theory</title>
	<author>duggaman57</author>
	<datestamp>1265125800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I have a Social Networking account tied to the real me, and then I go and create an anonymous Social Networking page, do you really think I'm going to take the time to replicate all of my "groups" and things that would otherwise be on my primary profile? I obviously have something to hide, so this theory is bunk and not relevant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have a Social Networking account tied to the real me , and then I go and create an anonymous Social Networking page , do you really think I 'm going to take the time to replicate all of my " groups " and things that would otherwise be on my primary profile ?
I obviously have something to hide , so this theory is bunk and not relevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have a Social Networking account tied to the real me, and then I go and create an anonymous Social Networking page, do you really think I'm going to take the time to replicate all of my "groups" and things that would otherwise be on my primary profile?
I obviously have something to hide, so this theory is bunk and not relevant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31014250</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264929300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://mindyourdecisions.com/blog/2010/02/02/a-mystery-sherlock-holmes-couldnt-solve-but-you-can/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //mindyourdecisions.com/blog/2010/02/02/a-mystery-sherlock-holmes-couldnt-solve-but-you-can/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://mindyourdecisions.com/blog/2010/02/02/a-mystery-sherlock-holmes-couldnt-solve-but-you-can/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556</id>
	<title>Xing?</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1265102280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They (the authors) keep mentioning it in the same breath as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn - but I've never heard of it (I realize that may not necessarily mean anything). It also seems a bit odd to see the BSD demon in one of the article graphics. I can't help but wonder if this was posted to actually discuss an attack vector against social networking sites, or if it was really some weird attempt to promote some GNU/Free social networking club.</p><p>Anyway, it seems to me that demoing a practical de-anonymization of a Facebook user or a LinkedIn profile would be more interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They ( the authors ) keep mentioning it in the same breath as Facebook , Twitter , and LinkedIn - but I 've never heard of it ( I realize that may not necessarily mean anything ) .
It also seems a bit odd to see the BSD demon in one of the article graphics .
I ca n't help but wonder if this was posted to actually discuss an attack vector against social networking sites , or if it was really some weird attempt to promote some GNU/Free social networking club.Anyway , it seems to me that demoing a practical de-anonymization of a Facebook user or a LinkedIn profile would be more interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They (the authors) keep mentioning it in the same breath as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn - but I've never heard of it (I realize that may not necessarily mean anything).
It also seems a bit odd to see the BSD demon in one of the article graphics.
I can't help but wonder if this was posted to actually discuss an attack vector against social networking sites, or if it was really some weird attempt to promote some GNU/Free social networking club.Anyway, it seems to me that demoing a practical de-anonymization of a Facebook user or a LinkedIn profile would be more interesting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992406</id>
	<title>First Post</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1265143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fuck social networks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck social networks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck social networks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30997556</id>
	<title>I feared this day will come.</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1265134020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a reason why I joined a Young Communists group on Facebook and friended the GOP on MySpace...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a reason why I joined a Young Communists group on Facebook and friended the GOP on MySpace.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a reason why I joined a Young Communists group on Facebook and friended the GOP on MySpace...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992490</id>
	<title>Uh, no thanks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265101260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I prefer not to de-<i>anatomized</i> all the Anonymous Cowards.  Neutered them, sure.  Let's leave it at that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer not to de-anatomized all the Anonymous Cowards .
Neutered them , sure .
Let 's leave it at that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer not to de-anatomized all the Anonymous Cowards.
Neutered them, sure.
Let's leave it at that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31002180</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is wrong; idea is worthless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265110440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Xing has over 8 million members and is the #1 B2B social network in Europe. It isn't irrelevant or exotic just because you haven't heard of it. Duh. Yes, I'm a member. Yes, I made quite a nice amount of business (=money) because of Xing.</p><p><a href="http://corporate.xing.com/english/company/" title="xing.com">http://corporate.xing.com/english/company/</a> [xing.com]</p><p>Before they rebranded it, it was called OpenBC (Open Business Club). Maybe you've heard of that.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Xing has over 8 million members and is the # 1 B2B social network in Europe .
It is n't irrelevant or exotic just because you have n't heard of it .
Duh. Yes , I 'm a member .
Yes , I made quite a nice amount of business ( = money ) because of Xing.http : //corporate.xing.com/english/company/ [ xing.com ] Before they rebranded it , it was called OpenBC ( Open Business Club ) .
Maybe you 've heard of that .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xing has over 8 million members and is the #1 B2B social network in Europe.
It isn't irrelevant or exotic just because you haven't heard of it.
