<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_15_1740214</id>
	<title>The Coming Botnet Stock Exchange</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1268677320000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Trailrunner7 writes <i>"Robert Hansen, a security researcher and CEO of SecTheory, has been gleaning intelligence from professional attackers in recent months, having a series of off-the-record conversations with spammers and malicious hackers in an effort to <a href="http://ha.ckers.org/blog/20100314/conversations-with-a-blackhat/">gain insight into their tactics, mindset and motivation</a>. 'He's not the type to hack randomly, he's only interested in targeted attacks with big payouts. Well, the more I thought about it the more I thought that this is a very solvable problem for bad guys. There are already other types of bad guys who do things like spam, steal credentials and DDoS. For that to work they need a botnet with thousands or millions of machines. The chances of a million machine botnet having compromised at least one machine within a target of interest is relatively high.' Hansen's solution to the hacker's problem provides a glimpse into a business model we might see in the not-too-distant future. It's an evolutionary version of the botnet-for-hire or malware-as-a-service model that's taken off in recent years. In Hansen's model, an attacker looking to infiltrate a specific network would not spend weeks throwing resources against machines in that network, looking for a weak spot and potentially raising the suspicion of the company's security team. Instead, he would contact a botmaster and <a href="http://threatpost.com/en\_us/blogs/future-botnets-031510">give him a laundry list of the machines or IP addresses he's interested in compromising</a>. If the botmaster already has his hooks into the network, the customer could then buy access directly into the network rather than spending his own time and resources trying to get in."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Trailrunner7 writes " Robert Hansen , a security researcher and CEO of SecTheory , has been gleaning intelligence from professional attackers in recent months , having a series of off-the-record conversations with spammers and malicious hackers in an effort to gain insight into their tactics , mindset and motivation .
'He 's not the type to hack randomly , he 's only interested in targeted attacks with big payouts .
Well , the more I thought about it the more I thought that this is a very solvable problem for bad guys .
There are already other types of bad guys who do things like spam , steal credentials and DDoS .
For that to work they need a botnet with thousands or millions of machines .
The chances of a million machine botnet having compromised at least one machine within a target of interest is relatively high .
' Hansen 's solution to the hacker 's problem provides a glimpse into a business model we might see in the not-too-distant future .
It 's an evolutionary version of the botnet-for-hire or malware-as-a-service model that 's taken off in recent years .
In Hansen 's model , an attacker looking to infiltrate a specific network would not spend weeks throwing resources against machines in that network , looking for a weak spot and potentially raising the suspicion of the company 's security team .
Instead , he would contact a botmaster and give him a laundry list of the machines or IP addresses he 's interested in compromising .
If the botmaster already has his hooks into the network , the customer could then buy access directly into the network rather than spending his own time and resources trying to get in .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trailrunner7 writes "Robert Hansen, a security researcher and CEO of SecTheory, has been gleaning intelligence from professional attackers in recent months, having a series of off-the-record conversations with spammers and malicious hackers in an effort to gain insight into their tactics, mindset and motivation.
'He's not the type to hack randomly, he's only interested in targeted attacks with big payouts.
Well, the more I thought about it the more I thought that this is a very solvable problem for bad guys.
There are already other types of bad guys who do things like spam, steal credentials and DDoS.
For that to work they need a botnet with thousands or millions of machines.
The chances of a million machine botnet having compromised at least one machine within a target of interest is relatively high.
' Hansen's solution to the hacker's problem provides a glimpse into a business model we might see in the not-too-distant future.
It's an evolutionary version of the botnet-for-hire or malware-as-a-service model that's taken off in recent years.
In Hansen's model, an attacker looking to infiltrate a specific network would not spend weeks throwing resources against machines in that network, looking for a weak spot and potentially raising the suspicion of the company's security team.
Instead, he would contact a botmaster and give him a laundry list of the machines or IP addresses he's interested in compromising.
If the botmaster already has his hooks into the network, the customer could then buy access directly into the network rather than spending his own time and resources trying to get in.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31493566</id>
	<title>My new BotNet...</title>
	<author>MasterOfGoingFaster</author>
	<datestamp>1268743140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, I just launched a new BotNet on 127.0.0.1 so if anyone wants to<br>****** CARRIER LOST *******</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , I just launched a new BotNet on 127.0.0.1 so if anyone wants to * * * * * * CARRIER LOST * * * * * * *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, I just launched a new BotNet on 127.0.0.1 so if anyone wants to****** CARRIER LOST *******</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485142</id>
	<title>Honeypot?</title>
	<author>dhanson865</author>
	<datestamp>1268681220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, interesting concept but the fear would be that the botnet owner would respond by saying knock, knock, the FBI is here (substitute the agency you think applies if the FBI isn't your cup of tea).</p><p>If you do something yourself you know all the players. If you pay someone to do it you don't know if you are walking into a trap.</p><p>disclaimer: I'm not too worried about this as I don't plan on taking either route.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , interesting concept but the fear would be that the botnet owner would respond by saying knock , knock , the FBI is here ( substitute the agency you think applies if the FBI is n't your cup of tea ) .If you do something yourself you know all the players .
If you pay someone to do it you do n't know if you are walking into a trap.disclaimer : I 'm not too worried about this as I do n't plan on taking either route .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, interesting concept but the fear would be that the botnet owner would respond by saying knock, knock, the FBI is here (substitute the agency you think applies if the FBI isn't your cup of tea).If you do something yourself you know all the players.
If you pay someone to do it you don't know if you are walking into a trap.disclaimer: I'm not too worried about this as I don't plan on taking either route.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485894</id>
	<title>Re:crime</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268683980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is counter-productive for a security researcher to not be fascinated by these people. Your moralizing the issue only holds back any meaningful gathering of knowledge that can be used to mitigate the harm that blackhat hackers can cause to legitimate people. There is a time and place for us to objectively learn more about their culture, technology, and economy for our own well being.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is counter-productive for a security researcher to not be fascinated by these people .
Your moralizing the issue only holds back any meaningful gathering of knowledge that can be used to mitigate the harm that blackhat hackers can cause to legitimate people .
There is a time and place for us to objectively learn more about their culture , technology , and economy for our own well being .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is counter-productive for a security researcher to not be fascinated by these people.
Your moralizing the issue only holds back any meaningful gathering of knowledge that can be used to mitigate the harm that blackhat hackers can cause to legitimate people.
There is a time and place for us to objectively learn more about their culture, technology, and economy for our own well being.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</id>
	<title>How to Pay?</title>
	<author>MrTripps</author>
	<datestamp>1268681460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you have just hired a bot master. How do you pay them? You know they are dirty hackers, so it isn't like you would just give them your credit card number or Pay Pal account. Maybe the guy just wakes up and finds a crate of Jolt and Hot Pockets on his doorstep.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you have just hired a bot master .
How do you pay them ?
You know they are dirty hackers , so it is n't like you would just give them your credit card number or Pay Pal account .
Maybe the guy just wakes up and finds a crate of Jolt and Hot Pockets on his doorstep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you have just hired a bot master.
How do you pay them?
You know they are dirty hackers, so it isn't like you would just give them your credit card number or Pay Pal account.
Maybe the guy just wakes up and finds a crate of Jolt and Hot Pockets on his doorstep.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</id>
	<title>I can't believe we are still discussing this ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268681940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When the solution (and who is responsible for the problem) are so obvious.</p><p>The one that should be held responsible for this is microsoft. No, I am not trolling. We are making Toyota responsible for all the incidents, and possible future incidents with their acceleration issues, aren't we? Why not hold microsoft responible for their own products too?</p><p>We've known for years that windows is directly responsible for all this security issues. It's an unreliable and insecure system, and the company refuses to patch vulnerabilities.</p><p>The solution, is obvious too: use another operating system.</p><p>Why do we have to spend so many resources, including government resources that we pay for with our taxes, for something that is a non-issue?</p><p>Spending time and money sending the FBI behind spammers because microsoft's software is insecure is at best stupid, and most probably absolutely corrupt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When the solution ( and who is responsible for the problem ) are so obvious.The one that should be held responsible for this is microsoft .
No , I am not trolling .
We are making Toyota responsible for all the incidents , and possible future incidents with their acceleration issues , are n't we ?
Why not hold microsoft responible for their own products too ? We 've known for years that windows is directly responsible for all this security issues .
