<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_19_2324257</id>
	<title>Windows 7 Can Create Rogue Wi-Fi Access Point</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266579300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>alphadogg writes <i>"Windows 7 contains a 'SoftAP' feature, also called 'virtual Wi-Fi,' that allows a PC to function <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/wireless/2010/022210wireless1.html">simultaneously as a Wi-Fi client and as an access point</a> to which other Wi-Fi-capable devices can connect. The capability is handy when users want to share music and play interactive games. But it also can allow on-site visitors and parking-lot hackers to piggyback onto the user's laptop and 'ghost ride' into a corporate network unnoticed."</i>

While this means a bit more policing for networks meant to be locked down, it sounds like a good thing overall. Linux users, meanwhile, have had <a href="http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux\_2\_6\_26#head-26b4a3f6eb606c21056e4f906a4dae88077346f5">kernel support (since 2.6.26)</a> for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE\_802.11s">802.11s mesh networking</a>, as well as <a href="http://hostap.epitest.fi/">Host AP support for certain chipsets</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>alphadogg writes " Windows 7 contains a 'SoftAP ' feature , also called 'virtual Wi-Fi, ' that allows a PC to function simultaneously as a Wi-Fi client and as an access point to which other Wi-Fi-capable devices can connect .
The capability is handy when users want to share music and play interactive games .
But it also can allow on-site visitors and parking-lot hackers to piggyback onto the user 's laptop and 'ghost ride ' into a corporate network unnoticed .
" While this means a bit more policing for networks meant to be locked down , it sounds like a good thing overall .
Linux users , meanwhile , have had kernel support ( since 2.6.26 ) for 802.11s mesh networking , as well as Host AP support for certain chipsets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>alphadogg writes "Windows 7 contains a 'SoftAP' feature, also called 'virtual Wi-Fi,' that allows a PC to function simultaneously as a Wi-Fi client and as an access point to which other Wi-Fi-capable devices can connect.
The capability is handy when users want to share music and play interactive games.
But it also can allow on-site visitors and parking-lot hackers to piggyback onto the user's laptop and 'ghost ride' into a corporate network unnoticed.
"

While this means a bit more policing for networks meant to be locked down, it sounds like a good thing overall.
Linux users, meanwhile, have had kernel support (since 2.6.26) for 802.11s mesh networking, as well as Host AP support for certain chipsets.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206592</id>
	<title>Re:Ghost ridin' the whip!</title>
	<author>LeperPuppet</author>
	<datestamp>1266587580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The TV show the Real Hustle showed this run as a scam to harvest credit card details.  A scammer with a laptop sets up as a fake access point which serves up fake payment screen to anyone who connects to that point.  Most of the people connecting to the point assume that the payment screen is legitimate and enter their details.  You might not catch the truly paranoid or alert, but there's still plenty of people who would be fooled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The TV show the Real Hustle showed this run as a scam to harvest credit card details .
A scammer with a laptop sets up as a fake access point which serves up fake payment screen to anyone who connects to that point .
Most of the people connecting to the point assume that the payment screen is legitimate and enter their details .
You might not catch the truly paranoid or alert , but there 's still plenty of people who would be fooled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The TV show the Real Hustle showed this run as a scam to harvest credit card details.
A scammer with a laptop sets up as a fake access point which serves up fake payment screen to anyone who connects to that point.
Most of the people connecting to the point assume that the payment screen is legitimate and enter their details.
You might not catch the truly paranoid or alert, but there's still plenty of people who would be fooled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207554</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>Redlazer</author>
	<datestamp>1266597960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cisco's implementation is the most cumbersome and the most expensive. I don't truly know how useful it is compared to Aruba's, but I know that Aruba's works like a charm every time, and is automatic and fast.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cisco 's implementation is the most cumbersome and the most expensive .
I do n't truly know how useful it is compared to Aruba 's , but I know that Aruba 's works like a charm every time , and is automatic and fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cisco's implementation is the most cumbersome and the most expensive.
I don't truly know how useful it is compared to Aruba's, but I know that Aruba's works like a charm every time, and is automatic and fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260</id>
	<title>Linux Treats You Like An Adult....</title>
	<author>pandrijeczko</author>
	<datestamp>1266584580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...you make decisions about how you want to configure it, you put some work into researching how it should be configured correctly, and you face the consequences of what can go wrong if you mess it up.</p><p>If you need to be nursemaided in your computer use, stick with a Mac or Windows. If you're prepared to put some effort into learning how a computer works and how to search forums and asks questions of people who are more than willing to help you out free-of-charge, then try Linux.</p><p>It's that simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...you make decisions about how you want to configure it , you put some work into researching how it should be configured correctly , and you face the consequences of what can go wrong if you mess it up.If you need to be nursemaided in your computer use , stick with a Mac or Windows .
If you 're prepared to put some effort into learning how a computer works and how to search forums and asks questions of people who are more than willing to help you out free-of-charge , then try Linux.It 's that simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...you make decisions about how you want to configure it, you put some work into researching how it should be configured correctly, and you face the consequences of what can go wrong if you mess it up.If you need to be nursemaided in your computer use, stick with a Mac or Windows.
If you're prepared to put some effort into learning how a computer works and how to search forums and asks questions of people who are more than willing to help you out free-of-charge, then try Linux.It's that simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31209748</id>
	<title>Is this just the Ad-Hoc network option</title>
	<author>moxley</author>
	<datestamp>1266677880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this just the Ad-Hoc network option that can be setup in the network and sharing center, or is it something else?</p><p>I have Win7 Ultimate and I can't find anything that refers to "VirtualAP" or "SoftAP."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this just the Ad-Hoc network option that can be setup in the network and sharing center , or is it something else ? I have Win7 Ultimate and I ca n't find anything that refers to " VirtualAP " or " SoftAP .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this just the Ad-Hoc network option that can be setup in the network and sharing center, or is it something else?I have Win7 Ultimate and I can't find anything that refers to "VirtualAP" or "SoftAP.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31212486</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Treats You Like An Adult....</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1266656700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My time is no longer worth nothing and the last thing I want to do is spend time dicking around with a computer for everyday use.  At work it costs money and at home, it's the last thing I want to do when I get home.  And every time I attempt to use Linux in a desktop environment, I still have to fuck around with some piece of hardware to get it to work.  Hell even when I did research this last time on wireless hardware, all the sites said it would work and the card was a couple years old.  So I bought it and turned out it was the one revision that linux wouldn't support with an NDIS wrapper.  It cost me about a half days worth of work to get everything configured correctly.  At my billable hours rate those 4 hours was an opportunity cost of $340.  That easily makes up the price difference between a barebones kit and the price of a Mac Mini.</p><p>That's why when OSX 10.2 came out I said the hell with it and bought a mac and never looked back.  OSX stays the hell out of my way.  If something comes up, and since we're in development things do, I can always open up terminal and I got just as much power as would in Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My time is no longer worth nothing and the last thing I want to do is spend time dicking around with a computer for everyday use .
At work it costs money and at home , it 's the last thing I want to do when I get home .
And every time I attempt to use Linux in a desktop environment , I still have to fuck around with some piece of hardware to get it to work .
Hell even when I did research this last time on wireless hardware , all the sites said it would work and the card was a couple years old .
So I bought it and turned out it was the one revision that linux would n't support with an NDIS wrapper .
It cost me about a half days worth of work to get everything configured correctly .
At my billable hours rate those 4 hours was an opportunity cost of $ 340 .
That easily makes up the price difference between a barebones kit and the price of a Mac Mini.That 's why when OSX 10.2 came out I said the hell with it and bought a mac and never looked back .
OSX stays the hell out of my way .
If something comes up , and since we 're in development things do , I can always open up terminal and I got just as much power as would in Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My time is no longer worth nothing and the last thing I want to do is spend time dicking around with a computer for everyday use.