Duh. Yes, I'm a member.
Yes, I made quite a nice amount of business (=money) because of Xing.http://corporate.xing.com/english/company/ [xing.com]Before they rebranded it, it was called OpenBC (Open Business Club).
Maybe you've heard of that.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31004610</id>
	<title>Re:What about loners?</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1265125080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That already happens now. Been that way for years. People without a traceable history, for example a credit history, or a small stack of credit cards, a job, etc.,  receive all sorts of "special" treatment at the border, made even worse in today's hysterical times. Yes, not having a file makes you very suspicious indeed. Upon its discovery, one will be created automatically for you. Those without facebook accounts clearly have something to hide. It will be mandatory real soon now. - Papers please -</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That already happens now .
Been that way for years .
People without a traceable history , for example a credit history , or a small stack of credit cards , a job , etc. , receive all sorts of " special " treatment at the border , made even worse in today 's hysterical times .
Yes , not having a file makes you very suspicious indeed .
Upon its discovery , one will be created automatically for you .
Those without facebook accounts clearly have something to hide .
It will be mandatory real soon now .
- Papers please -</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That already happens now.
Been that way for years.
People without a traceable history, for example a credit history, or a small stack of credit cards, a job, etc.,  receive all sorts of "special" treatment at the border, made even worse in today's hysterical times.
Yes, not having a file makes you very suspicious indeed.
Upon its discovery, one will be created automatically for you.
Those without facebook accounts clearly have something to hide.
It will be mandatory real soon now.
- Papers please -</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993534</id>
	<title>Re:False belief work both ways.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265115660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Posted as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons.</p></div><p>Because they're after you, but you are outwitting them as a result of your superior intelligence and foresight. Yes, quite obvious to us all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Posted as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons.Because they 're after you , but you are outwitting them as a result of your superior intelligence and foresight .
Yes , quite obvious to us all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Posted as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons.Because they're after you, but you are outwitting them as a result of your superior intelligence and foresight.
Yes, quite obvious to us all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992758</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993670</id>
	<title>Re:Uh, no thanks...</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1265116860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I prefer not to de-<i>anatomized</i> all the Anonymous Cowards.</p></div><p>I think it's time anonymous users were de-<em>anathemized</em>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer not to de-anatomized all the Anonymous Cowards.I think it 's time anonymous users were de-anathemized .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer not to de-anatomized all the Anonymous Cowards.I think it's time anonymous users were de-anathemized.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994928</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1265124960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Not many people disable javascript, that's just one more thing to make you more unique.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Yes, but you replace many bits of data (plugin list, fonts, etc) with a single information, so it's probably better either way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not many people disable javascript , that 's just one more thing to make you more unique .
Yes , but you replace many bits of data ( plugin list , fonts , etc ) with a single information , so it 's probably better either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not many people disable javascript, that's just one more thing to make you more unique.
Yes, but you replace many bits of data (plugin list, fonts, etc) with a single information, so it's probably better either way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992554</id>
	<title>What about loners?</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1265102280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Brilliant plan, guys... except you still left one variable unknown: the aloof guy who doesn't belong to any groups.  How do you pick him out of the crowd when he's not in it to begin with?  Those aloof loners are always the ones we should be worrying about, right?  That's what the movies always say.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Brilliant plan , guys... except you still left one variable unknown : the aloof guy who does n't belong to any groups .
How do you pick him out of the crowd when he 's not in it to begin with ?
Those aloof loners are always the ones we should be worrying about , right ?
That 's what the movies always say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brilliant plan, guys... except you still left one variable unknown: the aloof guy who doesn't belong to any groups.
How do you pick him out of the crowd when he's not in it to begin with?
Those aloof loners are always the ones we should be worrying about, right?
That's what the movies always say.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993664</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>pjt33</author>
	<datestamp>1265116800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw the Java plugin fire up when I visited the Panopticlick site. It contains an applet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw the Java plugin fire up when I visited the Panopticlick site .
It contains an applet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw the Java plugin fire up when I visited the Panopticlick site.