It 's an unreliable and insecure system , and the company refuses to patch vulnerabilities.The solution , is obvious too : use another operating system.Why do we have to spend so many resources , including government resources that we pay for with our taxes , for something that is a non-issue ? Spending time and money sending the FBI behind spammers because microsoft 's software is insecure is at best stupid , and most probably absolutely corrupt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the solution (and who is responsible for the problem) are so obvious.The one that should be held responsible for this is microsoft.
No, I am not trolling.
We are making Toyota responsible for all the incidents, and possible future incidents with their acceleration issues, aren't we?
Why not hold microsoft responible for their own products too?We've known for years that windows is directly responsible for all this security issues.
It's an unreliable and insecure system, and the company refuses to patch vulnerabilities.The solution, is obvious too: use another operating system.Why do we have to spend so many resources, including government resources that we pay for with our taxes, for something that is a non-issue?Spending time and money sending the FBI behind spammers because microsoft's software is insecure is at best stupid, and most probably absolutely corrupt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492284</id>
	<title>Re:Bad title</title>
	<author>Athanasius</author>
	<datestamp>1268679240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <b>Real Stock Exchange:</b> </p><p>
As best as I understand it that is pretty close to how real stock exchanges work.  You don't necessarily sell shares just by saying you want to, someone else has to be prepared to buy them at the price you're asking.  Nor can you buy them without someone offering to sell.  The stock exchange keeps tracks of these offers and provides a mechanism to resolve them (OK, so there are stock brokers involved too, but this basic concept is how it works).
</p><p>
<b>Botnet/Compromised Host Stock Exchange:</b>
</p><p>
The botnet owner has 'bought' stock in the target machines by compromising them.  He can offer to sell for at least a minimum price. The other party to the transaction offers to 'buy' a share of this stock at up to a given price. The 'stock market' resolves these offers by putting the two parties in touch where the buy maximum is at least the sell minimum price.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Real Stock Exchange : As best as I understand it that is pretty close to how real stock exchanges work .
You do n't necessarily sell shares just by saying you want to , someone else has to be prepared to buy them at the price you 're asking .
Nor can you buy them without someone offering to sell .
The stock exchange keeps tracks of these offers and provides a mechanism to resolve them ( OK , so there are stock brokers involved too , but this basic concept is how it works ) .
Botnet/Compromised Host Stock Exchange : The botnet owner has 'bought ' stock in the target machines by compromising them .
He can offer to sell for at least a minimum price .
The other party to the transaction offers to 'buy ' a share of this stock at up to a given price .
The 'stock market ' resolves these offers by putting the two parties in touch where the buy maximum is at least the sell minimum price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Real Stock Exchange: 
As best as I understand it that is pretty close to how real stock exchanges work.
You don't necessarily sell shares just by saying you want to, someone else has to be prepared to buy them at the price you're asking.
Nor can you buy them without someone offering to sell.
The stock exchange keeps tracks of these offers and provides a mechanism to resolve them (OK, so there are stock brokers involved too, but this basic concept is how it works).
Botnet/Compromised Host Stock Exchange:

The botnet owner has 'bought' stock in the target machines by compromising them.
He can offer to sell for at least a minimum price.
The other party to the transaction offers to 'buy' a share of this stock at up to a given price.
The 'stock market' resolves these offers by putting the two parties in touch where the buy maximum is at least the sell minimum price.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485770</id>
	<title>Re:crime</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1268683680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be sure to lock up all those teachers who make children's plays based on Robin Hood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be sure to lock up all those teachers who make children 's plays based on Robin Hood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be sure to lock up all those teachers who make children's plays based on Robin Hood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485904</id>
	<title>Re:crime</title>
	<author>azmodean+1</author>
	<datestamp>1268684040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably a troll, but I'll bite.</p><p>1. Regardless of your knee-jerk reaction to being interested in how "bad people" think, they ARE fascinating, and often very fruitful to study.<br>2. Assuming you didn't RTFA, I don't see anywhere where he glamorizes black hats.<br>3. This is akin to a cop going undercover to find out how criminals operate, you think they should be tossed in jail too?</p><p>Security research REQUIRES you to think like the "bad guys", it just comes with the territory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably a troll , but I 'll bite.1 .
Regardless of your knee-jerk reaction to being interested in how " bad people " think , they ARE fascinating , and often very fruitful to study.2 .
Assuming you did n't RTFA , I do n't see anywhere where he glamorizes black hats.3 .
This is akin to a cop going undercover to find out how criminals operate , you think they should be tossed in jail too ? Security research REQUIRES you to think like the " bad guys " , it just comes with the territory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably a troll, but I'll bite.1.
Regardless of your knee-jerk reaction to being interested in how "bad people" think, they ARE fascinating, and often very fruitful to study.2.
Assuming you didn't RTFA, I don't see anywhere where he glamorizes black hats.3.
This is akin to a cop going undercover to find out how criminals operate, you think they should be tossed in jail too?Security research REQUIRES you to think like the "bad guys", it just comes with the territory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492754</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268731800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>e-gold, perhaps?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>e-gold , perhaps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>e-gold, perhaps?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487492</id>
	<title>Re:crime</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268646420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haha, thought crime? You moron.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Haha , thought crime ?
You moron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haha, thought crime?
You moron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31531890</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268924040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>iPhone - though I would like to be able to install 3rd party apps - flash for instance.</p><p>Keith Rowley</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>iPhone - though I would like to be able to install 3rd party apps - flash for instance.Keith Rowley</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iPhone - though I would like to be able to install 3rd party apps - flash for instance.Keith Rowley</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488856</id>
	<title>Penny stocks?  Bah!</title>
	<author>SlappyBastard</author>
	<datestamp>1268652420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's already being done on fractions of a cent in arbitrage between the closes and opens of various stock and currency markets.  All legitimate trades, mind you.</p><p>Go back and look at the Societe Generale incident from 2008.  And that guy was just working with Excel macros!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's already being done on fractions of a cent in arbitrage between the closes and opens of various stock and currency markets .
All legitimate trades , mind you.Go back and look at the Societe Generale incident from 2008 .
And that guy was just working with Excel macros !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's already being done on fractions of a cent in arbitrage between the closes and opens of various stock and currency markets.
All legitimate trades, mind you.Go back and look at the Societe Generale incident from 2008.
And that guy was just working with Excel macros!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485514</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268682600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Windows is no more secure than Linux, or whatever hippie OS you're into. Any OS as popular as Windows is going to get the crap hacked out of it, the only reason Linux (assuming you're into that, but substitute it for whatever you like) is 'more secure' is because your grandmother doesn't open<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe attachments on it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows is no more secure than Linux , or whatever hippie OS you 're into .
Any OS as popular as Windows is going to get the crap hacked out of it , the only reason Linux ( assuming you 're into that , but substitute it for whatever you like ) is 'more secure ' is because your grandmother does n't open .exe attachments on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows is no more secure than Linux, or whatever hippie OS you're into.
Any OS as popular as Windows is going to get the crap hacked out of it, the only reason Linux (assuming you're into that, but substitute it for whatever you like) is 'more secure' is because your grandmother doesn't open .exe attachments on it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485694</id>
	<title>Re:Honeypot?</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1268683320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is a notable risk for the botnet owner, as well.<br> <br>

If I am a security guy for some entity that I fear may contain compromised systems, and potentially be the target of more focused attacks, <i>I</i> can use this hypothetical "botnet stock exchange" to verify my suspicions. "So, I'm interested in buying access to hosts within OWN\_IP\_BLOCK, anybody have some?" If no, breath slightly easier. If yes, I now know which of my hosts need serious inspection and rebuilding.<br> <br>

Depending on exactly how the exchange is run, basic checks(ie. botnet or no botnet, not necessarily specific hosts) might well be cheap or even free. You don't have much of a market if people can't ask "Is anybody selling X?" and receive a useful answer. More specific answers would probably cost you, as would the services of the sorts of grey hats who work for white hats but can talk to black hats; but there are certainly circumstances where it could be cost effective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a notable risk for the botnet owner , as well .
If I am a security guy for some entity that I fear may contain compromised systems , and potentially be the target of more focused attacks , I can use this hypothetical " botnet stock exchange " to verify my suspicions .
" So , I 'm interested in buying access to hosts within OWN \ _IP \ _BLOCK , anybody have some ?
" If no , breath slightly easier .