At work it costs money and at home, it's the last thing I want to do when I get home.
And every time I attempt to use Linux in a desktop environment, I still have to fuck around with some piece of hardware to get it to work.
Hell even when I did research this last time on wireless hardware, all the sites said it would work and the card was a couple years old.
So I bought it and turned out it was the one revision that linux wouldn't support with an NDIS wrapper.
It cost me about a half days worth of work to get everything configured correctly.
At my billable hours rate those 4 hours was an opportunity cost of $340.
That easily makes up the price difference between a barebones kit and the price of a Mac Mini.That's why when OSX 10.2 came out I said the hell with it and bought a mac and never looked back.
OSX stays the hell out of my way.
If something comes up, and since we're in development things do, I can always open up terminal and I got just as much power as would in Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206086</id>
	<title>No biased reporting here on /. Just the facts.</title>
	<author>DiamondGeezer</author>
	<datestamp>1266583620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't participate much in the bore-a-thon dick-measuring contest called "Windows v Linux" on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. but for the record, its crap reporting to claim that Windows 7's "SoftAP" is a "rogue" which allows "ghostriding" while Linux's "802.11s mesh networking" is somehow better because it pre-dates Windows 7 when it allows the same problem which needs to be policed.<br> <br>

I have lots of criticisms of Windows generally and I run XP and Kubuntu, but SoftAP is a network management issue for corporate networks, not a "rogue".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't participate much in the bore-a-thon dick-measuring contest called " Windows v Linux " on / .
but for the record , its crap reporting to claim that Windows 7 's " SoftAP " is a " rogue " which allows " ghostriding " while Linux 's " 802.11s mesh networking " is somehow better because it pre-dates Windows 7 when it allows the same problem which needs to be policed .
I have lots of criticisms of Windows generally and I run XP and Kubuntu , but SoftAP is a network management issue for corporate networks , not a " rogue " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't participate much in the bore-a-thon dick-measuring contest called "Windows v Linux" on /.
but for the record, its crap reporting to claim that Windows 7's "SoftAP" is a "rogue" which allows "ghostriding" while Linux's "802.11s mesh networking" is somehow better because it pre-dates Windows 7 when it allows the same problem which needs to be policed.
I have lots of criticisms of Windows generally and I run XP and Kubuntu, but SoftAP is a network management issue for corporate networks, not a "rogue".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208310</id>
	<title>Mesh is here</title>
	<author>DogDude</author>
	<datestamp>1266608100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this article is accurate, we'll see the beginnings of real ad-hoc mesh networks starting in 2010.  This feature has the potential for allowing massive ad-hoc networks.  Awesome.  ISP's are going to pee themselves.  Awesome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this article is accurate , we 'll see the beginnings of real ad-hoc mesh networks starting in 2010 .
This feature has the potential for allowing massive ad-hoc networks .
Awesome. ISP 's are going to pee themselves .
Awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this article is accurate, we'll see the beginnings of real ad-hoc mesh networks starting in 2010.
This feature has the potential for allowing massive ad-hoc networks.
Awesome.  ISP's are going to pee themselves.
Awesome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206184</id>
	<title>Ghost Ridin' Go Crazy!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266584100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who's that surfin,  Patrick Swayze?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who 's that surfin , Patrick Swayze ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who's that surfin,  Patrick Swayze?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206062</id>
	<title>Ghost ridin' the whip!</title>
	<author>hkz</author>
	<datestamp>1266583500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ghost ridin' the whip! No seriously, I've been wanting to use the Linux host AP features to bring up a mischievous AP that does man-in-the-middle attacks. I'd be connected to some open wifi somewhere, and someone would connect to my netbook and also see an open access point. I'd then give them the upside-downternet: <a href="http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html" title="ex-parrot.com">http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html</a> [ex-parrot.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ghost ridin ' the whip !
No seriously , I 've been wanting to use the Linux host AP features to bring up a mischievous AP that does man-in-the-middle attacks .
I 'd be connected to some open wifi somewhere , and someone would connect to my netbook and also see an open access point .
I 'd then give them the upside-downternet : http : //www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html [ ex-parrot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ghost ridin' the whip!
No seriously, I've been wanting to use the Linux host AP features to bring up a mischievous AP that does man-in-the-middle attacks.
I'd be connected to some open wifi somewhere, and someone would connect to my netbook and also see an open access point.
I'd then give them the upside-downternet: http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html [ex-parrot.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208630</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone see the Linux bias here?</title>
	<author>pandrijeczko</author>
	<datestamp>1266657660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I'm both a Windows XP and Linux user (and I like them both for their own reasons), let me explain this to you in more detail.</p><p>Any Linux application I use holds it configuration in a text-based file somewhere on the system - either in my home directory, or globally under<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc somewhere. Whenever I want to change the configuration of an app, I can back up the old configuration just by making a copy of a text file.</p><p>So if I'm messing about with the configuration of, say, Xorg (the modern implementation of the X-Windows GUI) to get a particular graphics card feature to work, it's quite possible I break Xorg and have to go scanning through log files to find out why what I did broke it. But I can also just copy back in the original<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/X11/xorg.conf file and it will work again...</p><p>If I'm messing about with some new kernel features, then I can end up putting in place a kernel that panics when I try to boot. But it's very easy to configure the GRUB bootloader to give you the option of booting from the last working kernel that you always keep a copy of, so if my new kernel borks then I can always boot back on the old kernel and try compiling a new one again.</p><p>Yes, this stuff is all complicated, even to a Linux veteran like me, but as long as you act responsibly, think about the ramifications about what you are doing, and make sure you have a backout plan, it's not really a problem.</p><p>Now explain to me how this would work in Windows? Don't get me wrong, XP is a bloody reliable OS (I can't comment on Vista or 7 because I've never used either) and uninstalling an application usually works to get you out of any mess you're in.</p><p>But what about if that app trashes the registry, what do you do then?</p><p>And why is it such a big deal whenever I try to backup my "Documents and Settings" directory in Windows, that it won't let me backup a lot of the files unless I boot into safe mode? Or how about I want to take my app settings from one XP machine to another? Presumably I have to use some convoluted backup program, whereas in Linux I can just use "cp" or "scp" over the network to send my home directory and all it's config contents somewhere else.</p><p>I'm sorry, but if something happens on an OS that the user cannot prepare a reasonable backup plan for, then it's a flaw in the OS. No, it doesn't happen often in XP but even as recently as last week, there were reports of some automatic updates trashing users' PCs...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I 'm both a Windows XP and Linux user ( and I like them both for their own reasons ) , let me explain this to you in more detail.Any Linux application I use holds it configuration in a text-based file somewhere on the system - either in my home directory , or globally under /etc somewhere .
Whenever I want to change the configuration of an app , I can back up the old configuration just by making a copy of a text file.So if I 'm messing about with the configuration of , say , Xorg ( the modern implementation of the X-Windows GUI ) to get a particular graphics card feature to work , it 's quite possible I break Xorg and have to go scanning through log files to find out why what I did broke it .
But I can also just copy back in the original /etc/X11/xorg.conf file and it will work again...If I 'm messing about with some new kernel features , then I can end up putting in place a kernel that panics when I try to boot .
But it 's very easy to configure the GRUB bootloader to give you the option of booting from the last working kernel that you always keep a copy of , so if my new kernel borks then I can always boot back on the old kernel and try compiling a new one again.Yes , this stuff is all complicated , even to a Linux veteran like me , but as long as you act responsibly , think about the ramifications about what you are doing , and make sure you have a backout plan , it 's not really a problem.Now explain to me how this would work in Windows ?