It contains an applet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992480</id>
	<title>Can I get a big who cares?</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1265144280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So basically if </p><ol> <li> An attacker indexes the entire user list and group memberships of a social networking sites.</li><li>You regularly visit a large number of the groups you belong to on said social networking site so that their url paths are in your history.</li><li>You're the only person who uses your PC to log onto said social networking site.</li><li>You visit a malicious website using this technique.</li></ol><p> then an attacker might be able to work out the name you use on that social networking site?</p><p>Why would anyone bother. Indexing facebook would take quite a bit of time and resources and at the end of it you'd have something which might or might not be someones real name. Even if it is their real name, what exactly are you going to do with it? So you've unmasked(maybe) the name(maybe) of someone who visited your site. It's not going to give you anything else useful unless you combine it with some other attack vector which could quite easily pick up their real name for free anyway.</p><p>I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interests, but to be honest, you'd probably do better social engineering their ISP to get their account details.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So basically if An attacker indexes the entire user list and group memberships of a social networking sites.You regularly visit a large number of the groups you belong to on said social networking site so that their url paths are in your history.You 're the only person who uses your PC to log onto said social networking site.You visit a malicious website using this technique .
then an attacker might be able to work out the name you use on that social networking site ? Why would anyone bother .
Indexing facebook would take quite a bit of time and resources and at the end of it you 'd have something which might or might not be someones real name .
Even if it is their real name , what exactly are you going to do with it ?
So you 've unmasked ( maybe ) the name ( maybe ) of someone who visited your site .
It 's not going to give you anything else useful unless you combine it with some other attack vector which could quite easily pick up their real name for free anyway.I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interests , but to be honest , you 'd probably do better social engineering their ISP to get their account details .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So basically if   An attacker indexes the entire user list and group memberships of a social networking sites.You regularly visit a large number of the groups you belong to on said social networking site so that their url paths are in your history.You're the only person who uses your PC to log onto said social networking site.You visit a malicious website using this technique.
then an attacker might be able to work out the name you use on that social networking site?Why would anyone bother.
Indexing facebook would take quite a bit of time and resources and at the end of it you'd have something which might or might not be someones real name.
Even if it is their real name, what exactly are you going to do with it?
So you've unmasked(maybe) the name(maybe) of someone who visited your site.
It's not going to give you anything else useful unless you combine it with some other attack vector which could quite easily pick up their real name for free anyway.I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interests, but to be honest, you'd probably do better social engineering their ISP to get their account details.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994704</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is wrong; idea is worthless</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1265123880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CSS can be used to execute the same sort of attack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CSS can be used to execute the same sort of attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CSS can be used to execute the same sort of attack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993740</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is wrong; idea is worthless</title>
	<author>paleshadows</author>
	<datestamp>1265117400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not sure why you think it's worthless.

Like you say, the paper shows that browser-history-stealing can be exploited in a new way, allowing any web site to uniquely identify those who actively participate in social networks. All people who fall under the latter category (presumably very many) are affected, and I imagine quite a few of them do not wish to be identified. So why is this worthless?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure why you think it 's worthless .
Like you say , the paper shows that browser-history-stealing can be exploited in a new way , allowing any web site to uniquely identify those who actively participate in social networks .
All people who fall under the latter category ( presumably very many ) are affected , and I imagine quite a few of them do not wish to be identified .
So why is this worthless ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure why you think it's worthless.
Like you say, the paper shows that browser-history-stealing can be exploited in a new way, allowing any web site to uniquely identify those who actively participate in social networks.
All people who fall under the latter category (presumably very many) are affected, and I imagine quite a few of them do not wish to be identified.
So why is this worthless?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>zwei2stein</author>
	<datestamp>1265102580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your font list is reported by flash and java. Your browser is innocent of this. Disabling flash &amp; java goes long way to make your system information less accessible.</p><p>Sniffing history is basic feature of xhtml/css, price you pay for selectors. a:visited (background-image:"slashdotorg.png") &amp;&amp; <a href="http://www.shasldot.org/" title="shasldot.org">boo!</a> [shasldot.org] - if you go to my site, you will request specific image and i can see it in logs, boom, i know you were to slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your font list is reported by flash and java .
Your browser is innocent of this .
Disabling flash &amp; java goes long way to make your system information less accessible.Sniffing history is basic feature of xhtml/css , price you pay for selectors .
a : visited ( background-image : " slashdotorg.png " ) &amp;&amp; boo !
[ shasldot.org ] - if you go to my site , you will request specific image and i can see it in logs , boom , i know you were to slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your font list is reported by flash and java.
Your browser is innocent of this.
Disabling flash &amp; java goes long way to make your system information less accessible.Sniffing history is basic feature of xhtml/css, price you pay for selectors.
a:visited (background-image:"slashdotorg.png") &amp;&amp; boo!