If yes , I now know which of my hosts need serious inspection and rebuilding .
Depending on exactly how the exchange is run , basic checks ( ie .
botnet or no botnet , not necessarily specific hosts ) might well be cheap or even free .
You do n't have much of a market if people ca n't ask " Is anybody selling X ?
" and receive a useful answer .
More specific answers would probably cost you , as would the services of the sorts of grey hats who work for white hats but can talk to black hats ; but there are certainly circumstances where it could be cost effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a notable risk for the botnet owner, as well.
If I am a security guy for some entity that I fear may contain compromised systems, and potentially be the target of more focused attacks, I can use this hypothetical "botnet stock exchange" to verify my suspicions.
"So, I'm interested in buying access to hosts within OWN\_IP\_BLOCK, anybody have some?
" If no, breath slightly easier.
If yes, I now know which of my hosts need serious inspection and rebuilding.
Depending on exactly how the exchange is run, basic checks(ie.
botnet or no botnet, not necessarily specific hosts) might well be cheap or even free.
You don't have much of a market if people can't ask "Is anybody selling X?
" and receive a useful answer.
More specific answers would probably cost you, as would the services of the sorts of grey hats who work for white hats but can talk to black hats; but there are certainly circumstances where it could be cost effective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485158</id>
	<title>The ??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268681340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally!  Someone has figured out the missing step.</p><p>1. Create an idea<br>2. Implement it<br>3. Create a botnet for hire!<br>4. PROFIT!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally !
Someone has figured out the missing step.1 .
Create an idea2 .
Implement it3 .
Create a botnet for hire ! 4 .
PROFIT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally!
Someone has figured out the missing step.1.
Create an idea2.
Implement it3.
Create a botnet for hire!4.
PROFIT!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487026</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268644680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The answer used to be 'egold'. No idea these days. Probably Western Union to some patsy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer used to be 'egold' .
No idea these days .
Probably Western Union to some patsy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer used to be 'egold'.
No idea these days.
Probably Western Union to some patsy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486198</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268684940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another uninspiring Hansen/RSnake media attention whoring article.</p><p>Nothing new here whatsoever - people willing to pay to gain access to networks/information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another uninspiring Hansen/RSnake media attention whoring article.Nothing new here whatsoever - people willing to pay to gain access to networks/information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another uninspiring Hansen/RSnake media attention whoring article.Nothing new here whatsoever - people willing to pay to gain access to networks/information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485970</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>cynyr</author>
	<datestamp>1268684220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>even app signing wouldn't work, it would ahve to be open enough to allow small outfits to produce code, and would need to allow dev to test run their code prior to the app signing. Both of those are holes, whats to stop a hacker from making a legit app and then using the same cert on both it and the malware?

</p><p> *nix without admin rights, and their home dir mounted no\_exec with backup taken every 6 hours, admined by dell/HP/etc. No way to install a new app, and no way to run something from the home dir, problem solved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>even app signing would n't work , it would ahve to be open enough to allow small outfits to produce code , and would need to allow dev to test run their code prior to the app signing .
Both of those are holes , whats to stop a hacker from making a legit app and then using the same cert on both it and the malware ?
* nix without admin rights , and their home dir mounted no \ _exec with backup taken every 6 hours , admined by dell/HP/etc .
No way to install a new app , and no way to run something from the home dir , problem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>even app signing wouldn't work, it would ahve to be open enough to allow small outfits to produce code, and would need to allow dev to test run their code prior to the app signing.
Both of those are holes, whats to stop a hacker from making a legit app and then using the same cert on both it and the malware?
*nix without admin rights, and their home dir mounted no\_exec with backup taken every 6 hours, admined by dell/HP/etc.
No way to install a new app, and no way to run something from the home dir, problem solved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485910</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>atomic777</author>
	<datestamp>1268684040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not quite that simple. Proving that a product as complex as a consumer-level GUI operating system is bug-free and secure is in general an undecideable problem.</p><p>

We can't even prove that our critical, lower-level embedded software (aerospace, health-related, etc) is bug-free, and this is why there is substantially more effort put into ensuring that such software is of high quality. For example <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178B" title="wikipedia.org">there are extensive regulations</a> [wikipedia.org] on how exhaustively testing must be done on various components of an aviation-related piece of software, depending on its criticality
</p><p>
Try enforcing something like this on Windows, and even monopolistic Microsoft's fabled profit margins would disappear -- it would be the push that crowd-sourced OSS software would need to acheive a real foothold in the desktop market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not quite that simple .
Proving that a product as complex as a consumer-level GUI operating system is bug-free and secure is in general an undecideable problem .
We ca n't even prove that our critical , lower-level embedded software ( aerospace , health-related , etc ) is bug-free , and this is why there is substantially more effort put into ensuring that such software is of high quality .
For example there are extensive regulations [ wikipedia.org ] on how exhaustively testing must be done on various components of an aviation-related piece of software , depending on its criticality Try enforcing something like this on Windows , and even monopolistic Microsoft 's fabled profit margins would disappear -- it would be the push that crowd-sourced OSS software would need to acheive a real foothold in the desktop market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not quite that simple.
Proving that a product as complex as a consumer-level GUI operating system is bug-free and secure is in general an undecideable problem.
We can't even prove that our critical, lower-level embedded software (aerospace, health-related, etc) is bug-free, and this is why there is substantially more effort put into ensuring that such software is of high quality.
For example there are extensive regulations [wikipedia.org] on how exhaustively testing must be done on various components of an aviation-related piece of software, depending on its criticality

Try enforcing something like this on Windows, and even monopolistic Microsoft's fabled profit margins would disappear -- it would be the push that crowd-sourced OSS software would need to acheive a real foothold in the desktop market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486730</id>
	<title>Re:Bad title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268686740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's also just an idea someone put out.  There's now evidence it's "Coming".  We've all been bitching about fraudulent Slashdot titles for years.  I don't think they'll ever stop with the hype.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also just an idea someone put out .
There 's now evidence it 's " Coming " .
We 've all been bitching about fraudulent Slashdot titles for years .
I do n't think they 'll ever stop with the hype .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also just an idea someone put out.
There's now evidence it's "Coming".
We've all been bitching about fraudulent Slashdot titles for years.
I don't think they'll ever stop with the hype.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485372</id>
	<title>Re:Bad title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268682060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Both involve trusting your money to less than scrupulous people to do all the work for you in hopes that you'll get back more than you put in with no rational reason to back up this hope.</p><p>Actually I take that back. The hackers will at least worry about their reputation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both involve trusting your money to less than scrupulous people to do all the work for you in hopes that you 'll get back more than you put in with no rational reason to back up this hope.Actually I take that back .
The hackers will at least worry about their reputation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both involve trusting your money to less than scrupulous people to do all the work for you in hopes that you'll get back more than you put in with no rational reason to back up this hope.Actually I take that back.
The hackers will at least worry about their reputation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485988</id>
	<title>Re:Bad title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268684280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How is this a "stock exchange"?</p></div><p>This would be a case of provisioning global resources, supply and demand just like any other market.  Google has done some work in this area.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Murray Stokely, Jim Winget, Ed Keyes, Carrie Grimes, Benjamin Yolken, Using a Market Economy to Provision Compute Resources Across Planet-wide Clusters, Proceedings for the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium 2009.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; http://www.stokely.org/papers/google-cluster-auctions.pdf</p><p>I could easily see a market for this sort of thing.  Using a broker you trusted to do the work based on the 'cost' of the target machines.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this a " stock exchange " ? This would be a case of provisioning global resources , supply and demand just like any other market .
Google has done some work in this area .
    Murray Stokely , Jim Winget , Ed Keyes , Carrie Grimes , Benjamin Yolken , Using a Market Economy to Provision Compute Resources Across Planet-wide Clusters , Proceedings for the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium 2009 .
    http : //www.stokely.org/papers/google-cluster-auctions.pdfI could easily see a market for this sort of thing .
Using a broker you trusted to do the work based on the 'cost ' of the target machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this a "stock exchange"?This would be a case of provisioning global resources, supply and demand just like any other market.
Google has done some work in this area.
    Murray Stokely, Jim Winget, Ed Keyes, Carrie Grimes, Benjamin Yolken, Using a Market Economy to Provision Compute Resources Across Planet-wide Clusters, Proceedings for the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium 2009.
    http://www.stokely.org/papers/google-cluster-auctions.pdfI could easily see a market for this sort of thing.