Do n't get me wrong , XP is a bloody reliable OS ( I ca n't comment on Vista or 7 because I 've never used either ) and uninstalling an application usually works to get you out of any mess you 're in.But what about if that app trashes the registry , what do you do then ? And why is it such a big deal whenever I try to backup my " Documents and Settings " directory in Windows , that it wo n't let me backup a lot of the files unless I boot into safe mode ?
Or how about I want to take my app settings from one XP machine to another ?
Presumably I have to use some convoluted backup program , whereas in Linux I can just use " cp " or " scp " over the network to send my home directory and all it 's config contents somewhere else.I 'm sorry , but if something happens on an OS that the user can not prepare a reasonable backup plan for , then it 's a flaw in the OS .
No , it does n't happen often in XP but even as recently as last week , there were reports of some automatic updates trashing users ' PCs.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I'm both a Windows XP and Linux user (and I like them both for their own reasons), let me explain this to you in more detail.Any Linux application I use holds it configuration in a text-based file somewhere on the system - either in my home directory, or globally under /etc somewhere.
Whenever I want to change the configuration of an app, I can back up the old configuration just by making a copy of a text file.So if I'm messing about with the configuration of, say, Xorg (the modern implementation of the X-Windows GUI) to get a particular graphics card feature to work, it's quite possible I break Xorg and have to go scanning through log files to find out why what I did broke it.
But I can also just copy back in the original /etc/X11/xorg.conf file and it will work again...If I'm messing about with some new kernel features, then I can end up putting in place a kernel that panics when I try to boot.
But it's very easy to configure the GRUB bootloader to give you the option of booting from the last working kernel that you always keep a copy of, so if my new kernel borks then I can always boot back on the old kernel and try compiling a new one again.Yes, this stuff is all complicated, even to a Linux veteran like me, but as long as you act responsibly, think about the ramifications about what you are doing, and make sure you have a backout plan, it's not really a problem.Now explain to me how this would work in Windows?
Don't get me wrong, XP is a bloody reliable OS (I can't comment on Vista or 7 because I've never used either) and uninstalling an application usually works to get you out of any mess you're in.But what about if that app trashes the registry, what do you do then?And why is it such a big deal whenever I try to backup my "Documents and Settings" directory in Windows, that it won't let me backup a lot of the files unless I boot into safe mode?
Or how about I want to take my app settings from one XP machine to another?
Presumably I have to use some convoluted backup program, whereas in Linux I can just use "cp" or "scp" over the network to send my home directory and all it's config contents somewhere else.I'm sorry, but if something happens on an OS that the user cannot prepare a reasonable backup plan for, then it's a flaw in the OS.
No, it doesn't happen often in XP but even as recently as last week, there were reports of some automatic updates trashing users' PCs...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206198</id>
	<title>What is this crap</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266584220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any OS will have problems if used incorrectly. This biased reporting is BS. It needs to stop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any OS will have problems if used incorrectly .
This biased reporting is BS .
It needs to stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any OS will have problems if used incorrectly.
This biased reporting is BS.
It needs to stop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206106</id>
	<title>Oh my, what danger!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266583680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So....what's the problem? Hundreds of features can be used to do evil.<br> <br> <br>Damn!...I forgot to cover the USB hole again! Now a hacker can plug a dirty cable in it!<br> <br>More seriously, I get it, it's the fact that it is a hidden feature. Still, leave MS alone and stop the fuzz. I may not like them; I may not stand them, but you seem to hate them more^^</htmltext>
<tokenext>So....what 's the problem ?
Hundreds of features can be used to do evil .
Damn ! ...I forgot to cover the USB hole again !
Now a hacker can plug a dirty cable in it !
More seriously , I get it , it 's the fact that it is a hidden feature .
Still , leave MS alone and stop the fuzz .
I may not like them ; I may not stand them , but you seem to hate them more ^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So....what's the problem?
Hundreds of features can be used to do evil.
Damn!...I forgot to cover the USB hole again!
Now a hacker can plug a dirty cable in it!
More seriously, I get it, it's the fact that it is a hidden feature.
Still, leave MS alone and stop the fuzz.
I may not like them; I may not stand them, but you seem to hate them more^^</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206586</id>
	<title>AD-hoc</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266587520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its called AD-hoc network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its called AD-hoc network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its called AD-hoc network.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206974</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266591600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Anyways the fix is simple</p></div></blockquote><p>Yes, give cisco sh*tloads of money.  It's just like the easy solution with corrosion, coat everything in gold.  There are better things to do with budgets.<br>I had an idiot bring in his own wireless access point instead of borrowing any of the spare 8 port switches and a 2 metre cable - and that idiot turned on dhcpd and took quite a few people off the network.  The only real way to stop that is firewalls all over the place or firewalls built into all the switches.  Effectively you tell the new device that if you are not on the list you are not sending or receiving anything.  Only very expensive switches can do this on every port, so the other answer is a lot of firewalls to quarantine off network segments and limit the damage.<br>IT notifying people is not enough - because then you still get the clueless n00b that thinks they are a genius so the rules do not apply to them and they decide a production network is a nice place for them to learn the basics of networking by poking it with a stick until it breaks.  You have to give them a sandbox and whack them on the nose when they sh*t outside of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyways the fix is simpleYes , give cisco sh * tloads of money .
It 's just like the easy solution with corrosion , coat everything in gold .
There are better things to do with budgets.I had an idiot bring in his own wireless access point instead of borrowing any of the spare 8 port switches and a 2 metre cable - and that idiot turned on dhcpd and took quite a few people off the network .
The only real way to stop that is firewalls all over the place or firewalls built into all the switches .
Effectively you tell the new device that if you are not on the list you are not sending or receiving anything .
Only very expensive switches can do this on every port , so the other answer is a lot of firewalls to quarantine off network segments and limit the damage.IT notifying people is not enough - because then you still get the clueless n00b that thinks they are a genius so the rules do not apply to them and they decide a production network is a nice place for them to learn the basics of networking by poking it with a stick until it breaks .
You have to give them a sandbox and whack them on the nose when they sh * t outside of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyways the fix is simpleYes, give cisco sh*tloads of money.
It's just like the easy solution with corrosion, coat everything in gold.
There are better things to do with budgets.I had an idiot bring in his own wireless access point instead of borrowing any of the spare 8 port switches and a 2 metre cable - and that idiot turned on dhcpd and took quite a few people off the network.
The only real way to stop that is firewalls all over the place or firewalls built into all the switches.
Effectively you tell the new device that if you are not on the list you are not sending or receiving anything.
Only very expensive switches can do this on every port, so the other answer is a lot of firewalls to quarantine off network segments and limit the damage.IT notifying people is not enough - because then you still get the clueless n00b that thinks they are a genius so the rules do not apply to them and they decide a production network is a nice place for them to learn the basics of networking by poking it with a stick until it breaks.