[shasldot.org] - if you go to my site, you will request specific image and i can see it in logs, boom, i know you were to slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992898</id>
	<title>In similar ways you can detect font w/o Flash/Java</title>
	<author>Animaether</author>
	<datestamp>1265108580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your selectors example can be used similarly for font detection.  Set up CSS with a particular font - fall back to a standard font with known metrics.  Once the page is rendered, use javascript to get the metrics of e.g. the block element you stuck the text in, and you can determine with fair certainty that the user either has that font, or doesn't.  Obviously user CSS overriding things, scripting getting blocked, etc. thwart this - but that's not going to be the vast majority of users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your selectors example can be used similarly for font detection .
Set up CSS with a particular font - fall back to a standard font with known metrics .
Once the page is rendered , use javascript to get the metrics of e.g .
the block element you stuck the text in , and you can determine with fair certainty that the user either has that font , or does n't .
Obviously user CSS overriding things , scripting getting blocked , etc .
thwart this - but that 's not going to be the vast majority of users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your selectors example can be used similarly for font detection.
Set up CSS with a particular font - fall back to a standard font with known metrics.
Once the page is rendered, use javascript to get the metrics of e.g.
the block element you stuck the text in, and you can determine with fair certainty that the user either has that font, or doesn't.
Obviously user CSS overriding things, scripting getting blocked, etc.
thwart this - but that's not going to be the vast majority of users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993984</id>
	<title>Porn mode kills this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265119500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If anyone is even vaguely aware that they should be hiding their identity online, there's now an easy way to do it on every browser and it defeats history stealing.</p><p>This may still be useful to advertisers and other people chasing the unwary but don't bother setting up a porn site, hoping to catch a politician because they'd have to be a complete idiot to get caught by this... actually, never mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If anyone is even vaguely aware that they should be hiding their identity online , there 's now an easy way to do it on every browser and it defeats history stealing.This may still be useful to advertisers and other people chasing the unwary but do n't bother setting up a porn site , hoping to catch a politician because they 'd have to be a complete idiot to get caught by this... actually , never mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anyone is even vaguely aware that they should be hiding their identity online, there's now an easy way to do it on every browser and it defeats history stealing.This may still be useful to advertisers and other people chasing the unwary but don't bother setting up a porn site, hoping to catch a politician because they'd have to be a complete idiot to get caught by this... actually, never mind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992888</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is wrong; idea is worthless</title>
	<author>zdzichu</author>
	<datestamp>1265108460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole site and paper looks like an attempt at marketing Xing. I never heard of this site before, now it's on the news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole site and paper looks like an attempt at marketing Xing .
I never heard of this site before , now it 's on the news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole site and paper looks like an attempt at marketing Xing.
I never heard of this site before, now it's on the news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30997080</id>
	<title>Took 'em long enough.</title>
	<author>Proteus Child</author>
	<datestamp>1265132460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's amazing how long it took the private sector to rediscover good, old-fashioned intelligence analysis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing how long it took the private sector to rediscover good , old-fashioned intelligence analysis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing how long it took the private sector to rediscover good, old-fashioned intelligence analysis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995958</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265128680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to panopticlick, 20\% disable JavaScript. For the overall population, that percentage is sure to be lower. But still, disabling JavaScript does not make you all that unique.</p><p>For my octogenarian parents, I have NoScript blacklist the obvious bad sites (doubleclick.net, etc).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to panopticlick , 20 \ % disable JavaScript .
For the overall population , that percentage is sure to be lower .
But still , disabling JavaScript does not make you all that unique.For my octogenarian parents , I have NoScript blacklist the obvious bad sites ( doubleclick.net , etc ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to panopticlick, 20\% disable JavaScript.
For the overall population, that percentage is sure to be lower.
But still, disabling JavaScript does not make you all that unique.For my octogenarian parents, I have NoScript blacklist the obvious bad sites (doubleclick.net, etc).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992822</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265107140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?"</p><p>NoScript blocks Javascript which in turn blocks most of these queries.</p><p>Still says I'm 1 in 200.000. Probably due to running Ubuntu. I'd have to manipulate my HTTP headers to something very common to counter that. No idea if there's an add-on that does that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or what value to use.</p><p>Add Flashblock if you want to control the execution of Flash independently (e.g. allow JavaScript but only run one of the flash applets, like the video but not all those add/tracker applets).</p></div><p>Not many people disable javascript, that's just one more thing to make you more unique.
</p><p>And there is a big drawback from changing your headers: You're no longer advertising a free operating system. I was thinking of changing my signatures, but I figured that I would rather like webmasters to know that they have linux users as well.
</p><p>.. And last, if I'm not mistaken, NoScript lets me enable individual flash applets on a page, at least I can do that and I don't have Flashblock.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" anyone know of a plugin that blocks them ?