Using a broker you trusted to do the work based on the 'cost' of the target machines.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487094</id>
	<title>Re:Why not use a botnet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268644920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This happens on a rather frequent basis.  I work on a trading desk which sees some retail customer order flow.  Every now and then fraudulent pump and dump stocks come to our attention.  Its usually not too hard to figure out that some order for 5x the average daily volume in a penny stock is fraudulent.  Not to hard to track down the customer to give them a call and find out that they had no idea their account was broken into.  A much more effective way is to send the orders a few hundred or thousand shares at a time and have them auto executed by a machine.

Usually they trace the attacks back to Eastern Bloc countries.  I know Hungry was pretty popular last year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This happens on a rather frequent basis .
I work on a trading desk which sees some retail customer order flow .
Every now and then fraudulent pump and dump stocks come to our attention .
Its usually not too hard to figure out that some order for 5x the average daily volume in a penny stock is fraudulent .
Not to hard to track down the customer to give them a call and find out that they had no idea their account was broken into .
A much more effective way is to send the orders a few hundred or thousand shares at a time and have them auto executed by a machine .
Usually they trace the attacks back to Eastern Bloc countries .
I know Hungry was pretty popular last year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This happens on a rather frequent basis.
I work on a trading desk which sees some retail customer order flow.
Every now and then fraudulent pump and dump stocks come to our attention.
Its usually not too hard to figure out that some order for 5x the average daily volume in a penny stock is fraudulent.
Not to hard to track down the customer to give them a call and find out that they had no idea their account was broken into.
A much more effective way is to send the orders a few hundred or thousand shares at a time and have them auto executed by a machine.
Usually they trace the attacks back to Eastern Bloc countries.
I know Hungry was pretty popular last year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634</id>
	<title>crime</title>
	<author>Max\_W</author>
	<datestamp>1268683080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've been spending more and more time talking to blackhats lately. Frankly, I think they're fascinating people</p></div><p>They are criminals who steal from people. Fascinating people? How sick.</p><p>Glamorizing thieves and moral creeps is sending a wrong message especially to young people. If it were up to me I would lock this Robert Hansen into a jail together with his "blackhats" thieves and thrown away the key. This is where he and they belong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been spending more and more time talking to blackhats lately .
Frankly , I think they 're fascinating peopleThey are criminals who steal from people .
Fascinating people ?
How sick.Glamorizing thieves and moral creeps is sending a wrong message especially to young people .
If it were up to me I would lock this Robert Hansen into a jail together with his " blackhats " thieves and thrown away the key .
This is where he and they belong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been spending more and more time talking to blackhats lately.
Frankly, I think they're fascinating peopleThey are criminals who steal from people.
Fascinating people?
How sick.Glamorizing thieves and moral creeps is sending a wrong message especially to young people.
If it were up to me I would lock this Robert Hansen into a jail together with his "blackhats" thieves and thrown away the key.
This is where he and they belong.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31491074</id>
	<title>Re:Survey</title>
	<author>Agarax</author>
	<datestamp>1268666280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem isn't Windows, it's users that are willing to run free-porn.exe that is linked in facebook/email/whatever.</p><p>Any operating system is only as secure as the user operating it.</p><p>A properly configured Windows 7 machine with a solid antivirus, firewall, and a user who paid attention during 15-20 minutes of information assurance training would be a real bitch to exploit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't Windows , it 's users that are willing to run free-porn.exe that is linked in facebook/email/whatever.Any operating system is only as secure as the user operating it.A properly configured Windows 7 machine with a solid antivirus , firewall , and a user who paid attention during 15-20 minutes of information assurance training would be a real bitch to exploit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't Windows, it's users that are willing to run free-porn.exe that is linked in facebook/email/whatever.Any operating system is only as secure as the user operating it.A properly configured Windows 7 machine with a solid antivirus, firewall, and a user who paid attention during 15-20 minutes of information assurance training would be a real bitch to exploit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485324</id>
	<title>Re:Honeypot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268681880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This particular problem already exists - and yet there are online exchanges to buy/swap/sell credit card information, bank account info etc. The risk is sold off - so if a guy has 1000 bank accounts (+pin + atm card number etc) with an average of $10,000 on each of them, he sells it to someone who will actually do the hard work at say $20 per account.</p><p>Your argument would be the same at the exchanges too... but they exist and thrive. So, a botnet selling cloud computing power is not far fetched.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This particular problem already exists - and yet there are online exchanges to buy/swap/sell credit card information , bank account info etc .
The risk is sold off - so if a guy has 1000 bank accounts ( + pin + atm card number etc ) with an average of $ 10,000 on each of them , he sells it to someone who will actually do the hard work at say $ 20 per account.Your argument would be the same at the exchanges too... but they exist and thrive .
So , a botnet selling cloud computing power is not far fetched .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This particular problem already exists - and yet there are online exchanges to buy/swap/sell credit card information, bank account info etc.
The risk is sold off - so if a guy has 1000 bank accounts (+pin + atm card number etc) with an average of $10,000 on each of them, he sells it to someone who will actually do the hard work at say $20 per account.Your argument would be the same at the exchanges too... but they exist and thrive.
So, a botnet selling cloud computing power is not far fetched.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488802</id>
	<title>That's the shittiest business model EVER!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268652180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All wealth is created in arbitrage.  All wealth arises in the differences between what I know, what I can do, what I want to do and what you know, what you can do and what you want to do.  If you hand over your target information, you've closed the gap so much that profit will disappear altogether -- especially if the botnet owner involved figures out what he can gain from the target.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All wealth is created in arbitrage .
All wealth arises in the differences between what I know , what I can do , what I want to do and what you know , what you can do and what you want to do .
If you hand over your target information , you 've closed the gap so much that profit will disappear altogether -- especially if the botnet owner involved figures out what he can gain from the target .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All wealth is created in arbitrage.
All wealth arises in the differences between what I know, what I can do, what I want to do and what you know, what you can do and what you want to do.
If you hand over your target information, you've closed the gap so much that profit will disappear altogether -- especially if the botnet owner involved figures out what he can gain from the target.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31493692</id>
	<title>Re:Honeypot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268745180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>aren't botnet creators already selling access to their "zombies" ???<br>I thought this was already happening</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are n't botnet creators already selling access to their " zombies " ? ?
? I thought this was already happening</tokentext>
<sentencetext>aren't botnet creators already selling access to their "zombies" ??
?I thought this was already happening</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485492</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268682540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come off the "I am not trolling" bullshit. Everything you post is a troll designed to discredit the beliefs you appear to be promoting.</p><p>At least that's what I hope, because you do more damage to the Free Software movement with your posts than any positive effects you may have had.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come off the " I am not trolling " bullshit .
Everything you post is a troll designed to discredit the beliefs you appear to be promoting.At least that 's what I hope , because you do more damage to the Free Software movement with your posts than any positive effects you may have had .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come off the "I am not trolling" bullshit.
Everything you post is a troll designed to discredit the beliefs you appear to be promoting.At least that's what I hope, because you do more damage to the Free Software movement with your posts than any positive effects you may have had.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485338</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268681940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one of those things you learn from RTFAing over the years. They use anonymizing proxies, just like they do for everything else: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/12/72278</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of those things you learn from RTFAing over the years .
They use anonymizing proxies , just like they do for everything else : http : //www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/12/72278</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of those things you learn from RTFAing over the years.
They use anonymizing proxies, just like they do for everything else: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/12/72278</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486644</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268686440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So if someone who owns a Toyota runs someone else over with malice we should sue Toyota and let the driver go? Get a fucking clue, you troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if someone who owns a Toyota runs someone else over with malice we should sue Toyota and let the driver go ?
Get a fucking clue , you troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if someone who owns a Toyota runs someone else over with malice we should sue Toyota and let the driver go?
