<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_03_2235219</id>
	<title>Privacy With a 4096 Bit RSA Key &mdash; Offline, On Paper</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1267614180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>HavanaF writes <i>"Online backup is practical, but can it offer any privacy? The Dutch security company Safeberg developed an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offline\_private\_key\_protocol">Offline Private Key Protocol</a>, with an asymmetric key scheme. The protocol demands that the private (decryption) key be stored away from the 'source' computer, which presumably is 'too vulnerable.' The catch is that the private key needs to be fairly large to be secure: a <a href="https://www.safeberg.com/en/security/encryption">4,096-bit RSA key</a> should <a href="http://www.keylength.com/en/">suffice for some years</a>. But how to store an 800-character key offline? Safeberg introduces a <a href="https://www.safeberg.com/en/paperkey">machine readable paper key</a>, with the 4k-bit key crammed in a giant 2D Datamatrix barcode. This <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQJga--D0Do">video on key strength</a> tells the story."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>HavanaF writes " Online backup is practical , but can it offer any privacy ?
The Dutch security company Safeberg developed an Offline Private Key Protocol , with an asymmetric key scheme .
The protocol demands that the private ( decryption ) key be stored away from the 'source ' computer , which presumably is 'too vulnerable .
' The catch is that the private key needs to be fairly large to be secure : a 4,096-bit RSA key should suffice for some years .
But how to store an 800-character key offline ?
Safeberg introduces a machine readable paper key , with the 4k-bit key crammed in a giant 2D Datamatrix barcode .
This video on key strength tells the story .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HavanaF writes "Online backup is practical, but can it offer any privacy?
The Dutch security company Safeberg developed an Offline Private Key Protocol, with an asymmetric key scheme.
The protocol demands that the private (decryption) key be stored away from the 'source' computer, which presumably is 'too vulnerable.
' The catch is that the private key needs to be fairly large to be secure: a 4,096-bit RSA key should suffice for some years.
But how to store an 800-character key offline?
Safeberg introduces a machine readable paper key, with the 4k-bit key crammed in a giant 2D Datamatrix barcode.
This video on key strength tells the story.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355088</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267644840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on?</p></div><p>It becomes 3D.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on ? It becomes 3D .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... you fold the paper your 2D key is on?It becomes 3D.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352052</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267618560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The pixels of the 2D code are 2mm by 2mm (0.08 inch x 0.08 inch) and there is about two-fold redundancy in the encoding. Reconstructing should be possible even when there are destructive creases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The pixels of the 2D code are 2mm by 2mm ( 0.08 inch x 0.08 inch ) and there is about two-fold redundancy in the encoding .
Reconstructing should be possible even when there are destructive creases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The pixels of the 2D code are 2mm by 2mm (0.08 inch x 0.08 inch) and there is about two-fold redundancy in the encoding.
Reconstructing should be possible even when there are destructive creases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612</id>
	<title>Re:In 2006, a guy recited Pi to 100000 places...</title>
	<author>localman57</author>
	<datestamp>1267621560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So what could be so hard about memorizing a measly 800 or so characters?</p></div><p>Pi might be hard.  But for encryption keys, It's not hard at all.  You just repeat "12345" one hundred and sixty times.<br> <br>
Now, I want half of you to mod this funny, because it is.  I want the other half of you to mod it insightful, because we all know that when you put 4096 bit encryption into the hands of an average person, they really do type 12345 one hundred and sixty times.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what could be so hard about memorizing a measly 800 or so characters ? Pi might be hard .
But for encryption keys , It 's not hard at all .
You just repeat " 12345 " one hundred and sixty times .
Now , I want half of you to mod this funny , because it is .
I want the other half of you to mod it insightful , because we all know that when you put 4096 bit encryption into the hands of an average person , they really do type 12345 one hundred and sixty times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what could be so hard about memorizing a measly 800 or so characters?Pi might be hard.
But for encryption keys, It's not hard at all.
You just repeat "12345" one hundred and sixty times.
Now, I want half of you to mod this funny, because it is.
I want the other half of you to mod it insightful, because we all know that when you put 4096 bit encryption into the hands of an average person, they really do type 12345 one hundred and sixty times.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</id>
	<title>I'll hold out</title>
	<author>egcagrac0</author>
	<datestamp>1267627680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... until there's a 640kbit key. 640k ought to be enough for anybody.</p><p>But seriously, it was just a few years back when we though 128bit keys were unbreakably long. Now 2048bit is standard, and about to get broken.  4096bit isn't enough right now.  16kbit is just about right, but that will get broken in early 2015.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... until there 's a 640kbit key .
640k ought to be enough for anybody.But seriously , it was just a few years back when we though 128bit keys were unbreakably long .
Now 2048bit is standard , and about to get broken .
4096bit is n't enough right now .
16kbit is just about right , but that will get broken in early 2015 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... until there's a 640kbit key.
640k ought to be enough for anybody.But seriously, it was just a few years back when we though 128bit keys were unbreakably long.
Now 2048bit is standard, and about to get broken.
4096bit isn't enough right now.
16kbit is just about right, but that will get broken in early 2015.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353134</id>
	<title>Pants? Hmm!</title>
	<author>Zancarius</author>
	<datestamp>1267625520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Hang on! let me get my giant barcode out of my pocket!</p></div></blockquote><p>That's just the thing... a printed key is just one washing machine away from complete and total disaster at the data center.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hang on !
let me get my giant barcode out of my pocket ! That 's just the thing... a printed key is just one washing machine away from complete and total disaster at the data center .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hang on!
let me get my giant barcode out of my pocket!That's just the thing... a printed key is just one washing machine away from complete and total disaster at the data center.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352766</id>
	<title>ECC only requires 75 chars</title>
	<author>joeku98</author>
	<datestamp>1267622880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ECC-521 exceeds RSA4096 in terms of security strength, and it would only require approx 75 ascii chars to represent the key.
It's still ridiculously long, but it's certainly much shorter than the 800 chars required by RSA4096!</htmltext>
<tokenext>ECC-521 exceeds RSA4096 in terms of security strength , and it would only require approx 75 ascii chars to represent the key .
It 's still ridiculously long , but it 's certainly much shorter than the 800 chars required by RSA4096 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ECC-521 exceeds RSA4096 in terms of security strength, and it would only require approx 75 ascii chars to represent the key.