" NoScript blocks Javascript which in turn blocks most of these queries.Still says I 'm 1 in 200.000 .
Probably due to running Ubuntu .
I 'd have to manipulate my HTTP headers to something very common to counter that .
No idea if there 's an add-on that does that ... or what value to use.Add Flashblock if you want to control the execution of Flash independently ( e.g .
allow JavaScript but only run one of the flash applets , like the video but not all those add/tracker applets ) .Not many people disable javascript , that 's just one more thing to make you more unique .
And there is a big drawback from changing your headers : You 're no longer advertising a free operating system .
I was thinking of changing my signatures , but I figured that I would rather like webmasters to know that they have linux users as well .
.. And last , if I 'm not mistaken , NoScript lets me enable individual flash applets on a page , at least I can do that and I do n't have Flashblock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?
"NoScript blocks Javascript which in turn blocks most of these queries.Still says I'm 1 in 200.000.
Probably due to running Ubuntu.
I'd have to manipulate my HTTP headers to something very common to counter that.
No idea if there's an add-on that does that ... or what value to use.Add Flashblock if you want to control the execution of Flash independently (e.g.
allow JavaScript but only run one of the flash applets, like the video but not all those add/tracker applets).Not many people disable javascript, that's just one more thing to make you more unique.
And there is a big drawback from changing your headers: You're no longer advertising a free operating system.
I was thinking of changing my signatures, but I figured that I would rather like webmasters to know that they have linux users as well.
.. And last, if I'm not mistaken, NoScript lets me enable individual flash applets on a page, at least I can do that and I don't have Flashblock.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30999488</id>
	<title>Privacy Law</title>
	<author>Benjamin\_Wright</author>
	<datestamp>1265140980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://legal-beagle.typepad.com/wrights\_legal\_beagle/2009/04/what-is-the-definition-of-personally-identifiable-information.html" title="typepad.com" rel="nofollow">Privacy law</a> [typepad.com] often says (roughly) that personally identifiable information needs to be protected.  But this research calls into question whether we can define personally identifiable information in a legally-meaningful way.  All information related to a person can contribute to identifying the person.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Privacy law [ typepad.com ] often says ( roughly ) that personally identifiable information needs to be protected .
But this research calls into question whether we can define personally identifiable information in a legally-meaningful way .
All information related to a person can contribute to identifying the person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Privacy law [typepad.com] often says (roughly) that personally identifiable information needs to be protected.
But this research calls into question whether we can define personally identifiable information in a legally-meaningful way.
All information related to a person can contribute to identifying the person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992694</id>
	<title>Re:Can I get a big who cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265104320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interests</p></div><p>You mean, like, a social networking site?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interestsYou mean , like , a social networking site ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interestsYou mean, like, a social networking site?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992644</id>
	<title>Re:Fonts, Plugins, History... why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265103600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?"</p><p>NoScript blocks Javascript which in turn blocks most of these queries.</p><p>Still says I'm 1 in 200.000. Probably due to running Ubuntu. I'd have to manipulate my HTTP headers to something very common to counter that. No idea if there's an add-on that does that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or what value to use.</p><p>Add Flashblock if you want to control the execution of Flash independently (e.g. allow JavaScript but only run one of the flash applets, like the video but not all those add/tracker applets).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" anyone know of a plugin that blocks them ?
" NoScript blocks Javascript which in turn blocks most of these queries.Still says I 'm 1 in 200.000 .
Probably due to running Ubuntu .
I 'd have to manipulate my HTTP headers to something very common to counter that .
No idea if there 's an add-on that does that ... or what value to use.Add Flashblock if you want to control the execution of Flash independently ( e.g .
allow JavaScript but only run one of the flash applets , like the video but not all those add/tracker applets ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?
"NoScript blocks Javascript which in turn blocks most of these queries.Still says I'm 1 in 200.000.
Probably due to running Ubuntu.
I'd have to manipulate my HTTP headers to something very common to counter that.
No idea if there's an add-on that does that ... or what value to use.Add Flashblock if you want to control the execution of Flash independently (e.g.
allow JavaScript but only run one of the flash applets, like the video but not all those add/tracker applets).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31004610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31006906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31001350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30998706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31002180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31014250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_02_0118213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995130
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992862
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31014250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30998706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994402
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993178
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993664
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31001350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992644
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992822
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994928
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993180
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30995724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31004610
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992798
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30994704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992888
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31002180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30993740
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_02_0118213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.30992406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_02_0118213.31006906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