Get a fucking clue, you troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31495542</id>
	<title>Windows, albeit AFTER security hardening &amp; use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268754120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"So tell me, which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users?"</b> - by Galestar (1473827) on Monday March 15, @01:45PM (#31485434)</p></div><p>Reiterating my subject-line, once more:  <b>Windows, albeit AFTER security hardening &amp; user education!</b></p><p>How so? Ok:</p><p>----</p><p><b>HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, &amp; even VISTA/Windows 7 (+ make it "fun-to-do" via CIS Tool Guidance &amp; beyond):</b></p><p><a href="http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=568d95985ad83ef4add94de09f6026d3&amp;showtopic=2662" title="tcmagazine.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=568d95985ad83ef4add94de09f6026d3&amp;showtopic=2662</a> [tcmagazine.com]</p><p>----</p><p>It works!</p><p>It's based on the concept computer security folks the past few years have been calling "LAYERED SECURITY"...</p><p>Proofs to its efficacy?</p><p>Ok, some quoted testimonials:</p><p>----</p><p><a href="http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t=28430&amp;page=2" title="xtremepccentral.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t=28430&amp;page=2</a> [xtremepccentral.com]</p><p>"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - <b>THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral</b></p><p>AND</p><p>"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - <b>THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral</b></p><p>AND</p><p><a href="http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3" title="xtremepccentral.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3</a> [xtremepccentral.com]</p><p>"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff!  My client STILL Hasn't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid. I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works. Speaking of which, I need to call her to see if I can get some leads.  APK - I will say it again, the guide is FANTASTIC! Its made my PC experience much easier. Sandboxing was great. Getting my host file updated, setting services to system service, rather than system local. (except AVG updater, needed system local)" - <b>THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral</b></p><p>AND</p><p><a href="http://forums.theplanet.com/index.php?s=80bbbffc22d358de6b01b8450d596746&amp;showtopic=89123&amp;st=60&amp;start=60" title="theplanet.com" rel="nofollow">http://forums.theplanet.com/index.php?s=80bbbffc22d358de6b01b8450d596746&amp;showtopic=89123&amp;st=60&amp;start=60</a> [theplanet.com]</p><p>"the use of the hosts file has worked for me in many ways. for one it stops ad banners, it helps speed up your computer as well. if you need more proof i am writing to you on a 400 hertz computer and i run with ease. i do not get 200++ viruses and spy ware a month as i use to. now i am lucky if i get 1 or 2 viruses a month.  if you want my opinion if you stick to what APK says in his article about securing your computer then you will be safe and should not get any viruses or spy ware, but if you do get hit with viruses and spy ware then it will your own fault.  keep up the good fight APK.<b>" - Kings Joker, user of my guide @ THE PLANET</b></p><p>----</p><p>(Those results are only a SMALL SAMPLING TOO, mind you - I can produce more such results, upon request, from other users &amp; sites online)</p><p>Addtionally - Users aren't "stupid" really, just ignorant of HOW/WHEN/WHERE/WHY/WHAT causes their hassles, usually. Still, they can learn... especially after you point out HOW they get infested/infected, &amp; especially when it CO$T$ THEM THEIR MONIES TO REMOVE SAID INFESTATIONS (that teaches ANYONE a lesson pretty much), because when it comes to expenses, ANYONE learns, &amp; pretty fast!</p><p><b>HOWEVER - There's ONLY 1 WEAKNESS TO IT:</b> Human beings, &amp; they not being 'disciplined' about the indiscriminate usage of javascript (the main "harbinger of doom" out there today online), OR, what they download for example... King's Joker above tends to "2nd that motion" (&amp; there is NOTHING I can do about that! Per Dr. Manhattan of "The Watchmen", ala -&gt; "I can change almost anything, but I can't change human nature"). He's written me once WHY he got himself suckered too - pr0n: He hits sites with it that use javascript, &amp; he knows he takes his chances that way. He's gone down from 200++ viruses a month, to MAYBE 1 a month tops... &amp;, when he gets one? He knows (per that guide's "how to remove malware" section) how to get rid of them, himself now, too.</p><p>He's FAR from a "Computer Expert" too... just an ordinary guy! Still, he's proof that ANYONE can learn how to manage a PC &amp; NOT get infested, &amp; IF they do? They can be shown HOW to "burn out" infectors, themselves, &amp; easily as well!</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.-&gt; That's the "latest iteration" of my guide for Windows users &amp; to show them how to "security-harden" a system running Windows. I wrote it (and ones far earlier than it years before, circa 1998-2002, @ NTCompatible.com -&gt; <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20010405012842/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml" title="archive.org" rel="nofollow">http://web.archive.org/web/20010405012842/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml</a> [archive.org] [archive.org] which was later "picked up on" by NEOWIN &amp; rated well -&gt; <a href="http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text" title="neowin.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text</a> [neowin.net] [neowin.net] after they spotted where the original article @ NTCompatible.com spawned the current one above (top most URL in this post) grew from evolved out of)... &amp; all I know is, it works (no infestations here, for decades now, because I "got wise" to how botmasters/hackers-cracker/malware-makers in general think &amp; work... &amp; I decided to spread that around to others, especially less "tech saavy" others (across 15 forums online, &amp; so far, to the tune of over 300,000++ views worldwide since 2008 on this version of said security guide for Windows users)... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" So tell me , which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users ?
" - by Galestar ( 1473827 ) on Monday March 15 , @ 01 : 45PM ( # 31485434 ) Reiterating my subject-line , once more : Windows , albeit AFTER security hardening &amp; user education ! How so ?
Ok : ----HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 , &amp; even VISTA/Windows 7 ( + make it " fun-to-do " via CIS Tool Guidance &amp; beyond ) : http : //www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php ? s = 568d95985ad83ef4add94de09f6026d3&amp;showtopic = 2662 [ tcmagazine.com ] ----It works ! It 's based on the concept computer security folks the past few years have been calling " LAYERED SECURITY " ...Proofs to its efficacy ? Ok , some quoted testimonials : ----http : //www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php ? s = 672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t = 28430&amp;page = 2 [ xtremepccentral.com ] " I recently , months ago when you finally got this guide done , had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids .
My client , who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this , has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS !
I have n't even had a follow up call which is unusual .
" - THRONKA , user of my guide @ XTremePcCentralAND " APK , thanks for such a great guide .
This would , and should , be an inspiration to such security measures .
Also , the pc that has " tweaks " : IS STILL GOING !
NO PROBLEMS !
" - THRONKA , user of my guide @ XTremePcCentralANDhttp : //www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php ? s = 672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t = 28430&amp;page = 3 [ xtremepccentral.com ] " Its 2009 - still trouble free !
I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration , and he said I was doing overkill .
I told him yes , but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get .
He said good point .
So from 2008 till 2009 .
No speed decreases , its been to a lan party , moved around in a move , and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008 .
Great stuff !
My client STILL Has n't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid .
I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works .
Speaking of which , I need to call her to see if I can get some leads .
APK - I will say it again , the guide is FANTASTIC !
Its made my PC experience much easier .
Sandboxing was great .
Getting my host file updated , setting services to system service , rather than system local .
( except AVG updater , needed system local ) " - THRONKA , user of my guide @ XTremePcCentralANDhttp : //forums.theplanet.com/index.php ? s = 80bbbffc22d358de6b01b8450d596746&amp;showtopic = 89123&amp;st = 60&amp;start = 60 [ theplanet.com ] " the use of the hosts file has worked for me in many ways .
for one it stops ad banners , it helps speed up your computer as well .
if you need more proof i am writing to you on a 400 hertz computer and i run with ease .
i do not get 200 + + viruses and spy ware a month as i use to .
now i am lucky if i get 1 or 2 viruses a month .
if you want my opinion if you stick to what APK says in his article about securing your computer then you will be safe and should not get any viruses or spy ware , but if you do get hit with viruses and spy ware then it will your own fault .
keep up the good fight APK .
" - Kings Joker , user of my guide @ THE PLANET---- ( Those results are only a SMALL SAMPLING TOO , mind you - I can produce more such results , upon request , from other users &amp; sites online ) Addtionally - Users are n't " stupid " really , just ignorant of HOW/WHEN/WHERE/WHY/WHAT causes their hassles , usually .
Still , they can learn... especially after you point out HOW they get infested/infected , &amp; especially when it CO $ T $ THEM THEIR MONIES TO REMOVE SAID INFESTATIONS ( that teaches ANYONE a lesson pretty much ) , because when it comes to expenses , ANYONE learns , &amp; pretty fast ! HOWEVER - There 's ONLY 1 WEAKNESS TO IT : Human beings , &amp; they not being 'disciplined ' about the indiscriminate usage of javascript ( the main " harbinger of doom " out there today online ) , OR , what they download for example... King 's Joker above tends to " 2nd that motion " ( &amp; there is NOTHING I can do about that !