It's still ridiculously long, but it's certainly much shorter than the 800 chars required by RSA4096!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355008</id>
	<title>Why not use a smartcard to hold the private key?</title>
	<author>fluffy99</author>
	<datestamp>1267643700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see some use for this a secondary method of archiving the private key.  Perhaps one that might survive the EMP blast from a nuclear strike. I don't think I wouldn't trust it as a primary method though.</p><p>Personally, I would think that using a smartcard (or two for redundancy) would be a better option.   Since the private key never leaves the card once installed, it can't be copied without stealing the card itself.   The actual signing, or en/decrypting of symmetric keys happens securely within the smartcard.  If someone actually needs to recover some encrypted archive data then they go get the card and use it.  The pin to unlock the card can be changed as needed.  Otherwise with typical removeable media or hard copy of the private key, any person or software that had access in the past could have copied it.</p><p>For an example of a large entity doing this full-scale, just have a look at the DOD CAC program.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see some use for this a secondary method of archiving the private key .
Perhaps one that might survive the EMP blast from a nuclear strike .
I do n't think I would n't trust it as a primary method though.Personally , I would think that using a smartcard ( or two for redundancy ) would be a better option .
Since the private key never leaves the card once installed , it ca n't be copied without stealing the card itself .
The actual signing , or en/decrypting of symmetric keys happens securely within the smartcard .
If someone actually needs to recover some encrypted archive data then they go get the card and use it .
The pin to unlock the card can be changed as needed .
Otherwise with typical removeable media or hard copy of the private key , any person or software that had access in the past could have copied it.For an example of a large entity doing this full-scale , just have a look at the DOD CAC program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see some use for this a secondary method of archiving the private key.
Perhaps one that might survive the EMP blast from a nuclear strike.
I don't think I wouldn't trust it as a primary method though.Personally, I would think that using a smartcard (or two for redundancy) would be a better option.
Since the private key never leaves the card once installed, it can't be copied without stealing the card itself.
The actual signing, or en/decrypting of symmetric keys happens securely within the smartcard.
If someone actually needs to recover some encrypted archive data then they go get the card and use it.
The pin to unlock the card can be changed as needed.
Otherwise with typical removeable media or hard copy of the private key, any person or software that had access in the past could have copied it.For an example of a large entity doing this full-scale, just have a look at the DOD CAC program.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351992</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>fructose</author>
	<datestamp>1267618260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would yo fold it?  Put it in your filing cabinet and maybe put a copy in a firesafe.  Plus, one fold isn't going to tear a paper.  I've got lots of papers that are folded that aren't torn.  Sure some copies will tear, but some passwords get forgotten too.  It's not a perfect solution, but it is another option for those who want a fairly high level of security.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would yo fold it ?
Put it in your filing cabinet and maybe put a copy in a firesafe .
Plus , one fold is n't going to tear a paper .
I 've got lots of papers that are folded that are n't torn .
Sure some copies will tear , but some passwords get forgotten too .
It 's not a perfect solution , but it is another option for those who want a fairly high level of security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would yo fold it?
Put it in your filing cabinet and maybe put a copy in a firesafe.
Plus, one fold isn't going to tear a paper.
I've got lots of papers that are folded that aren't torn.
Sure some copies will tear, but some passwords get forgotten too.
It's not a perfect solution, but it is another option for those who want a fairly high level of security.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352478</id>
	<title>Re:You don't need to store it offline....</title>
	<author>KPexEA</author>
	<datestamp>1267620660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if they know the file you are using, and let's say for an example that the file is 100k, but they don't know the offset and length from where the key is generated inside the file, there is a lot of possible combination to test. Wouldn't that be like 100k factorial combinations?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if they know the file you are using , and let 's say for an example that the file is 100k , but they do n't know the offset and length from where the key is generated inside the file , there is a lot of possible combination to test .
Would n't that be like 100k factorial combinations ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if they know the file you are using, and let's say for an example that the file is 100k, but they don't know the offset and length from where the key is generated inside the file, there is a lot of possible combination to test.
Wouldn't that be like 100k factorial combinations?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352440</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1267620420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simple: you print the key in a blank spot on a random page of <i>War and Peace. Good luck to anybody trying to find it without knowing the page number! Whereas in a standalone computer, any disk analysis software should be able to find the key. The point is, as in <i>The Purloined Letter</i>, you put the key in a place no one would think to look for it. Searching your computer and computer media is the \_first\_ thing anyone looking for the key is going to do! When they come in with a warrant to confiscate your computer, do you think that warrant covers your book collection as well? No, it just covers computers, hard drives, USB drives, CDs/DVDs, etc.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple : you print the key in a blank spot on a random page of War and Peace .
Good luck to anybody trying to find it without knowing the page number !
Whereas in a standalone computer , any disk analysis software should be able to find the key .
The point is , as in The Purloined Letter , you put the key in a place no one would think to look for it .
Searching your computer and computer media is the \ _first \ _ thing anyone looking for the key is going to do !
When they come in with a warrant to confiscate your computer , do you think that warrant covers your book collection as well ?
No , it just covers computers , hard drives , USB drives , CDs/DVDs , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple: you print the key in a blank spot on a random page of War and Peace.
Good luck to anybody trying to find it without knowing the page number!
Whereas in a standalone computer, any disk analysis software should be able to find the key.
The point is, as in The Purloined Letter, you put the key in a place no one would think to look for it.
Searching your computer and computer media is the \_first\_ thing anyone looking for the key is going to do!
When they come in with a warrant to confiscate your computer, do you think that warrant covers your book collection as well?
No, it just covers computers, hard drives, USB drives, CDs/DVDs, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354274</id>
	<title>Great idea!</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1267635360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give me a second while I print that thing on thermal paper...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give me a second while I print that thing on thermal paper.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give me a second while I print that thing on thermal paper...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352256</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Tubal-Cain</author>
	<datestamp>1267619520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>rsync? Though I guess it depends on how much data changes throughout the day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>rsync ?
Though I guess it depends on how much data changes throughout the day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rsync?
Though I guess it depends on how much data changes throughout the day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352708</id>
	<title>Why not use OpenPGPCard?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267622340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not just use OpenPGPCard 2.0?  It supports up to 3072bit RSA keys, and I'm sure bigger keys in the future.<br>Just unplug, and it's offline.  Seems a lot more secure than a barcode on paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just use OpenPGPCard 2.0 ?
It supports up to 3072bit RSA keys , and I 'm sure bigger keys in the future.Just unplug , and it 's offline .
Seems a lot more secure than a barcode on paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just use OpenPGPCard 2.0?