You have to give them a sandbox and whack them on the nose when they sh*t outside of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206786</id>
	<title>Re:Damn! Should have installed Win7 instead of Ubu</title>
	<author>Xabraxas</author>
	<datestamp>1266589500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MAC802.11 supports creating an AP and since the standard intel wireless driver is MAC802.11 based you should be able to do this easily with the aircrack-ng suite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MAC802.11 supports creating an AP and since the standard intel wireless driver is MAC802.11 based you should be able to do this easily with the aircrack-ng suite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MAC802.11 supports creating an AP and since the standard intel wireless driver is MAC802.11 based you should be able to do this easily with the aircrack-ng suite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</id>
	<title>Easy Solution</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1266584940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This doesn't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network, except that a) they can do it from outside the building wirelessly and b) any special software used by the 7 user to access the network could potentially helpfully forward packets from others, but that would probably be a fault of the software not checking the origin IP on packets...</p><p>Anyways the fix is simple.  Require authentication for all network resources.  Windows enterprise solutions are set up like this by default and do it transparently using Windows login credentials.  An intruder on your network would be unable to access anything.  There is the LITTLE issue of exploits, so you can either batten down the hatches as much as you can and continually scan for suspicious network traffic, or you can try an alternate solution which may work better (a combination of both would be best):</p><p>For complete security, IT could notify all employees that use of this feature is not permitted.  On corporate machines it could be disabled or removed or steps taken to block access, but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working (not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known, except complete Windows software compatibility.  Someone did mention Linux software that did this though, and my brother's WiFi card supposedly does it too with a special included application.).  IT could also compromise and allow users to use it if it is properly configured, with clear steps outlining how to check if this is the case.  However either way, severe penalties (starting with being kicked off the network until you have resolved the problem) would be issued for having an open access point.  IT would have to periodically stage their own "attacks" to look for such hotspots and attempt to connect, and then lock the user out of the network if they are able to access the user's machine anonymously (ie folder shares with company files) or the network.</p><p>OK so it's a long winded solution but basically: The problem isn't new, lock down systems with authentication best you can, routinely scan for hotspots and penalize users that put them up.</p><p>Disclaimer: I am not a security expert but I like to think I've picked up a few things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This does n't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network , except that a ) they can do it from outside the building wirelessly and b ) any special software used by the 7 user to access the network could potentially helpfully forward packets from others , but that would probably be a fault of the software not checking the origin IP on packets...Anyways the fix is simple .
Require authentication for all network resources .
Windows enterprise solutions are set up like this by default and do it transparently using Windows login credentials .
An intruder on your network would be unable to access anything .
There is the LITTLE issue of exploits , so you can either batten down the hatches as much as you can and continually scan for suspicious network traffic , or you can try an alternate solution which may work better ( a combination of both would be best ) : For complete security , IT could notify all employees that use of this feature is not permitted .
On corporate machines it could be disabled or removed or steps taken to block access , but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working ( not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known , except complete Windows software compatibility .
Someone did mention Linux software that did this though , and my brother 's WiFi card supposedly does it too with a special included application. ) .
IT could also compromise and allow users to use it if it is properly configured , with clear steps outlining how to check if this is the case .
However either way , severe penalties ( starting with being kicked off the network until you have resolved the problem ) would be issued for having an open access point .
IT would have to periodically stage their own " attacks " to look for such hotspots and attempt to connect , and then lock the user out of the network if they are able to access the user 's machine anonymously ( ie folder shares with company files ) or the network.OK so it 's a long winded solution but basically : The problem is n't new , lock down systems with authentication best you can , routinely scan for hotspots and penalize users that put them up.Disclaimer : I am not a security expert but I like to think I 've picked up a few things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This doesn't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network, except that a) they can do it from outside the building wirelessly and b) any special software used by the 7 user to access the network could potentially helpfully forward packets from others, but that would probably be a fault of the software not checking the origin IP on packets...Anyways the fix is simple.
Require authentication for all network resources.
Windows enterprise solutions are set up like this by default and do it transparently using Windows login credentials.
An intruder on your network would be unable to access anything.
There is the LITTLE issue of exploits, so you can either batten down the hatches as much as you can and continually scan for suspicious network traffic, or you can try an alternate solution which may work better (a combination of both would be best):For complete security, IT could notify all employees that use of this feature is not permitted.
On corporate machines it could be disabled or removed or steps taken to block access, but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working (not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known, except complete Windows software compatibility.
Someone did mention Linux software that did this though, and my brother's WiFi card supposedly does it too with a special included application.).
IT could also compromise and allow users to use it if it is properly configured, with clear steps outlining how to check if this is the case.
However either way, severe penalties (starting with being kicked off the network until you have resolved the problem) would be issued for having an open access point.
IT would have to periodically stage their own "attacks" to look for such hotspots and attempt to connect, and then lock the user out of the network if they are able to access the user's machine anonymously (ie folder shares with company files) or the network.OK so it's a long winded solution but basically: The problem isn't new, lock down systems with authentication best you can, routinely scan for hotspots and penalize users that put them up.Disclaimer: I am not a security expert but I like to think I've picked up a few things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206344</id>
	<title>Oh I see what you tried to do there..</title>
	<author>synthesizerpatel</author>
	<datestamp>1266585480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you attempt with 'ghost ride' is better communicated and less retarded with one of the following phrases:</p><p>* piggy-backing<br>* covert channel<br>* out-of-band</p><p>There's no applicable analogy with 'ghost ride' to communicate what you're trying to describe. Don't try to introduce new lingo. You might as well call it 'Dog sledding' as it has just as much in common with covert channels as 'ghost riding' does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you attempt with 'ghost ride ' is better communicated and less retarded with one of the following phrases : * piggy-backing * covert channel * out-of-bandThere 's no applicable analogy with 'ghost ride ' to communicate what you 're trying to describe .
Do n't try to introduce new lingo .
You might as well call it 'Dog sledding ' as it has just as much in common with covert channels as 'ghost riding ' does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you attempt with 'ghost ride' is better communicated and less retarded with one of the following phrases:* piggy-backing* covert channel* out-of-bandThere's no applicable analogy with 'ghost ride' to communicate what you're trying to describe.
Don't try to introduce new lingo.
You might as well call it 'Dog sledding' as it has just as much in common with covert channels as 'ghost riding' does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</id>
	<title>Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>Josh04</author>
	<datestamp>1266583440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X, which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W! Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X , which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W !
Linux has had feature X since 20VV , the 'Year of the Linux Desktop' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X, which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W!
Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207056</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>jpmorgan</author>
	<datestamp>1266592980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Er, no. In this case, Linux has features Q and R, which aren't anything like X, but chances are nobody will notice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Er , no .
In this case , Linux has features Q and R , which are n't anything like X , but chances are nobody will notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Er, no.
In this case, Linux has features Q and R, which aren't anything like X, but chances are nobody will notice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206556</id>
	<title>Re:No biased reporting here on /. Just the facts.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266587280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, depending on your p.o.v., there is no such thing as bias or facts. Because there are no absolutes in nature, except in mathematics. Everything is relative. Every information is filtered, interpreted and processed a billion times. And always relative to the processor&rsquo;s standpoint.</p><p>What you call &ldquo;facts&rdquo; is what fits your inner model and comes from trusted sources. What you call bias, are simply points of view that differ from yours. That&rsquo;s all there is to it.<br>Which means that actually it does not matter, since you can always get out the useful bits that fit your reality, by knowing the standpoint of the sources, and interpreting things accordingly.</p><p>(Denying all this, because you thought all your life, that there are absolute truths, won&rsquo;t make it go away. You can of course develop another explanation that fits you better. But will it improve your life more than this one?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>About your comment&rsquo;s actual content: I agree, since it nicely fits my inner model, and your comment shows no signs of trustworthiness or inconsistencies visible to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , depending on your p.o.v. , there is no such thing as bias or facts .
Because there are no absolutes in nature , except in mathematics .
Everything is relative .
Every information is filtered , interpreted and processed a billion times .
And always relative to the processor    s standpoint.What you call    facts    is what fits your inner model and comes from trusted sources .
What you call bias , are simply points of view that differ from yours .
That    s all there is to it.Which means that actually it does not matter , since you can always get out the useful bits that fit your reality , by knowing the standpoint of the sources , and interpreting things accordingly .
( Denying all this , because you thought all your life , that there are absolute truths , won    t make it go away .
You can of course develop another explanation that fits you better .
But will it improve your life more than this one ?
: ) About your comment    s actual content : I agree , since it nicely fits my inner model , and your comment shows no signs of trustworthiness or inconsistencies visible to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, depending on your p.o.v., there is no such thing as bias or facts.
Because there are no absolutes in nature, except in mathematics.
Everything is relative.
Every information is filtered, interpreted and processed a billion times.