Per Dr. Manhattan of " The Watchmen " , ala - &gt; " I can change almost anything , but I ca n't change human nature " ) .
He 's written me once WHY he got himself suckered too - pr0n : He hits sites with it that use javascript , &amp; he knows he takes his chances that way .
He 's gone down from 200 + + viruses a month , to MAYBE 1 a month tops... &amp; , when he gets one ?
He knows ( per that guide 's " how to remove malware " section ) how to get rid of them , himself now , too.He 's FAR from a " Computer Expert " too... just an ordinary guy !
Still , he 's proof that ANYONE can learn how to manage a PC &amp; NOT get infested , &amp; IF they do ?
They can be shown HOW to " burn out " infectors , themselves , &amp; easily as well ! APKP.S.- &gt; That 's the " latest iteration " of my guide for Windows users &amp; to show them how to " security-harden " a system running Windows .
I wrote it ( and ones far earlier than it years before , circa 1998-2002 , @ NTCompatible.com - &gt; http : //web.archive.org/web/20010405012842/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml [ archive.org ] [ archive.org ] which was later " picked up on " by NEOWIN &amp; rated well - &gt; http : //www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text [ neowin.net ] [ neowin.net ] after they spotted where the original article @ NTCompatible.com spawned the current one above ( top most URL in this post ) grew from evolved out of ) ... &amp; all I know is , it works ( no infestations here , for decades now , because I " got wise " to how botmasters/hackers-cracker/malware-makers in general think &amp; work... &amp; I decided to spread that around to others , especially less " tech saavy " others ( across 15 forums online , &amp; so far , to the tune of over 300,000 + + views worldwide since 2008 on this version of said security guide for Windows users ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So tell me, which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users?
" - by Galestar (1473827) on Monday March 15, @01:45PM (#31485434)Reiterating my subject-line, once more:  Windows, albeit AFTER security hardening &amp; user education!How so?
Ok:----HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, &amp; even VISTA/Windows 7 (+ make it "fun-to-do" via CIS Tool Guidance &amp; beyond):http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=568d95985ad83ef4add94de09f6026d3&amp;showtopic=2662 [tcmagazine.com]----It works!It's based on the concept computer security folks the past few years have been calling "LAYERED SECURITY"...Proofs to its efficacy?Ok, some quoted testimonials:----http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t=28430&amp;page=2 [xtremepccentral.com]"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids.
My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS!
I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual.
" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentralAND"APK, thanks for such a great guide.
This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures.
Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING!
NO PROBLEMS!
" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentralANDhttp://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&amp;t=28430&amp;page=3 [xtremepccentral.com]"Its 2009 - still trouble free!
I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill.
I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get.
He said good point.
So from 2008 till 2009.
No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008.
Great stuff!
My client STILL Hasn't called me back in regards to that one machine to get it locked down for the kid.
I am glad it worked and I am sure her wallet is appreciated too now that it works.
Speaking of which, I need to call her to see if I can get some leads.
APK - I will say it again, the guide is FANTASTIC!
Its made my PC experience much easier.
Sandboxing was great.
Getting my host file updated, setting services to system service, rather than system local.
(except AVG updater, needed system local)" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentralANDhttp://forums.theplanet.com/index.php?s=80bbbffc22d358de6b01b8450d596746&amp;showtopic=89123&amp;st=60&amp;start=60 [theplanet.com]"the use of the hosts file has worked for me in many ways.
for one it stops ad banners, it helps speed up your computer as well.
if you need more proof i am writing to you on a 400 hertz computer and i run with ease.
i do not get 200++ viruses and spy ware a month as i use to.
now i am lucky if i get 1 or 2 viruses a month.
if you want my opinion if you stick to what APK says in his article about securing your computer then you will be safe and should not get any viruses or spy ware, but if you do get hit with viruses and spy ware then it will your own fault.
keep up the good fight APK.
" - Kings Joker, user of my guide @ THE PLANET----(Those results are only a SMALL SAMPLING TOO, mind you - I can produce more such results, upon request, from other users &amp; sites online)Addtionally - Users aren't "stupid" really, just ignorant of HOW/WHEN/WHERE/WHY/WHAT causes their hassles, usually.
Still, they can learn... especially after you point out HOW they get infested/infected, &amp; especially when it CO$T$ THEM THEIR MONIES TO REMOVE SAID INFESTATIONS (that teaches ANYONE a lesson pretty much), because when it comes to expenses, ANYONE learns, &amp; pretty fast!HOWEVER - There's ONLY 1 WEAKNESS TO IT: Human beings, &amp; they not being 'disciplined' about the indiscriminate usage of javascript (the main "harbinger of doom" out there today online), OR, what they download for example... King's Joker above tends to "2nd that motion" (&amp; there is NOTHING I can do about that!
Per Dr. Manhattan of "The Watchmen", ala -&gt; "I can change almost anything, but I can't change human nature").
He's written me once WHY he got himself suckered too - pr0n: He hits sites with it that use javascript, &amp; he knows he takes his chances that way.
He's gone down from 200++ viruses a month, to MAYBE 1 a month tops... &amp;, when he gets one?
He knows (per that guide's "how to remove malware" section) how to get rid of them, himself now, too.He's FAR from a "Computer Expert" too... just an ordinary guy!
Still, he's proof that ANYONE can learn how to manage a PC &amp; NOT get infested, &amp; IF they do?
They can be shown HOW to "burn out" infectors, themselves, &amp; easily as well!APKP.S.-&gt; That's the "latest iteration" of my guide for Windows users &amp; to show them how to "security-harden" a system running Windows.
I wrote it (and ones far earlier than it years before, circa 1998-2002, @ NTCompatible.com -&gt; http://web.archive.org/web/20010405012842/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml [archive.org] [archive.org] which was later "picked up on" by NEOWIN &amp; rated well -&gt; http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text [neowin.net] [neowin.net] after they spotted where the original article @ NTCompatible.com spawned the current one above (top most URL in this post) grew from evolved out of)... &amp; all I know is, it works (no infestations here, for decades now, because I "got wise" to how botmasters/hackers-cracker/malware-makers in general think &amp; work... &amp; I decided to spread that around to others, especially less "tech saavy" others (across 15 forums online, &amp; so far, to the tune of over 300,000++ views worldwide since 2008 on this version of said security guide for Windows users)... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485778</id>
	<title>Re:Bad title</title>
	<author>eviloverlordx</author>
	<datestamp>1268683740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wait.  In a few years, they'll be applying for a bailout, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait .
In a few years , they 'll be applying for a bailout , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait.
In a few years, they'll be applying for a bailout, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485244</id>
	<title>buzzword bingo</title>
	<author>Thud457</author>
	<datestamp>1268681640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cloud Computing FTW!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cloud Computing FTW ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cloud Computing FTW!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31490090</id>
	<title>Reality check</title>
	<author>darku</author>
	<datestamp>1268659620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The concept seems sound and trades are not uncommon in the cracker world but this is not the problem.

- "How do you know that your system is secure?"
- "Aaaa, I have an antivirus and broadband router that is handling my Internet connection. That should keep me safe"
- "Ok. And why are there all those ports opened on your router?"
- "Well, I'm forwarding everything through it in order to be able to play \_\_\_\_\_\_\_" (Insert game name here)
- "I see. Ok."

An antivirus and a firewall will not help you if you are stupid enough to open the latest XXX e-mail that knocks on the door of your never-updated Outlook Express or if your password is 123456.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The concept seems sound and trades are not uncommon in the cracker world but this is not the problem .
- " How do you know that your system is secure ?
" - " Aaaa , I have an antivirus and broadband router that is handling my Internet connection .
That should keep me safe " - " Ok. And why are there all those ports opened on your router ?
" - " Well , I 'm forwarding everything through it in order to be able to play \ _ \ _ \ _ \ _ \ _ \ _ \ _ " ( Insert game name here ) - " I see .
Ok. " An antivirus and a firewall will not help you if you are stupid enough to open the latest XXX e-mail that knocks on the door of your never-updated Outlook Express or if your password is 123456 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The concept seems sound and trades are not uncommon in the cracker world but this is not the problem.
- "How do you know that your system is secure?
"
- "Aaaa, I have an antivirus and broadband router that is handling my Internet connection.
That should keep me safe"
- "Ok. And why are there all those ports opened on your router?