It supports up to 3072bit RSA keys, and I'm sure bigger keys in the future.Just unplug, and it's offline.
Seems a lot more secure than a barcode on paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353450</id>
	<title>Hang on a minute</title>
	<author>Nazlfrag</author>
	<datestamp>1267628520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does it come with a sticky backing so I can put it next to all the passwords I wrote down?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it come with a sticky backing so I can put it next to all the passwords I wrote down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it come with a sticky backing so I can put it next to all the passwords I wrote down?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356226</id>
	<title>This comes has an answer to avoid Digital Dark Age</title>
	<author>advid.net</author>
	<datestamp>1267702560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thanks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.  !<br>
I was searching this kind of information after the  recent <i>Digital Dark Age</i> topic:
<a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/02/23/2210224/Avoiding-a-Digital-Dark-Age" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/02/23/2210224/Avoiding-a-Digital-Dark-Age</a> [slashdot.org]
<p>
I'm looking for a way to store digital info for years. There has been many<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. stories about this.<br>
My conclusion: go for printed 2D codes with CRC like Reed Solomon, using archival paper and ink jet.<br>
So thank again<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. crowd for giving all those clues about 2D codes printing and reading !</p><p>
My contribution: <br>
<b>Beware of those laser printing !</b> Solid ink can be peeled of the paper, leaving a blank page (with heat, time, vibrations, frictions). Prints last longer with quality ink jet prints, some are also water resistant.<br>
BTW, does anyone have some good advice for the printing itself ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks / .
! I was searching this kind of information after the recent Digital Dark Age topic : http : //hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/02/23/2210224/Avoiding-a-Digital-Dark-Age [ slashdot.org ] I 'm looking for a way to store digital info for years .
There has been many / .
stories about this .
My conclusion : go for printed 2D codes with CRC like Reed Solomon , using archival paper and ink jet .
So thank again / .
crowd for giving all those clues about 2D codes printing and reading !
My contribution : Beware of those laser printing !
Solid ink can be peeled of the paper , leaving a blank page ( with heat , time , vibrations , frictions ) .
Prints last longer with quality ink jet prints , some are also water resistant .
BTW , does anyone have some good advice for the printing itself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks /.
!
I was searching this kind of information after the  recent Digital Dark Age topic:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/02/23/2210224/Avoiding-a-Digital-Dark-Age [slashdot.org]

I'm looking for a way to store digital info for years.
There has been many /.
stories about this.
My conclusion: go for printed 2D codes with CRC like Reed Solomon, using archival paper and ink jet.
So thank again /.
crowd for giving all those clues about 2D codes printing and reading !
My contribution: 
Beware of those laser printing !
Solid ink can be peeled of the paper, leaving a blank page (with heat, time, vibrations, frictions).
Prints last longer with quality ink jet prints, some are also water resistant.
BTW, does anyone have some good advice for the printing itself ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</id>
	<title>How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267618620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352210</id>
	<title>I think it could be a bad idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267619340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you need that much security, for some reason I am 1000000\% curious of what you are doing now. If you had an old 286 machine in the corner I would likely just ignore it</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you need that much security , for some reason I am 1000000 \ % curious of what you are doing now .
If you had an old 286 machine in the corner I would likely just ignore it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you need that much security, for some reason I am 1000000\% curious of what you are doing now.
If you had an old 286 machine in the corner I would likely just ignore it</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357434</id>
	<title>Re:I'll hold out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267714740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... until there's a 640kbit key. 640k ought to be enough for anybody.</p><p>But seriously, it was just a few years back when we though 128bit keys were unbreakably long. Now 2048bit is standard, and about to get broken.  4096bit isn't enough right now.  16kbit is just about right, but that will get broken in early 2015.</p></div><p>128bit RSA keys were never unbreakably long. Coincidentally, they were also never used.</p><p>You are confusing asymmetric crypto (like RSA) using thousands of bits with symmetric crypto (like DES, AES...) ranging from less than hundred to a few hundred bits.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric\_crypto<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetric-key\_algorithm</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... until there 's a 640kbit key .
640k ought to be enough for anybody.But seriously , it was just a few years back when we though 128bit keys were unbreakably long .
Now 2048bit is standard , and about to get broken .
4096bit is n't enough right now .
16kbit is just about right , but that will get broken in early 2015.128bit RSA keys were never unbreakably long .
Coincidentally , they were also never used.You are confusing asymmetric crypto ( like RSA ) using thousands of bits with symmetric crypto ( like DES , AES... ) ranging from less than hundred to a few hundred bits.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric \ _cryptohttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetric-key \ _algorithm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... until there's a 640kbit key.
640k ought to be enough for anybody.But seriously, it was just a few years back when we though 128bit keys were unbreakably long.
Now 2048bit is standard, and about to get broken.
4096bit isn't enough right now.
16kbit is just about right, but that will get broken in early 2015.128bit RSA keys were never unbreakably long.
Coincidentally, they were also never used.You are confusing asymmetric crypto (like RSA) using thousands of bits with symmetric crypto (like DES, AES...) ranging from less than hundred to a few hundred bits.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric\_cryptohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetric-key\_algorithm
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352634</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267621740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think i should fix that line for you.<br>"Online backup is practical, <b>for important files</b>"</p><p>Not sure about you, but i don't usually classify all that porn as important, especially when it is easy enough to find again.<br>There are only those few files that are worthy of being classified as VIFs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think i should fix that line for you .
" Online backup is practical , for important files " Not sure about you , but i do n't usually classify all that porn as important , especially when it is easy enough to find again.There are only those few files that are worthy of being classified as VIFs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think i should fix that line for you.
"Online backup is practical, for important files"Not sure about you, but i don't usually classify all that porn as important, especially when it is easy enough to find again.There are only those few files that are worthy of being classified as VIFs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353502</id>
	<title>Re:Don't use datamatrix</title>
	<author>dangermonkeyboy</author>
	<datestamp>1267628820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No offense, but this information is wrong. Data Matrix is completely unencumbered by patents. For one thing, it was released into the public domain by its inventor, and for another it's so old that even if there had been patents they would have expired by now.</p><p>There was one "IP" company that made some noise in 2006-2007 claiming to cover some of the underlying technology in their patent portfolio, but they were handed their hats in court. I followed the issue very closely, even stopping distribution of my Data Matrix open source project for a while, pending this outcome. But rest assured that Data Matrix is unencumbered by patents and safe to use in your projects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No offense , but this information is wrong .
Data Matrix is completely unencumbered by patents .