And always relative to the processor’s standpoint.What you call “facts” is what fits your inner model and comes from trusted sources.
What you call bias, are simply points of view that differ from yours.
That’s all there is to it.Which means that actually it does not matter, since you can always get out the useful bits that fit your reality, by knowing the standpoint of the sources, and interpreting things accordingly.
(Denying all this, because you thought all your life, that there are absolute truths, won’t make it go away.
You can of course develop another explanation that fits you better.
But will it improve your life more than this one?
:)About your comment’s actual content: I agree, since it nicely fits my inner model, and your comment shows no signs of trustworthiness or inconsistencies visible to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207542</id>
	<title>Re:Damn! Should have installed Win7 instead of Ubu</title>
	<author>Redlazer</author>
	<datestamp>1266597840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows 7 can do lots of cool stuff I like.
<p>
Kubuntu can do lots of cool stuff I like.
</p><p>
So, I use both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 can do lots of cool stuff I like .
Kubuntu can do lots of cool stuff I like .
So , I use both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 can do lots of cool stuff I like.
Kubuntu can do lots of cool stuff I like.
So, I use both.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208558</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Treats You Like An Adult....</title>
	<author>pandrijeczko</author>
	<datestamp>1266656460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, your comment tells me that you've never used Linux - or at least not recently.</p><p>I have all manner of USB disks, webcams, drives, phones, etc. at home and use them all on dual-booting Gentoo Linux and Windows XP machines. The biggest problem I have had with USB recently (and strictly speaking it's not a USB issue) is how to get NTFS-formatted external USB disks to mount with proper permissions using the ntfs-3g user space driver.</p><p>The reason this problem came about in the first place was because Microsoft don't allow you to format any drive over 32GB with FAT32 in recent Windows versions (even though FAT32 partitions have a size limit of 2TB) and I needed to have USB disks readable/writeable by both OSes.</p><p>In the end I found <a href="http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/index.htm?fat32format.htm" title="demon.co.uk">fat32format</a> [demon.co.uk] which does allow me to use FAT32 on big external disks (even PartitionMagic sets an arbitrary 200GB FAT32 partition limit) and ditched NTFS completely.</p><p>I suggest you go ahead and try a modern Linux distro with built in daemons like hal and udev running on startup - because with a modular kernel these days, hardware detection is pretty much automatic....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , your comment tells me that you 've never used Linux - or at least not recently.I have all manner of USB disks , webcams , drives , phones , etc .
at home and use them all on dual-booting Gentoo Linux and Windows XP machines .
The biggest problem I have had with USB recently ( and strictly speaking it 's not a USB issue ) is how to get NTFS-formatted external USB disks to mount with proper permissions using the ntfs-3g user space driver.The reason this problem came about in the first place was because Microsoft do n't allow you to format any drive over 32GB with FAT32 in recent Windows versions ( even though FAT32 partitions have a size limit of 2TB ) and I needed to have USB disks readable/writeable by both OSes.In the end I found fat32format [ demon.co.uk ] which does allow me to use FAT32 on big external disks ( even PartitionMagic sets an arbitrary 200GB FAT32 partition limit ) and ditched NTFS completely.I suggest you go ahead and try a modern Linux distro with built in daemons like hal and udev running on startup - because with a modular kernel these days , hardware detection is pretty much automatic... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, your comment tells me that you've never used Linux - or at least not recently.I have all manner of USB disks, webcams, drives, phones, etc.
at home and use them all on dual-booting Gentoo Linux and Windows XP machines.
The biggest problem I have had with USB recently (and strictly speaking it's not a USB issue) is how to get NTFS-formatted external USB disks to mount with proper permissions using the ntfs-3g user space driver.The reason this problem came about in the first place was because Microsoft don't allow you to format any drive over 32GB with FAT32 in recent Windows versions (even though FAT32 partitions have a size limit of 2TB) and I needed to have USB disks readable/writeable by both OSes.In the end I found fat32format [demon.co.uk] which does allow me to use FAT32 on big external disks (even PartitionMagic sets an arbitrary 200GB FAT32 partition limit) and ditched NTFS completely.I suggest you go ahead and try a modern Linux distro with built in daemons like hal and udev running on startup - because with a modular kernel these days, hardware detection is pretty much automatic....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207976</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206324</id>
	<title>Not again..</title>
	<author>Niobe</author>
	<datestamp>1266585300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't we already go through this with Ad Hoc networks on the original version of Win XP? The 'Free Public Wifi' SSID is still around today thanks to this poorly conceived 'convenience' and it was a nightmare for anyone trying to manage a secure wireless network.

I think time will show this feature not being worth the trouble it causes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we already go through this with Ad Hoc networks on the original version of Win XP ?
The 'Free Public Wifi ' SSID is still around today thanks to this poorly conceived 'convenience ' and it was a nightmare for anyone trying to manage a secure wireless network .
I think time will show this feature not being worth the trouble it causes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we already go through this with Ad Hoc networks on the original version of Win XP?
The 'Free Public Wifi' SSID is still around today thanks to this poorly conceived 'convenience' and it was a nightmare for anyone trying to manage a secure wireless network.
I think time will show this feature not being worth the trouble it causes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206464</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1266586440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it should be "Linux has had feature W since 20VV" since its about Windows' and Linux' capabilities to work as a WiFi access point which, as TFS states, is actually a pretty useful feature in many scenarios. The only problem with Windows' implementation is that its presumably(*) turned on by default, which can be problematic in some enviroments from a security standpoint.</p><p><i>(*) "presumably" because TFA is awfully thin on details, and is fairly unapologetic about being an ad for some security company's software. I'm merely assuming it's turned on by default because it's the only way it could be considered a problem to begin with.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it should be " Linux has had feature W since 20VV " since its about Windows ' and Linux ' capabilities to work as a WiFi access point which , as TFS states , is actually a pretty useful feature in many scenarios .
The only problem with Windows ' implementation is that its presumably ( * ) turned on by default , which can be problematic in some enviroments from a security standpoint .
( * ) " presumably " because TFA is awfully thin on details , and is fairly unapologetic about being an ad for some security company 's software .
I 'm merely assuming it 's turned on by default because it 's the only way it could be considered a problem to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it should be "Linux has had feature W since 20VV" since its about Windows' and Linux' capabilities to work as a WiFi access point which, as TFS states, is actually a pretty useful feature in many scenarios.
The only problem with Windows' implementation is that its presumably(*) turned on by default, which can be problematic in some enviroments from a security standpoint.
(*) "presumably" because TFA is awfully thin on details, and is fairly unapologetic about being an ad for some security company's software.
I'm merely assuming it's turned on by default because it's the only way it could be considered a problem to begin with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206780</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>maitai</author>
	<datestamp>1266589440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only is it turned "off" by default, but requires third party software to make it work (not just enable it, but add the complete functionality) as mentioned a long time ago here <a href="http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/11/03/1649246/Unfinished-Windows-7-Hotspot-Feature-Exploited?from=rss" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/11/03/1649246/Unfinished-Windows-7-Hotspot-Feature-Exploited?from=rss</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only is it turned " off " by default , but requires third party software to make it work ( not just enable it , but add the complete functionality ) as mentioned a long time ago here http : //mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/11/03/1649246/Unfinished-Windows-7-Hotspot-Feature-Exploited ? from = rss [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only is it turned "off" by default, but requires third party software to make it work (not just enable it, but add the complete functionality) as mentioned a long time ago here http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/11/03/1649246/Unfinished-Windows-7-Hotspot-Feature-Exploited?from=rss [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206464</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208642</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone see the Linux bias here?</title>
	<author>pandrijeczko</author>
	<datestamp>1266657840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Incidentally, I object to being a called a zealot purely because I happen to utter words in support of Linux.</p><p>I do use both XP and Linux, and, for example, I have a handful of killer apps on Windows that I don't have on Linux - so there's a plus for XP to balance it out a bit, if that makes you happier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Incidentally , I object to being a called a zealot purely because I happen to utter words in support of Linux.I do use both XP and Linux , and , for example , I have a handful of killer apps on Windows that I do n't have on Linux - so there 's a plus for XP to balance it out a bit , if that makes you happier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incidentally, I object to being a called a zealot purely because I happen to utter words in support of Linux.I do use both XP and Linux, and, for example, I have a handful of killer apps on Windows that I don't have on Linux - so there's a plus for XP to balance it out a bit, if that makes you happier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206972</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>Knackered</author>
	<datestamp>1266591600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X, which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W! Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.</p></div><p>You got that last bit wrong. It's "Linux has had feature X since 21VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X , which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W !