"
- "Well, I'm forwarding everything through it in order to be able to play \_\_\_\_\_\_\_" (Insert game name here)
- "I see.
Ok."

An antivirus and a firewall will not help you if you are stupid enough to open the latest XXX e-mail that knocks on the door of your never-updated Outlook Express or if your password is 123456.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492916</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So tell me, which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users?</i> </p><p>Plan 9, CapROS, or Coyotos. Not <i>all</i> malware, but most. (Assume for the point of the argument that the stupid users would be able to actually use them.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So tell me , which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users ?
Plan 9 , CapROS , or Coyotos .
Not all malware , but most .
( Assume for the point of the argument that the stupid users would be able to actually use them .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So tell me, which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users?
Plan 9, CapROS, or Coyotos.
Not all malware, but most.
(Assume for the point of the argument that the stupid users would be able to actually use them.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487154</id>
	<title>I can already see the ticker</title>
	<author>g0bshiTe</author>
	<datestamp>1268645160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>HX Stocks rose today, as they aquired Zues.</htmltext>
<tokenext>HX Stocks rose today , as they aquired Zues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HX Stocks rose today, as they aquired Zues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485608</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1268683020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The solution, is obvious too: use another operating system.</i></p><p>And when the windows l^Husers switch to another operating system and want to see their dancing bunnies, then what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The solution , is obvious too : use another operating system.And when the windows l ^ Husers switch to another operating system and want to see their dancing bunnies , then what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The solution, is obvious too: use another operating system.And when the windows l^Husers switch to another operating system and want to see their dancing bunnies, then what?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485730</id>
	<title>botnet bank</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268683500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How do you pay them?</p></div><p>That is easy, you use a botnet bank of course. The difficult question is how to bail them out when the botnet bubble burst.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you pay them ? That is easy , you use a botnet bank of course .
The difficult question is how to bail them out when the botnet bubble burst .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you pay them?That is easy, you use a botnet bank of course.
The difficult question is how to bail them out when the botnet bubble burst.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486718</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>slayer\_ix</author>
	<datestamp>1268686680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why not just use cash?  You know like the classic brief case of greenbacks in a shady area of town.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just use cash ?
You know like the classic brief case of greenbacks in a shady area of town .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just use cash?
You know like the classic brief case of greenbacks in a shady area of town.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485296</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>snowraver1</author>
	<datestamp>1268681820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Western Union.  "From anywhere, to anyone".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Western Union .
" From anywhere , to anyone " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Western Union.
"From anywhere, to anyone".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488824</id>
	<title>Re:crime</title>
	<author>Securityemo</author>
	<datestamp>1268652300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Look, I hate to break it to you - "security researchers" are basically crackers with morals who, for obvious reasons, would like to live in civilized society without being ostracized. A lot of "them" go "a tad bit" neurotic because of the inherent contradictions in this, but that's how it is. And if you're incapable of feeling more than one emotion towards a thing, concept or person, you're severely emotionally underdeveloped.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look , I hate to break it to you - " security researchers " are basically crackers with morals who , for obvious reasons , would like to live in civilized society without being ostracized .
A lot of " them " go " a tad bit " neurotic because of the inherent contradictions in this , but that 's how it is .
And if you 're incapable of feeling more than one emotion towards a thing , concept or person , you 're severely emotionally underdeveloped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look, I hate to break it to you - "security researchers" are basically crackers with morals who, for obvious reasons, would like to live in civilized society without being ostracized.
A lot of "them" go "a tad bit" neurotic because of the inherent contradictions in this, but that's how it is.
And if you're incapable of feeling more than one emotion towards a thing, concept or person, you're severely emotionally underdeveloped.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485690</id>
	<title>i shit on you fagggots</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268683320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>eat my nuts. faggots.</htmltext>
<tokenext>eat my nuts .
faggots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eat my nuts.
faggots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485966</id>
	<title>Hansen's model?</title>
	<author>Ironhandx</author>
	<datestamp>1268684220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's reposting word for word what happens on a daily basis and its his model? Is anyone else slightly confused by this?</p><p>Though TFA does at least mention "This model makes sense on a number of levels and may well have been implemented already."</p><p>Theres even underground exchanges between the various botnet holders to some extent. If botnet controller A does not have enough(or any) compromised machines related to a target in one of his customers shopping lists he'll go to botnet controller B, C, or d-z in order to find what he needs. Obviously they don't trust each other much but there is some level of cooperation.</p><p>Even targeted hacks will often try the same methods as used to spread botnets in the first place, if you're in that line of business and there are somewhat reliable sources of compromised machines out there that will get you what you need faster and thus a) reduce your own work load and headaches and b) end up with a happier customer for a prompt job completion. (aka they'll think you're the shit and come back again if they need something else, every business out there, legal or otherwise, needs return customers)</p><p>Come on, these guys are doing highly illegal, highly technical, very high problem solving ability oriented tasks for a living. You think they haven't been doing this for, oh, over a decade now? Thats about how dated my information is... I think its a safe bet to assume its still going on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's reposting word for word what happens on a daily basis and its his model ?
Is anyone else slightly confused by this ? Though TFA does at least mention " This model makes sense on a number of levels and may well have been implemented already .
" Theres even underground exchanges between the various botnet holders to some extent .
If botnet controller A does not have enough ( or any ) compromised machines related to a target in one of his customers shopping lists he 'll go to botnet controller B , C , or d-z in order to find what he needs .
Obviously they do n't trust each other much but there is some level of cooperation.Even targeted hacks will often try the same methods as used to spread botnets in the first place , if you 're in that line of business and there are somewhat reliable sources of compromised machines out there that will get you what you need faster and thus a ) reduce your own work load and headaches and b ) end up with a happier customer for a prompt job completion .
( aka they 'll think you 're the shit and come back again if they need something else , every business out there , legal or otherwise , needs return customers ) Come on , these guys are doing highly illegal , highly technical , very high problem solving ability oriented tasks for a living .
You think they have n't been doing this for , oh , over a decade now ?
Thats about how dated my information is... I think its a safe bet to assume its still going on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's reposting word for word what happens on a daily basis and its his model?
Is anyone else slightly confused by this?Though TFA does at least mention "This model makes sense on a number of levels and may well have been implemented already.
"Theres even underground exchanges between the various botnet holders to some extent.
If botnet controller A does not have enough(or any) compromised machines related to a target in one of his customers shopping lists he'll go to botnet controller B, C, or d-z in order to find what he needs.
Obviously they don't trust each other much but there is some level of cooperation.Even targeted hacks will often try the same methods as used to spread botnets in the first place, if you're in that line of business and there are somewhat reliable sources of compromised machines out there that will get you what you need faster and thus a) reduce your own work load and headaches and b) end up with a happier customer for a prompt job completion.
(aka they'll think you're the shit and come back again if they need something else, every business out there, legal or otherwise, needs return customers)Come on, these guys are doing highly illegal, highly technical, very high problem solving ability oriented tasks for a living.
You think they haven't been doing this for, oh, over a decade now?
Thats about how dated my information is... I think its a safe bet to assume its still going on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486438</id>
	<title>Re:Why not use a botnet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268685840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly the latency would make then uncompetitive against Wall Street. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html?\_r=1&amp;hp" title="nytimes.com" rel="nofollow">They already have bots doing trading.</a> [nytimes.com]</p><p>Besides, do you seriously think you can out-crook the financial sector? These are people that can literally sell you nothing for a billion dollars and get away with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly the latency would make then uncompetitive against Wall Street .
They already have bots doing trading .
[ nytimes.com ] Besides , do you seriously think you can out-crook the financial sector ?
These are people that can literally sell you nothing for a billion dollars and get away with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly the latency would make then uncompetitive against Wall Street.
They already have bots doing trading.
[nytimes.com]Besides, do you seriously think you can out-crook the financial sector?
These are people that can literally sell you nothing for a billion dollars and get away with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Galestar</author>
	<datestamp>1268682300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have oversimplified the issue.  The root causes are;<br>
1. Windows / [insert other exploitable program here (ie. Flash/Adobe PDF reader)]<br>
2. Stupid users<br>
<br>
If your user downloads and runs malware, there's almost nothing your OS can do to stop it.  The only way to stop it is to force application signing... but who really wants that?<br>
<br>
So tell me, which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have oversimplified the issue .
The root causes are ; 1 .