For one thing , it was released into the public domain by its inventor , and for another it 's so old that even if there had been patents they would have expired by now.There was one " IP " company that made some noise in 2006-2007 claiming to cover some of the underlying technology in their patent portfolio , but they were handed their hats in court .
I followed the issue very closely , even stopping distribution of my Data Matrix open source project for a while , pending this outcome .
But rest assured that Data Matrix is unencumbered by patents and safe to use in your projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No offense, but this information is wrong.
Data Matrix is completely unencumbered by patents.
For one thing, it was released into the public domain by its inventor, and for another it's so old that even if there had been patents they would have expired by now.There was one "IP" company that made some noise in 2006-2007 claiming to cover some of the underlying technology in their patent portfolio, but they were handed their hats in court.
I followed the issue very closely, even stopping distribution of my Data Matrix open source project for a while, pending this outcome.
But rest assured that Data Matrix is unencumbered by patents and safe to use in your projects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352764</id>
	<title>google docs as safe as email.</title>
	<author>barv</author>
	<datestamp>1267622820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is extremely convenient to use google documents to store current work online.  Access is available from anywhere.  I believe a 4096 RSA key is totally unnecessary for protection because the password is for entry to the online vault, not to decrypt a downloadable document.  Presumably an online vault would object to even a dictionary attack.  Most online vaults (e.g. mail accounts) close up for a time after three failed attempts.</p><p>If the account is compromised, it is almost certainly because the owner was not careful about the security of their password.  Or maybe the owner chose a password like their birthdate, or used the same password as for the website dodgyfellows.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is extremely convenient to use google documents to store current work online .
Access is available from anywhere .
I believe a 4096 RSA key is totally unnecessary for protection because the password is for entry to the online vault , not to decrypt a downloadable document .
Presumably an online vault would object to even a dictionary attack .
Most online vaults ( e.g .
mail accounts ) close up for a time after three failed attempts.If the account is compromised , it is almost certainly because the owner was not careful about the security of their password .
Or maybe the owner chose a password like their birthdate , or used the same password as for the website dodgyfellows.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is extremely convenient to use google documents to store current work online.
Access is available from anywhere.
I believe a 4096 RSA key is totally unnecessary for protection because the password is for entry to the online vault, not to decrypt a downloadable document.
Presumably an online vault would object to even a dictionary attack.
Most online vaults (e.g.
mail accounts) close up for a time after three failed attempts.If the account is compromised, it is almost certainly because the owner was not careful about the security of their password.
Or maybe the owner chose a password like their birthdate, or used the same password as for the website dodgyfellows.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352676</id>
	<title>Ummmm....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267622040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure I grok this notion of not storing the key with the source machine. I mean... if I can get to the machine you backed up... I don't really need to get to the backup, do I? I've got fresher data right there in front of me.
<br> <br>
Now, if you're really trying to protect some kind of <i>historical</i> record of how your data has progressed over time, then that <i>would</i> be a reason why access to the source computer still didn't get the intruder access to what you're trying to protect... but that's a very special case.
<br> <br>
Dunno. Maybe I'm just missing the point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure I grok this notion of not storing the key with the source machine .
I mean... if I can get to the machine you backed up... I do n't really need to get to the backup , do I ?
I 've got fresher data right there in front of me .
Now , if you 're really trying to protect some kind of historical record of how your data has progressed over time , then that would be a reason why access to the source computer still did n't get the intruder access to what you 're trying to protect... but that 's a very special case .
Dunno. Maybe I 'm just missing the point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure I grok this notion of not storing the key with the source machine.
I mean... if I can get to the machine you backed up... I don't really need to get to the backup, do I?
I've got fresher data right there in front of me.
Now, if you're really trying to protect some kind of historical record of how your data has progressed over time, then that would be a reason why access to the source computer still didn't get the intruder access to what you're trying to protect... but that's a very special case.
Dunno. Maybe I'm just missing the point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358846</id>
	<title>This is silly..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you care about key security then you have to use a Hardware Security Module (HSM).  This concept is just absurd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you care about key security then you have to use a Hardware Security Module ( HSM ) .
This concept is just absurd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you care about key security then you have to use a Hardware Security Module (HSM).
This concept is just absurd.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353628</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>jd2112</author>
	<datestamp>1267629720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Bar codes printed on media of all kinds are generally quite robust and not error prone.</p> </div><p>
Excepet at the supermarket, when you are in a hurry...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bar codes printed on media of all kinds are generally quite robust and not error prone .
Excepet at the supermarket , when you are in a hurry.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bar codes printed on media of all kinds are generally quite robust and not error prone.
Excepet at the supermarket, when you are in a hurry...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352642</id>
	<title>Ahhhh!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267621800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just spilled coffee on the bar code!</p><p>(Just a what-if scenerio.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just spilled coffee on the bar code !
( Just a what-if scenerio .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just spilled coffee on the bar code!
(Just a what-if scenerio.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354016</id>
	<title>Not seeing the strength of this set up...</title>
	<author>Junior J. Junior III</author>
	<datestamp>1267632540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>Paper can be burned, torn, folded, spindled, and mutilated</li><li>Paper can be stolen, photocopied, faxed.</li><li>When your (un-trusted) computer takes a picture of the key paper, a camlogger could intercept the key, compromising it.</li></ul><p>Bottom line, the key needs to turn into machine-read data at some point in order to interface with the crypto system and unlock your data, no matter what.  Moving it to a piece of paper doesn't make it any more secure than storing it on a read-only USB key that you only plug into your computer when you need to decrypt something, or a smart card.</p><p>In any event, if you really don't trust the PC, you have no business using it to decrypt anything at all.  It'd be like entering your super secret PIN number at an ATM while some guy you don't know is standing right there watching you do it.  As soon as it's decrypted any vulnerabilities of the host system can be used to gain access to the decrypted data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper can be burned , torn , folded , spindled , and mutilatedPaper can be stolen , photocopied , faxed.When your ( un-trusted ) computer takes a picture of the key paper , a camlogger could intercept the key , compromising it.Bottom line , the key needs to turn into machine-read data at some point in order to interface with the crypto system and unlock your data , no matter what .
Moving it to a piece of paper does n't make it any more secure than storing it on a read-only USB key that you only plug into your computer when you need to decrypt something , or a smart card.In any event , if you really do n't trust the PC , you have no business using it to decrypt anything at all .
It 'd be like entering your super secret PIN number at an ATM while some guy you do n't know is standing right there watching you do it .