Linux has had feature X since 20VV , the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.You got that last bit wrong .
It 's " Linux has had feature X since 21VV , the 'Year of the Linux Desktop' .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X, which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W!
Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.You got that last bit wrong.
It's "Linux has had feature X since 21VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207148</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266593880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Cisco Wireless (used to be airespace) and other wireless management controllers have had the ability to detect <b>rouge</b> networks for at least 5 years. If they see a <b>rouge</b>, they can attempt to use the nearest AP to connect, and see if the packets can route back to your network. (Showing you if someone plugged a linksys router into your building's wired network, or if the business next door just got wireless)</p><p>The Airespace controller even had a "feature" that was heavily discourgaed that would basically take a few of the nearest AP's, and bombard the <b>rouge</b> with packets and DDOS it. I think that the more advanced ones had the ability to use 802.1x features to shut down the network port that the <b>rouge</b> was going through, if I am not mistaken, but I didn't have a model that could do that.</p></div></blockquote><p>Wow.  I never realized networks had a color.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cisco Wireless ( used to be airespace ) and other wireless management controllers have had the ability to detect rouge networks for at least 5 years .
If they see a rouge , they can attempt to use the nearest AP to connect , and see if the packets can route back to your network .
( Showing you if someone plugged a linksys router into your building 's wired network , or if the business next door just got wireless ) The Airespace controller even had a " feature " that was heavily discourgaed that would basically take a few of the nearest AP 's , and bombard the rouge with packets and DDOS it .
I think that the more advanced ones had the ability to use 802.1x features to shut down the network port that the rouge was going through , if I am not mistaken , but I did n't have a model that could do that.Wow .
I never realized networks had a color .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cisco Wireless (used to be airespace) and other wireless management controllers have had the ability to detect rouge networks for at least 5 years.
If they see a rouge, they can attempt to use the nearest AP to connect, and see if the packets can route back to your network.
(Showing you if someone plugged a linksys router into your building's wired network, or if the business next door just got wireless)The Airespace controller even had a "feature" that was heavily discourgaed that would basically take a few of the nearest AP's, and bombard the rouge with packets and DDOS it.
I think that the more advanced ones had the ability to use 802.1x features to shut down the network port that the rouge was going through, if I am not mistaken, but I didn't have a model that could do that.Wow.
I never realized networks had a color.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206220</id>
	<title>Re:Ghost ridin' the whip!</title>
	<author>hkz</author>
	<datestamp>1266584340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Note: I was deliberately playing down the consequences of that scenario. You could "own" someone pretty thoroughly if that someone was uninformed enough (which 90\% of people are) to send sensitive stuff over the network unencrypted. Which is why I use ssh tunnels to a trusted server whenever I'm on an open AP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Note : I was deliberately playing down the consequences of that scenario .
You could " own " someone pretty thoroughly if that someone was uninformed enough ( which 90 \ % of people are ) to send sensitive stuff over the network unencrypted .
Which is why I use ssh tunnels to a trusted server whenever I 'm on an open AP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note: I was deliberately playing down the consequences of that scenario.
You could "own" someone pretty thoroughly if that someone was uninformed enough (which 90\% of people are) to send sensitive stuff over the network unencrypted.
Which is why I use ssh tunnels to a trusted server whenever I'm on an open AP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206146</id>
	<title>Not interesting by itself</title>
	<author>FranTaylor</author>
	<datestamp>1266583920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And certainly other OS's have this feature too.</p><p>But you have to look at the big picture.  This feature can be combined with one of the other Microsoft "remote access features" that they have been working so hard to remove from their product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And certainly other OS 's have this feature too.But you have to look at the big picture .
This feature can be combined with one of the other Microsoft " remote access features " that they have been working so hard to remove from their product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And certainly other OS's have this feature too.But you have to look at the big picture.
This feature can be combined with one of the other Microsoft "remote access features" that they have been working so hard to remove from their product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206122</id>
	<title>so you install a wireless IDS</title>
	<author>FooAtWFU</author>
	<datestamp>1266583740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
So you install a wireless IDS <a href="http://www.airwave.com/products/rapids/" title="airwave.com">like this one</a> [airwave.com] and monitor the airwaves and the wired data path to see if a MAC address shows up in both places... </p><p>
and then my company makes <a href="http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&amp;q=NASDAQ:ARUN" title="google.com">all the money</a> [google.com]. whee!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>soon to be part of a <a href="http://www.airwave.com/products/airwave-ondemand/" title="airwave.com">hosted service offering</a> [airwave.com] as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you install a wireless IDS like this one [ airwave.com ] and monitor the airwaves and the wired data path to see if a MAC address shows up in both places.. . and then my company makes all the money [ google.com ] .
whee ! : ) soon to be part of a hosted service offering [ airwave.com ] as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
So you install a wireless IDS like this one [airwave.com] and monitor the airwaves and the wired data path to see if a MAC address shows up in both places... 
and then my company makes all the money [google.com].
whee! :)soon to be part of a hosted service offering [airwave.com] as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206530</id>
	<title>Re:No biased reporting here on /. Just the facts.</title>
	<author>maxrate</author>
	<datestamp>1266586980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I couldn't agree with you more - seems a good few of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. linux user base has 'something to prove' quite often.  It gets old real quick.  I just wish it would end.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't agree with you more - seems a good few of the / .
linux user base has 'something to prove ' quite often .
It gets old real quick .
I just wish it would end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't agree with you more - seems a good few of the /.
linux user base has 'something to prove' quite often.
It gets old real quick.
I just wish it would end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206298</id>
	<title>I need to check this out</title>
	<author>greymond</author>
	<datestamp>1266585000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I need to play with this feature on my W7 laptop, I wonder how far the reach is on this and how well I could daisy chain this, just out of curiosity more than anything useful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I need to play with this feature on my W7 laptop , I wonder how far the reach is on this and how well I could daisy chain this , just out of curiosity more than anything useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I need to play with this feature on my W7 laptop, I wonder how far the reach is on this and how well I could daisy chain this, just out of curiosity more than anything useful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208378</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1266609480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>This doesn't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network</em> </p><p>
Unused ports are left unusable.
Assigned to a 'quarantine VLAN' which has only an IDS on it  designed to set off alarms  if anything sends traffic to it.
</p><p>
Ports that are in use, have port security enabled with sticky MAC address, and thus an alarm is also set off on violation.
</p><p> <em>
but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working (not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known, except complete Windows software compatibility.</em> </p><p>
802.1X  authentication required to bring up the wired network port.
The certificate is installed and available to Windows,  but rebooting the machine would cause connection to be lost, and the Live CD distribution would be unable to re-authenticate and gain access  (since Linux has no access to Windows'  secure crypto keystores).
</p><p>
So, you see..  This Windows 7 problem is much harder to address, and a much bigger risk than other issues such as LiveCDs or unused ports which are very easily made basically non-risks.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This does n't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network Unused ports are left unusable .
Assigned to a 'quarantine VLAN ' which has only an IDS on it designed to set off alarms if anything sends traffic to it .