Windows / [ insert other exploitable program here ( ie .
Flash/Adobe PDF reader ) ] 2 .
Stupid users If your user downloads and runs malware , there 's almost nothing your OS can do to stop it .
The only way to stop it is to force application signing... but who really wants that ?
So tell me , which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have oversimplified the issue.
The root causes are;
1.
Windows / [insert other exploitable program here (ie.
Flash/Adobe PDF reader)]
2.
Stupid users

If your user downloads and runs malware, there's almost nothing your OS can do to stop it.
The only way to stop it is to force application signing... but who really wants that?
So tell me, which OS would you choose that could stop all malware even with stupid users?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485470</id>
	<title>Survey</title>
	<author>ardeez</author>
	<datestamp>1268682480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can somebody do a survey of all of these infected machines and check what OS<br>version they're running?</p><p>If there's a growing number of Vista and Win 7 machines then someone should<br>get back to MS and let them know whatever they're doing ain't working.</p><p>With all of these security initiatives I'd have thought botnets would have been a shrinking<br>problem - not something that was a growth industry as this article seems to indicate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody do a survey of all of these infected machines and check what OSversion they 're running ? If there 's a growing number of Vista and Win 7 machines then someone shouldget back to MS and let them know whatever they 're doing ai n't working.With all of these security initiatives I 'd have thought botnets would have been a shrinkingproblem - not something that was a growth industry as this article seems to indicate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody do a survey of all of these infected machines and check what OSversion they're running?If there's a growing number of Vista and Win 7 machines then someone shouldget back to MS and let them know whatever they're doing ain't working.With all of these security initiatives I'd have thought botnets would have been a shrinkingproblem - not something that was a growth industry as this article seems to indicate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485172</id>
	<title>Robert Hansen has access</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1268681340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is SecTheory a harbor for these malicious users? Why does Hansen have such deep contacts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is SecTheory a harbor for these malicious users ?
Why does Hansen have such deep contacts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is SecTheory a harbor for these malicious users?
Why does Hansen have such deep contacts?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485508</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1268682600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can hook you up with an acquaintance in Nigeria that's very good with money transfers aquaintenance, let me know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can hook you up with an acquaintance in Nigeria that 's very good with money transfers aquaintenance , let me know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can hook you up with an acquaintance in Nigeria that's very good with money transfers aquaintenance, let me know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485708</id>
	<title>Re:How to Pay?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268683440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>'OK, if I decide to do this, I'm gonna need an unlimited supply of Xena tapes, and Hot Pockets'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>'OK , if I decide to do this , I 'm gon na need an unlimited supply of Xena tapes , and Hot Pockets' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'OK, if I decide to do this, I'm gonna need an unlimited supply of Xena tapes, and Hot Pockets'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486380</id>
	<title>Re:Why not use a botnet</title>
	<author>zero0ne</author>
	<datestamp>1268685660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My guess is that the organized cartels are already doing this.</p><p>Except that the second you cash out and it is discovered that the stock was inflated by 100,000 hacked e-trade accounts, you are the number one suspect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is that the organized cartels are already doing this.Except that the second you cash out and it is discovered that the stock was inflated by 100,000 hacked e-trade accounts , you are the number one suspect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is that the organized cartels are already doing this.Except that the second you cash out and it is discovered that the stock was inflated by 100,000 hacked e-trade accounts, you are the number one suspect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486156</id>
	<title>Re:Bad title</title>
	<author>hatemonger</author>
	<datestamp>1268684820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed. My first thought after reading the title was a large network of machines making microsecond stock purchases and sales with other machines, hoping that its algorithms are good enough to turn a profit. Some senior British official proposed a small fee per stock transaction to prevent that from happening, claiming that it would hurt the "buy and hold" stock purchasers, but I hadn't heard anything for a while. Samsonite? I was way off!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
My first thought after reading the title was a large network of machines making microsecond stock purchases and sales with other machines , hoping that its algorithms are good enough to turn a profit .
Some senior British official proposed a small fee per stock transaction to prevent that from happening , claiming that it would hurt the " buy and hold " stock purchasers , but I had n't heard anything for a while .
Samsonite ? I was way off !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
My first thought after reading the title was a large network of machines making microsecond stock purchases and sales with other machines, hoping that its algorithms are good enough to turn a profit.
Some senior British official proposed a small fee per stock transaction to prevent that from happening, claiming that it would hurt the "buy and hold" stock purchasers, but I hadn't heard anything for a while.
Samsonite? I was way off!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487020</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268644620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows is no more secure than Linux, or whatever hippie OS you're into. Any OS as popular as Windows is going to get the crap hacked out of it, the only reason Linux (assuming you're into that, but substitute it for whatever you like) is 'more secure' is because your grandmother doesn't open<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe attachments on it.</p></div><p>So why does windows 7 need a virus scanner????</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows is no more secure than Linux , or whatever hippie OS you 're into .
Any OS as popular as Windows is going to get the crap hacked out of it , the only reason Linux ( assuming you 're into that , but substitute it for whatever you like ) is 'more secure ' is because your grandmother does n't open .exe attachments on it.So why does windows 7 need a virus scanner ? ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows is no more secure than Linux, or whatever hippie OS you're into.
Any OS as popular as Windows is going to get the crap hacked out of it, the only reason Linux (assuming you're into that, but substitute it for whatever you like) is 'more secure' is because your grandmother doesn't open .exe attachments on it.So why does windows 7 need a virus scanner???
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31489464</id>
	<title>Re:I can't believe we are still discussing this ..</title>
	<author>Lunix Nutcase</author>
	<datestamp>1268656200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We are making Toyota responsible for all the incidents, and possible future incidents with their acceleration issues, aren't we? Why not hold microsoft responible for their own products too?</p></div><p>You mean other than the fact that the EULA you agree to when using Windows says that Microsoft disclaims all warranties and Toyota has no such contractual agreement with purchasers of their car? And before you go on about being able to ignore that and claiming EULAs are unenforceable (which is a common slashdot meme but it is wrong) then you would have to say that any such disclaimers in FOSS software would be null and void too thus opening them up to being held responsible for any bugs in their software.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are making Toyota responsible for all the incidents , and possible future incidents with their acceleration issues , are n't we ?
Why not hold microsoft responible for their own products too ? You mean other than the fact that the EULA you agree to when using Windows says that Microsoft disclaims all warranties and Toyota has no such contractual agreement with purchasers of their car ?
And before you go on about being able to ignore that and claiming EULAs are unenforceable ( which is a common slashdot meme but it is wrong ) then you would have to say that any such disclaimers in FOSS software would be null and void too thus opening them up to being held responsible for any bugs in their software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are making Toyota responsible for all the incidents, and possible future incidents with their acceleration issues, aren't we?
Why not hold microsoft responible for their own products too?You mean other than the fact that the EULA you agree to when using Windows says that Microsoft disclaims all warranties and Toyota has no such contractual agreement with purchasers of their car?
And before you go on about being able to ignore that and claiming EULAs are unenforceable (which is a common slashdot meme but it is wrong) then you would have to say that any such disclaimers in FOSS software would be null and void too thus opening them up to being held responsible for any bugs in their software.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148</id>
	<title>Bad title</title>
	<author>Galestar</author>
	<datestamp>1268681280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is this a "stock exchange"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this a " stock exchange " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this a "stock exchange"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576</id>
	<title>Why not use a botnet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268682840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To trade stocks in the first place?  Buy some penny stocks/junk bonds whatever and get/steal/buy enough logins to various brokerages than just pump the price at an opportune time, take the money and run.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To trade stocks in the first place ?
Buy some penny stocks/junk bonds whatever and get/steal/buy enough logins to various brokerages than just pump the price at an opportune time , take the money and run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To trade stocks in the first place?
Buy some penny stocks/junk bonds whatever and get/steal/buy enough logins to various brokerages than just pump the price at an opportune time, take the money and run.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485100</id>
	<title>gay niggers 4 life!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268681040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.goatse.fr/" title="goatse.fr" rel="nofollow">Please. have a look</a> [goatse.fr]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please .
have a look [ goatse.fr ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please.
have a look [goatse.fr]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31493692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31495542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31491074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31531890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31489464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_1740214_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485434
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485970
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31495542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31531890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31489464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31491074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486718
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485708
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31493692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31486730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31492284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488802
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_1740214.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31487492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31485904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_1740214.31488824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