As soon as it 's decrypted any vulnerabilities of the host system can be used to gain access to the decrypted data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Paper can be burned, torn, folded, spindled, and mutilatedPaper can be stolen, photocopied, faxed.When your (un-trusted) computer takes a picture of the key paper, a camlogger could intercept the key, compromising it.Bottom line, the key needs to turn into machine-read data at some point in order to interface with the crypto system and unlock your data, no matter what.
Moving it to a piece of paper doesn't make it any more secure than storing it on a read-only USB key that you only plug into your computer when you need to decrypt something, or a smart card.In any event, if you really don't trust the PC, you have no business using it to decrypt anything at all.
It'd be like entering your super secret PIN number at an ATM while some guy you don't know is standing right there watching you do it.
As soon as it's decrypted any vulnerabilities of the host system can be used to gain access to the decrypted data.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352072</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>RobVB</author>
	<datestamp>1267618620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The company could store a last-resort backup at a different facility, and allow you access after checking a bunch of biometrics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The company could store a last-resort backup at a different facility , and allow you access after checking a bunch of biometrics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company could store a last-resort backup at a different facility, and allow you access after checking a bunch of biometrics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353336</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1267627440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Paper is easily filed [and probably lost] forever; or at least until the information on it is no longer needed.<br> <br>The computer has to have an asset tag, the asset has to be depreciated, and the asset has to be disposed of eventually. Some enterprising hacker will recover that key from an improper hard drive disposal...everytime. Murphy is ascendant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper is easily filed [ and probably lost ] forever ; or at least until the information on it is no longer needed .
The computer has to have an asset tag , the asset has to be depreciated , and the asset has to be disposed of eventually .
Some enterprising hacker will recover that key from an improper hard drive disposal...everytime .
Murphy is ascendant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper is easily filed [and probably lost] forever; or at least until the information on it is no longer needed.
The computer has to have an asset tag, the asset has to be depreciated, and the asset has to be disposed of eventually.
Some enterprising hacker will recover that key from an improper hard drive disposal...everytime.
Murphy is ascendant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353276</id>
	<title>Nah...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267626960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll repeat this about... eight?  times.</p><p>3.1415926535897932384626433832795028814973993751058</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll repeat this about... eight ? times.3.1415926535897932384626433832795028814973993751058</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll repeat this about... eight?  times.3.1415926535897932384626433832795028814973993751058</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352034</id>
	<title>Lets go old school</title>
	<author>stretch0611</author>
	<datestamp>1267618500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds like a way to put punch cards back in every office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds like a way to put punch cards back in every office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds like a way to put punch cards back in every office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354268</id>
	<title>Paper Tape</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267635360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this really all that different from using paper tape?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this really all that different from using paper tape ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this really all that different from using paper tape?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354146</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1267634040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Bonus points if you don't keep the key at your house,  but instead print it in redundant pieces on a few dozen different library books at various different libraries.
</p><p>
Even if someone finds it, they'll have no idea what they are looking at.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bonus points if you do n't keep the key at your house , but instead print it in redundant pieces on a few dozen different library books at various different libraries .
Even if someone finds it , they 'll have no idea what they are looking at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Bonus points if you don't keep the key at your house,  but instead print it in redundant pieces on a few dozen different library books at various different libraries.
Even if someone finds it, they'll have no idea what they are looking at.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351976</id>
	<title>key exchange</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267618200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll fax you a xerox of my public key. Is analog the new steam punk?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll fax you a xerox of my public key .
Is analog the new steam punk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll fax you a xerox of my public key.
Is analog the new steam punk?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354182</id>
	<title>Obgliatory FOSS tinfoil-hat argument</title>
	<author>zill</author>
	<datestamp>1267634520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless you can inspect the entire source code of your digital camera and/or scanner, you cannot guarantee that it's not modifing the image. Thus it's the weakest link in the security system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you can inspect the entire source code of your digital camera and/or scanner , you can not guarantee that it 's not modifing the image .
Thus it 's the weakest link in the security system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you can inspect the entire source code of your digital camera and/or scanner, you cannot guarantee that it's not modifing the image.
Thus it's the weakest link in the security system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352516</id>
	<title>suck my dick, linux faggots</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267620960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>fucking dirty bird homosexuals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>fucking dirty bird homosexuals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fucking dirty bird homosexuals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352114</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>treeves</author>
	<datestamp>1267618800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He didn't mean tearing of the paper. He meant that he'd cry. Tears.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He did n't mean tearing of the paper .
He meant that he 'd cry .
Tears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He didn't mean tearing of the paper.
He meant that he'd cry.
Tears.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355606</id>
	<title>Re:the question is mute</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267694520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper's advantages over USB flash drives:</p><p>USB flash drives have not been given the test of time (over a decade) in the real world.  I have CDs I've burned from over 15 years ago, which work fine.  I have DLT IV tapes and Travan tapes from the early 1990s that work without issue.  USB flash drives are still a new technology.</p><p>Paper can take an EMP blast.  The chip in a USB flash drive will have its leads turn into antennas and cook the data should something like that happen.</p><p>People know how to deal with paper, and have been able to, for thousands of years.  You drop the printout into your fire resistant cabinet and call it done.  Electronic media has to be kept far cooler than the 451 degrees paper incinerates at.  Of course, there is still water damage, but many generations of librarians have been taught in long term preservation of paper documents.  There is nowhere near this knowledge of preservation of electronic media.</p><p>Paper can be checked easily for damage by the naked eye.  A USB flash drive that is dead appears just like one that is working.</p><p>IMHO, the best solution:  Multiple levels of backup.  Use Safeberg's technology to store critical documents and protect them from regional destruction (obviously putting the printed key in locations geographically separate.)  Use this in combination with a D2D2T system.  Have a backup server copy data daily (or in some cases use the automatic document replication so data gets copied every few minutes) to disk.  Then every so often, copy the data stored on the backup server's RAID to tape, with a backup set of tapes going to Iron Mountain.  This type of planning not just covers the "oh shit" type of incidents when some admin does the dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda while ssh-ed into the wrong machine, but it also covers a complete loss of a site due to an earthquake or flood.  The backup server provides an easy way to do bare metal restores (either restoring via the network, or copying the backup volume to an external drive and restoring locally to the downed machine), while the offsite storage of documents on Safeberg's site provides protection of the critical core documents a company has, such as tax records.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper 's advantages over USB flash drives : USB flash drives have not been given the test of time ( over a decade ) in the real world .