Ports that are in use , have port security enabled with sticky MAC address , and thus an alarm is also set off on violation .
but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working ( not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known , except complete Windows software compatibility .
802.1X authentication required to bring up the wired network port .
The certificate is installed and available to Windows , but rebooting the machine would cause connection to be lost , and the Live CD distribution would be unable to re-authenticate and gain access ( since Linux has no access to Windows ' secure crypto keystores ) .
So , you see.. This Windows 7 problem is much harder to address , and a much bigger risk than other issues such as LiveCDs or unused ports which are very easily made basically non-risks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This doesn't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network 
Unused ports are left unusable.
Assigned to a 'quarantine VLAN' which has only an IDS on it  designed to set off alarms  if anything sends traffic to it.
Ports that are in use, have port security enabled with sticky MAC address, and thus an alarm is also set off on violation.
but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working (not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known, except complete Windows software compatibility.
802.1X  authentication required to bring up the wired network port.
The certificate is installed and available to Windows,  but rebooting the machine would cause connection to be lost, and the Live CD distribution would be unable to re-authenticate and gain access  (since Linux has no access to Windows'  secure crypto keystores).
So, you see..  This Windows 7 problem is much harder to address, and a much bigger risk than other issues such as LiveCDs or unused ports which are very easily made basically non-risks.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206166</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>goldaryn</author>
	<datestamp>1266584100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Insightful? He's got the century wrong!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Insightful ?
He 's got the century wrong !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insightful?
He's got the century wrong!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206134</id>
	<title>rouge?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266583860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd be more impressed if Windows 7 could create a rouge access point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be more impressed if Windows 7 could create a rouge access point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be more impressed if Windows 7 could create a rouge access point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206156</id>
	<title>Yippie ki yay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266583980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As the riders loped on by him, he heard one call his name<br>If you want to save your server from Hell, a-riding on our range<br>Then cowboy change your ways today or with us you will ride<br>Trying to catch the Devil's herd, across these endless skies</p><p>Yippie yi Ohhhhh<br>Yippie yi Yaaaaay</p><p>Ghost Riders in, Ghost Riders in your LAN</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As the riders loped on by him , he heard one call his nameIf you want to save your server from Hell , a-riding on our rangeThen cowboy change your ways today or with us you will rideTrying to catch the Devil 's herd , across these endless skiesYippie yi OhhhhhYippie yi YaaaaayGhost Riders in , Ghost Riders in your LAN</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the riders loped on by him, he heard one call his nameIf you want to save your server from Hell, a-riding on our rangeThen cowboy change your ways today or with us you will rideTrying to catch the Devil's herd, across these endless skiesYippie yi OhhhhhYippie yi YaaaaayGhost Riders in, Ghost Riders in your LAN</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207976</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Treats You Like An Adult....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266602940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you need to be nursemaided in your computer use, stick with a Mac or Windows. If you're prepared to put some effort into learning how a computer works and how to search forums and asks questions of people who are more than willing to help you out free-of-charge, then try Linux.</p></div><p>Sounds to me like somebody's got sour grapes.  Are you jealous that I can plug a random USB device into my Win7 or OS X boxes and it will work without me spending five hours figuring out the chipset manufacturer, tracking down the generic drivers, finding all of the dependencies for the drivers, compiling them, and then playing with modprobe to get it to load properly?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you need to be nursemaided in your computer use , stick with a Mac or Windows .
If you 're prepared to put some effort into learning how a computer works and how to search forums and asks questions of people who are more than willing to help you out free-of-charge , then try Linux.Sounds to me like somebody 's got sour grapes .
Are you jealous that I can plug a random USB device into my Win7 or OS X boxes and it will work without me spending five hours figuring out the chipset manufacturer , tracking down the generic drivers , finding all of the dependencies for the drivers , compiling them , and then playing with modprobe to get it to load properly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you need to be nursemaided in your computer use, stick with a Mac or Windows.
If you're prepared to put some effort into learning how a computer works and how to search forums and asks questions of people who are more than willing to help you out free-of-charge, then try Linux.Sounds to me like somebody's got sour grapes.
Are you jealous that I can plug a random USB device into my Win7 or OS X boxes and it will work without me spending five hours figuring out the chipset manufacturer, tracking down the generic drivers, finding all of the dependencies for the drivers, compiling them, and then playing with modprobe to get it to load properly?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31209838</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1266679200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.</p></div><p>Hmmm... The same year Dr. Wily tried to take over the world.. again!</p><p>Coincidence, I think not!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux has had feature X since 20VV , the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.Hmmm... The same year Dr. Wily tried to take over the world.. again ! Coincidence , I think not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.Hmmm... The same year Dr. Wily tried to take over the world.. again!Coincidence, I think not!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208946</id>
	<title>Easier even</title>
	<author>srussia</author>
	<datestamp>1266663900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If SoftAP works as well as the Softmodem (Winmodem) I'm using right now; let me expla...{#`\%${\%&amp;`+'${`\%&amp; NO CARRIER</htmltext>
<tokenext>If SoftAP works as well as the Softmodem ( Winmodem ) I 'm using right now ; let me expla... { # ` \ % $ { \ % &amp; ` + ' $ { ` \ % &amp; NO CARRIER</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If SoftAP works as well as the Softmodem (Winmodem) I'm using right now; let me expla...{#`\%${\%&amp;`+'${`\%&amp; NO CARRIER</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206454</id>
	<title>Re:Serious issues found with X</title>
	<author>LarrySDonald</author>
	<datestamp>1266586440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey! We've totally had that since 19VV!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
We 've totally had that since 19VV !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
We've totally had that since 19VV!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206842</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1266589980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where I come from, deliberately bypassing network security is a one-strike-and-you're-out termination offense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where I come from , deliberately bypassing network security is a one-strike-and-you 're-out termination offense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where I come from, deliberately bypassing network security is a one-strike-and-you're-out termination offense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207528</id>
	<title>Aruba</title>
	<author>Redlazer</author>
	<datestamp>1266597780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Aruba Networks has support for detection and elimination of rogue AP's.
<p>
An important network that does not have wireless intrusion detection and control is definitely not protected well.
</p><p>
However, a proper Aruba deployment with AP's and a mobility controller can and do identify, mark, and shut down rogue APs and ad-hoc networks, as well as wireless bridges.
</p><p>
I am not terribly worried.
</p><p>
-Red</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aruba Networks has support for detection and elimination of rogue AP 's .
An important network that does not have wireless intrusion detection and control is definitely not protected well .
However , a proper Aruba deployment with AP 's and a mobility controller can and do identify , mark , and shut down rogue APs and ad-hoc networks , as well as wireless bridges .
I am not terribly worried .
-Red</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aruba Networks has support for detection and elimination of rogue AP's.
An important network that does not have wireless intrusion detection and control is definitely not protected well.
However, a proper Aruba deployment with AP's and a mobility controller can and do identify, mark, and shut down rogue APs and ad-hoc networks, as well as wireless bridges.
I am not terribly worried.
-Red</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208414</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>sam0737</author>
	<datestamp>1266696540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't RTFA, but I guess the problem is user will see an AP with the same SSID that user used to be connecting...and tricked into connecting it but that's actually a rouge one? Even without Win 7, I could do it with a $50 SOHO Wireless Router!...</p><p>The parent is right - If your network is that sensitive, please turn on Group Policy to requires IPSec encryption on both ends, and requires Proxy (say MS ISA) to go to the Internet. Then the rouge AP doesn't really matter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't RTFA , but I guess the problem is user will see an AP with the same SSID that user used to be connecting...and tricked into connecting it but that 's actually a rouge one ?
Even without Win 7 , I could do it with a $ 50 SOHO Wireless Router ! ...The parent is right - If your network is that sensitive , please turn on Group Policy to requires IPSec encryption on both ends , and requires Proxy ( say MS ISA ) to go to the Internet .