I have CDs I 've burned from over 15 years ago , which work fine .
I have DLT IV tapes and Travan tapes from the early 1990s that work without issue .
USB flash drives are still a new technology.Paper can take an EMP blast .
The chip in a USB flash drive will have its leads turn into antennas and cook the data should something like that happen.People know how to deal with paper , and have been able to , for thousands of years .
You drop the printout into your fire resistant cabinet and call it done .
Electronic media has to be kept far cooler than the 451 degrees paper incinerates at .
Of course , there is still water damage , but many generations of librarians have been taught in long term preservation of paper documents .
There is nowhere near this knowledge of preservation of electronic media.Paper can be checked easily for damage by the naked eye .
A USB flash drive that is dead appears just like one that is working.IMHO , the best solution : Multiple levels of backup .
Use Safeberg 's technology to store critical documents and protect them from regional destruction ( obviously putting the printed key in locations geographically separate .
) Use this in combination with a D2D2T system .
Have a backup server copy data daily ( or in some cases use the automatic document replication so data gets copied every few minutes ) to disk .
Then every so often , copy the data stored on the backup server 's RAID to tape , with a backup set of tapes going to Iron Mountain .
This type of planning not just covers the " oh shit " type of incidents when some admin does the dd if = /dev/zero of = /dev/sda while ssh-ed into the wrong machine , but it also covers a complete loss of a site due to an earthquake or flood .
The backup server provides an easy way to do bare metal restores ( either restoring via the network , or copying the backup volume to an external drive and restoring locally to the downed machine ) , while the offsite storage of documents on Safeberg 's site provides protection of the critical core documents a company has , such as tax records .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper's advantages over USB flash drives:USB flash drives have not been given the test of time (over a decade) in the real world.
I have CDs I've burned from over 15 years ago, which work fine.
I have DLT IV tapes and Travan tapes from the early 1990s that work without issue.
USB flash drives are still a new technology.Paper can take an EMP blast.
The chip in a USB flash drive will have its leads turn into antennas and cook the data should something like that happen.People know how to deal with paper, and have been able to, for thousands of years.
You drop the printout into your fire resistant cabinet and call it done.
Electronic media has to be kept far cooler than the 451 degrees paper incinerates at.
Of course, there is still water damage, but many generations of librarians have been taught in long term preservation of paper documents.
There is nowhere near this knowledge of preservation of electronic media.Paper can be checked easily for damage by the naked eye.
A USB flash drive that is dead appears just like one that is working.IMHO, the best solution:  Multiple levels of backup.
Use Safeberg's technology to store critical documents and protect them from regional destruction (obviously putting the printed key in locations geographically separate.
)  Use this in combination with a D2D2T system.
Have a backup server copy data daily (or in some cases use the automatic document replication so data gets copied every few minutes) to disk.
Then every so often, copy the data stored on the backup server's RAID to tape, with a backup set of tapes going to Iron Mountain.
This type of planning not just covers the "oh shit" type of incidents when some admin does the dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda while ssh-ed into the wrong machine, but it also covers a complete loss of a site due to an earthquake or flood.
The backup server provides an easy way to do bare metal restores (either restoring via the network, or copying the backup volume to an external drive and restoring locally to the downed machine), while the offsite storage of documents on Safeberg's site provides protection of the critical core documents a company has, such as tax records.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353368</id>
	<title>Gonna need a new printer...</title>
	<author>DieByWire</author>
	<datestamp>1267627860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm going to need a new printer. One that I can run my post-it-notes through. Then I can print out this new bar code thingy and stick it on my monitor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to need a new printer .
One that I can run my post-it-notes through .
Then I can print out this new bar code thingy and stick it on my monitor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to need a new printer.
One that I can run my post-it-notes through.
Then I can print out this new bar code thingy and stick it on my monitor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356310</id>
	<title>Re:I'll hold out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267703520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. You confuse symmetric with asymmetric key length.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
You confuse symmetric with asymmetric key length .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
You confuse symmetric with asymmetric key length.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31359104</id>
	<title>Re:Hang on a minute</title>
	<author>RivenAleem</author>
	<datestamp>1267724100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recommend using a drawing pin to affix the password to the soft part of your screen</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recommend using a drawing pin to affix the password to the soft part of your screen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recommend using a drawing pin to affix the password to the soft part of your screen</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</id>
	<title>What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>WrongSizeGlass</author>
	<datestamp>1267617960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on? Tears, that's what. Tears.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on ?
Tears , that 's what .
Tears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on?
Tears, that's what.
Tears.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352276</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>owlstead</author>
	<datestamp>1267619640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not more secure. It's cheaper. It's less likely to break down. You can store it in a safe. You can print it using a desktop printer. And its infinitely less likely to be wiped and used as a gaming machine by your 14 year old (if you have 4 year olds you might need the safe though).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not more secure .
It 's cheaper .
It 's less likely to break down .
You can store it in a safe .
You can print it using a desktop printer .
And its infinitely less likely to be wiped and used as a gaming machine by your 14 year old ( if you have 4 year olds you might need the safe though ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not more secure.
It's cheaper.
It's less likely to break down.
You can store it in a safe.
You can print it using a desktop printer.
And its infinitely less likely to be wiped and used as a gaming machine by your 14 year old (if you have 4 year olds you might need the safe though).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352094</id>
	<title>Smartcard ?</title>
	<author>KermitTheFragger</author>
	<datestamp>1267618740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>After surfing around a bit on the source site I can't find any compelling reasons why I should use a giant unwieldy printable 2D Barcode instead of a smartcard ? A smartcard reader costs 25 bucks now a days so that cant be much of an obstacle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After surfing around a bit on the source site I ca n't find any compelling reasons why I should use a giant unwieldy printable 2D Barcode instead of a smartcard ?
A smartcard reader costs 25 bucks now a days so that cant be much of an obstacle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After surfing around a bit on the source site I can't find any compelling reasons why I should use a giant unwieldy printable 2D Barcode instead of a smartcard ?
A smartcard reader costs 25 bucks now a days so that cant be much of an obstacle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108</id>
	<title>Don't use datamatrix</title>
	<author>GigsVT</author>
	<datestamp>1267618800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Datamatrix is the Gif of the barcode world.  It has a bunch of patents covering it.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF417" title="wikipedia.org">PDF417</a> [wikipedia.org] does mostly the same thing, can be read with a laser (instead of an imager) and was designed to be open source and patent free from the beginning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Datamatrix is the Gif of the barcode world .