Then the rouge AP does n't really matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't RTFA, but I guess the problem is user will see an AP with the same SSID that user used to be connecting...and tricked into connecting it but that's actually a rouge one?
Even without Win 7, I could do it with a $50 SOHO Wireless Router!...The parent is right - If your network is that sensitive, please turn on Group Policy to requires IPSec encryption on both ends, and requires Proxy (say MS ISA) to go to the Internet.
Then the rouge AP doesn't really matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206384</id>
	<title>Damn! Should have installed Win7 instead of Ubuntu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266585900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously! That is exactly what I wanted to do a few months ago, but it seems I can't with my WiFi Link 5300. Hostap seems to be for Prism chipsets. Easily creating an AP to share files or to <a href="http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html" title="ex-parrot.com">play with neighbors</a> [ex-parrot.com] was one of the bonuses I expected from my switch to Ubuntu. What is going on? Is Windows now becoming the fun OS for geeks and Linux the boring Desktop for the average users?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously !
That is exactly what I wanted to do a few months ago , but it seems I ca n't with my WiFi Link 5300 .
Hostap seems to be for Prism chipsets .
Easily creating an AP to share files or to play with neighbors [ ex-parrot.com ] was one of the bonuses I expected from my switch to Ubuntu .
What is going on ?
Is Windows now becoming the fun OS for geeks and Linux the boring Desktop for the average users ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously!
That is exactly what I wanted to do a few months ago, but it seems I can't with my WiFi Link 5300.
Hostap seems to be for Prism chipsets.
Easily creating an AP to share files or to play with neighbors [ex-parrot.com] was one of the bonuses I expected from my switch to Ubuntu.
What is going on?
Is Windows now becoming the fun OS for geeks and Linux the boring Desktop for the average users?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206424</id>
	<title>this is silly...</title>
	<author>BitwiseX</author>
	<datestamp>1266586260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you can "what if" lots of features.  As near as I can tell from the quick searching I did, it's not like it's on by default. I didn't think it would be, but I haven't fooled with Win7 wireless much.<br> <br>


Domain Administrators can do <a href="http://lmgtfy.com/?q=disable+softap+with+group+policy" title="lmgtfy.com" rel="nofollow">this.</a> [lmgtfy.com] <br> <br>

Is there an article on Network World that condemns Linux for having this ability?  Well I did find <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33816" title="networkworld.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [networkworld.com] when I searched for Linux and HostAP. Don't see anything in the article mentioned that it too, could be a security risk if used incorrectly.  It's not called Beware the rogue Wi-Fi access point in Linux Kernel 2.6.26 and up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you can " what if " lots of features .
As near as I can tell from the quick searching I did , it 's not like it 's on by default .
I did n't think it would be , but I have n't fooled with Win7 wireless much .
Domain Administrators can do this .
[ lmgtfy.com ] Is there an article on Network World that condemns Linux for having this ability ?
Well I did find this [ networkworld.com ] when I searched for Linux and HostAP .
Do n't see anything in the article mentioned that it too , could be a security risk if used incorrectly .
It 's not called Beware the rogue Wi-Fi access point in Linux Kernel 2.6.26 and up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can "what if" lots of features.
As near as I can tell from the quick searching I did, it's not like it's on by default.
I didn't think it would be, but I haven't fooled with Win7 wireless much.
Domain Administrators can do this.
[lmgtfy.com]  

Is there an article on Network World that condemns Linux for having this ability?
Well I did find this [networkworld.com] when I searched for Linux and HostAP.
Don't see anything in the article mentioned that it too, could be a security risk if used incorrectly.
It's not called Beware the rogue Wi-Fi access point in Linux Kernel 2.6.26 and up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206400</id>
	<title>Re:Easy Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266586080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cisco Wireless (used to be airespace) and other wireless management controllers have had the ability to detect rouge networks for at least 5 years.  If they see a rouge, they can attempt to use the nearest AP to connect, and see if the packets can route back to your network.  (Showing you if someone plugged a linksys router into your building's wired network, or if the business next door just got wireless)</p><p>The Airespace controller even had a "feature" that was heavily discourgaed that would basically take a few of the nearest AP's, and bombard the rouge with packets and DDOS it.  I think that the more advanced ones had the ability to use 802.1x features to shut down the network port that the rouge was going through, if I am not mistaken, but I didn't have a model that could do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cisco Wireless ( used to be airespace ) and other wireless management controllers have had the ability to detect rouge networks for at least 5 years .
If they see a rouge , they can attempt to use the nearest AP to connect , and see if the packets can route back to your network .
( Showing you if someone plugged a linksys router into your building 's wired network , or if the business next door just got wireless ) The Airespace controller even had a " feature " that was heavily discourgaed that would basically take a few of the nearest AP 's , and bombard the rouge with packets and DDOS it .
I think that the more advanced ones had the ability to use 802.1x features to shut down the network port that the rouge was going through , if I am not mistaken , but I did n't have a model that could do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cisco Wireless (used to be airespace) and other wireless management controllers have had the ability to detect rouge networks for at least 5 years.
If they see a rouge, they can attempt to use the nearest AP to connect, and see if the packets can route back to your network.
(Showing you if someone plugged a linksys router into your building's wired network, or if the business next door just got wireless)The Airespace controller even had a "feature" that was heavily discourgaed that would basically take a few of the nearest AP's, and bombard the rouge with packets and DDOS it.
I think that the more advanced ones had the ability to use 802.1x features to shut down the network port that the rouge was going through, if I am not mistaken, but I didn't have a model that could do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206850</id>
	<title>Anyone see the Linux bias here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266590160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How come when there's a feature in Linux that can burn you if not set right, the zealots say you're being treated like an adult. If it happens in Windows why is it suddenly it's MS fault for introducing a flaw? Such hypocrisy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How come when there 's a feature in Linux that can burn you if not set right , the zealots say you 're being treated like an adult .
If it happens in Windows why is it suddenly it 's MS fault for introducing a flaw ?
Such hypocrisy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How come when there's a feature in Linux that can burn you if not set right, the zealots say you're being treated like an adult.
If it happens in Windows why is it suddenly it's MS fault for introducing a flaw?
Such hypocrisy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208398</id>
	<title>Re:Linux Treats You Like An Adult....</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1266696300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rubbish. If you have an installed Linux system, what do you need to learn to do everyday tasks like web surfing or word processing? That you use "firefox" instead of "The blue E" and "OpenOffice" instead of "Office".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rubbish .
If you have an installed Linux system , what do you need to learn to do everyday tasks like web surfing or word processing ?
That you use " firefox " instead of " The blue E " and " OpenOffice " instead of " Office " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rubbish.
If you have an installed Linux system, what do you need to learn to do everyday tasks like web surfing or word processing?
That you use "firefox" instead of "The blue E" and "OpenOffice" instead of "Office".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206050</id>
	<title>Hard shell, gooey centre security obsolete</title>
	<author>anti-NAT</author>
	<datestamp>1266583440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.opengroup.org/jericho/deperim.htm" title="opengroup.org">De-perimeterization (perimeter erosion) Explained</a> [opengroup.org]</p><p><a href="http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb/papers/distfw.html" title="columbia.edu">Distributed Firewalls</a> [columbia.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>De-perimeterization ( perimeter erosion ) Explained [ opengroup.org ] Distributed Firewalls [ columbia.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>De-perimeterization (perimeter erosion) Explained [opengroup.org]Distributed Firewalls [columbia.edu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31212486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31209838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_19_2324257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31212486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207976
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208630
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206220
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206400
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207148
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31208310
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31207056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206464
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31209838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206166
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_19_2324257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_19_2324257.31206198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