It has a bunch of patents covering it.PDF417 [ wikipedia.org ] does mostly the same thing , can be read with a laser ( instead of an imager ) and was designed to be open source and patent free from the beginning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Datamatrix is the Gif of the barcode world.
It has a bunch of patents covering it.PDF417 [wikipedia.org] does mostly the same thing, can be read with a laser (instead of an imager) and was designed to be open source and patent free from the beginning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352948</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>bane2571</author>
	<datestamp>1267624020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but how is this any different from some kind of redundancy based file system stored on a USB key in the same file safe other than that the USB is probably a lot faster?</htmltext>
<tokenext>but how is this any different from some kind of redundancy based file system stored on a USB key in the same file safe other than that the USB is probably a lot faster ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but how is this any different from some kind of redundancy based file system stored on a USB key in the same file safe other than that the USB is probably a lot faster?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1267619520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bar codes printed on media of all kinds are generally quite robust and not error prone.  The printing device does not need to be special in any way.  The reader does not need to be special in any way.   Print the key on acid-free paper using a laser printer and store it for a looong time.  I'll leave it up to the slashdot tifosi to declare how long it would last in a bank vault.</p><p>Some nice ways to encode keys and store it as a symbol on paper here:  <a href="http://www.adams1.com/stack.html" title="adams1.com">http://www.adams1.com/stack.html</a> [adams1.com]</p><p>Symbology is very non-sexy knowledge, but valuable in logistics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bar codes printed on media of all kinds are generally quite robust and not error prone .
The printing device does not need to be special in any way .
The reader does not need to be special in any way .
Print the key on acid-free paper using a laser printer and store it for a looong time .
I 'll leave it up to the slashdot tifosi to declare how long it would last in a bank vault.Some nice ways to encode keys and store it as a symbol on paper here : http : //www.adams1.com/stack.html [ adams1.com ] Symbology is very non-sexy knowledge , but valuable in logistics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bar codes printed on media of all kinds are generally quite robust and not error prone.
The printing device does not need to be special in any way.
The reader does not need to be special in any way.
Print the key on acid-free paper using a laser printer and store it for a looong time.
I'll leave it up to the slashdot tifosi to declare how long it would last in a bank vault.Some nice ways to encode keys and store it as a symbol on paper here:  http://www.adams1.com/stack.html [adams1.com]Symbology is very non-sexy knowledge, but valuable in logistics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353274</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>steveb3210</author>
	<datestamp>1267626960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'll leave it up to the slashdot tifosi to declare how long it would last in a bank vault.</p></div><p>
<a href="http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html" title="fdic.gov" rel="nofollow">I'll pass....</a> [fdic.gov]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll leave it up to the slashdot tifosi to declare how long it would last in a bank vault .
I 'll pass.... [ fdic.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll leave it up to the slashdot tifosi to declare how long it would last in a bank vault.
I'll pass.... [fdic.gov]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353198</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267626120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Online backup is practical</p></div><p>not for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.</p><p>Right now backing up from hard drive to hard drive takes forever (hours). How the fuck am I gonna back up to a remote server over the internet at 60 kbytes/sec?</p></div><p>How much porn can one person watch, anyway? I mean, you have to leave time for Salshdot, too!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Online backup is practicalnot for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.Right now backing up from hard drive to hard drive takes forever ( hours ) .
How the fuck am I gon na back up to a remote server over the internet at 60 kbytes/sec ? How much porn can one person watch , anyway ?
I mean , you have to leave time for Salshdot , too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Online backup is practicalnot for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.Right now backing up from hard drive to hard drive takes forever (hours).
How the fuck am I gonna back up to a remote server over the internet at 60 kbytes/sec?How much porn can one person watch, anyway?
I mean, you have to leave time for Salshdot, too!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352188</id>
	<title>Not new</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1267619160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People have been using coloured matrices of keys, since the days of 8 bit games,
for example JetSet Willy had one back in 1982 or 3.
<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Cryptography/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Cryptography</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have been using coloured matrices of keys , since the days of 8 bit games , for example JetSet Willy had one back in 1982 or 3 .
--- Cryptography [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have been using coloured matrices of keys, since the days of 8 bit games,
for example JetSet Willy had one back in 1982 or 3.
---

Cryptography [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356926</id>
	<title>Not exactly new</title>
	<author>ei4anb</author>
	<datestamp>1267711260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I punched my private key onto 80 column punched cards for offline storage back in 1979. It was the only way to keep a key private on a mainframe where the operator could read all files.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I punched my private key onto 80 column punched cards for offline storage back in 1979 .
It was the only way to keep a key private on a mainframe where the operator could read all files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I punched my private key onto 80 column punched cards for offline storage back in 1979.
It was the only way to keep a key private on a mainframe where the operator could read all files.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356216</id>
	<title>What about a fscking key?</title>
	<author>mu22le</author>
	<datestamp>1267702320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on? Tears, that's what. Tears.</p></div><p>Yeah, paper is quite a stupid medium for a key, I mean really, paper? The thing that can be folded, erased, burned, it can fade, get wet...<br>Why not a real key? A physical object made of metal or plastic that actually looks somewhat like a key? I know that not everyone can print metal at home but you can "print" a metal key at your local mall and vinyl cutters are getting less and less expensive (you should probably xor the crypto-key with a password, for additional security, if you use someone else's printer). Maybe it would be even possible to make the information stored on the key retrievable by scanning the object with a home scanner.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... you fold the paper your 2D key is on ?
Tears , that 's what .
Tears.Yeah , paper is quite a stupid medium for a key , I mean really , paper ?
The thing that can be folded , erased , burned , it can fade , get wet...Why not a real key ?
A physical object made of metal or plastic that actually looks somewhat like a key ?
I know that not everyone can print metal at home but you can " print " a metal key at your local mall and vinyl cutters are getting less and less expensive ( you should probably xor the crypto-key with a password , for additional security , if you use someone else 's printer ) .
Maybe it would be even possible to make the information stored on the key retrievable by scanning the object with a home scanner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... you fold the paper your 2D key is on?
Tears, that's what.
Tears.Yeah, paper is quite a stupid medium for a key, I mean really, paper?
The thing that can be folded, erased, burned, it can fade, get wet...Why not a real key?
A physical object made of metal or plastic that actually looks somewhat like a key?
I know that not everyone can print metal at home but you can "print" a metal key at your local mall and vinyl cutters are getting less and less expensive (you should probably xor the crypto-key with a password, for additional security, if you use someone else's printer).
Maybe it would be even possible to make the information stored on the key retrievable by scanning the object with a home scanner.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352724</id>
	<title>Paper tape</title>
	<author>rlp</author>
	<datestamp>1267622460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could use long strips of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper\_tape" title="wikipedia.org">paper</a> [wikipedia.org] with holes punched in it (or not punched).  Or you could build one of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing\_machine" title="wikipedia.org">these</a> [wikipedia.org] with a somewhat longer strip of paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could use long strips of paper [ wikipedia.org ] with holes punched in it ( or not punched ) .
Or you could build one of these [ wikipedia.org ] with a somewhat longer strip of paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could use long strips of paper [wikipedia.org] with holes punched in it (or not punched).
Or you could build one of these [wikipedia.org] with a somewhat longer strip of paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353590</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267629360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hunh? the pr0n movies and music are the only thing useful on my hard drive... the rest loads off a knoppix cd.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hunh ?
the pr0n movies and music are the only thing useful on my hard drive... the rest loads off a knoppix cd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hunh?
the pr0n movies and music are the only thing useful on my hard drive... the rest loads off a knoppix cd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352112</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1267618800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or stored on a standard external storage medium like, say, an USB stick?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or stored on a standard external storage medium like , say , an USB stick ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or stored on a standard external storage medium like, say, an USB stick?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353834</id>
	<title>Re:In 2006, a guy recited Pi to 100000 places...</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1267631100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Problem is, this is an RSA key, it can't just be any random string of bits, it has to be two very large prime numbers.  Users won't be chosing a 4096bit key, it will be generated for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem is , this is an RSA key , it ca n't just be any random string of bits , it has to be two very large prime numbers .
Users wo n't be chosing a 4096bit key , it will be generated for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem is, this is an RSA key, it can't just be any random string of bits, it has to be two very large prime numbers.
Users won't be chosing a 4096bit key, it will be generated for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352976</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1267624260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>not for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.</p></div></blockquote><p>Doesn't matter how big the volume is.  It only matters how much data changes every day.  Even if it takes days to sync up the first time, as long as only a few GBs changes, subsequent backups will go plenty fast.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>not for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.Does n't matter how big the volume is .
It only matters how much data changes every day .
Even if it takes days to sync up the first time , as long as only a few GBs changes , subsequent backups will go plenty fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.Doesn't matter how big the volume is.
It only matters how much data changes every day.
Even if it takes days to sync up the first time, as long as only a few GBs changes, subsequent backups will go plenty fast.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352248</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267619460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They mean BESIDES the music, movies, and pr0n.  You know, the 20M or so on your hard drive that's actually useful?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They mean BESIDES the music , movies , and pr0n .
You know , the 20M or so on your hard drive that 's actually useful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They mean BESIDES the music, movies, and pr0n.
You know, the 20M or so on your hard drive that's actually useful?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352126</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267618920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Obvious. A key stored on paper is more likely to perish, and therefore less likely to fall in the hands of evildoers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Obvious .
A key stored on paper is more likely to perish , and therefore less likely to fall in the hands of evildoers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obvious.
A key stored on paper is more likely to perish, and therefore less likely to fall in the hands of evildoers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357540</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267715520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish "tears" wasn't spelled the same way as "tears". Tears for fears, or tears for fairs?</p><p>I think it's a dumb idea, personally. There's no reason to use paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish " tears " was n't spelled the same way as " tears " .
Tears for fears , or tears for fairs ? I think it 's a dumb idea , personally .
There 's no reason to use paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish "tears" wasn't spelled the same way as "tears".
Tears for fears, or tears for fairs?I think it's a dumb idea, personally.
There's no reason to use paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352224</id>
	<title>Re:You don't need to store it offline....</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1267619340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the file was stored anywhere obvious that would be a problem. For example, if it is stored on the machine then if someone gets access to the machine they might need to only test a few thousand files, especially if they have any good understanding of the time span from when the encryption was made. If they use a public website then you are vulnerable to having the website go down and can't access it unless you've got internet. Moreover, someone with access to your history might be able to identify the file (or at least would have a very small list of candidates). The use of a pen drive would actually be practical. But that's primarily because a pen drive is a small object that can be easily hidden, not because of any great aspect of this key generation scheme.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the file was stored anywhere obvious that would be a problem .
For example , if it is stored on the machine then if someone gets access to the machine they might need to only test a few thousand files , especially if they have any good understanding of the time span from when the encryption was made .
If they use a public website then you are vulnerable to having the website go down and ca n't access it unless you 've got internet .
Moreover , someone with access to your history might be able to identify the file ( or at least would have a very small list of candidates ) .
The use of a pen drive would actually be practical .
But that 's primarily because a pen drive is a small object that can be easily hidden , not because of any great aspect of this key generation scheme .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the file was stored anywhere obvious that would be a problem.
For example, if it is stored on the machine then if someone gets access to the machine they might need to only test a few thousand files, especially if they have any good understanding of the time span from when the encryption was made.
If they use a public website then you are vulnerable to having the website go down and can't access it unless you've got internet.
Moreover, someone with access to your history might be able to identify the file (or at least would have a very small list of candidates).
The use of a pen drive would actually be practical.
But that's primarily because a pen drive is a small object that can be easily hidden, not because of any great aspect of this key generation scheme.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31360190</id>
	<title>saving data by printing and restoring by scanning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267728480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oleh Yushuk did it long ago - <a href="http://www.ollydbg.de/Paperbak/index.html" title="ollydbg.de" rel="nofollow">http://www.ollydbg.de/Paperbak/index.html</a> [ollydbg.de]<br>just save your key to a text file, print it with paperbak.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oleh Yushuk did it long ago - http : //www.ollydbg.de/Paperbak/index.html [ ollydbg.de ] just save your key to a text file , print it with paperbak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oleh Yushuk did it long ago - http://www.ollydbg.de/Paperbak/index.html [ollydbg.de]just save your key to a text file, print it with paperbak.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353624</id>
	<title>I'll save you some money</title>
	<author>dangermonkeyboy</author>
	<datestamp>1267629720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$ gpg --export | dmtxwrite --encoding=8 --format=PNG | lp</p><p>To be honest, I thought trusted paper keys were already common knowledge among geeks:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted\_paper\_key" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted\_paper\_key</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ gpg --export | dmtxwrite --encoding = 8 --format = PNG | lpTo be honest , I thought trusted paper keys were already common knowledge among geeks : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted \ _paper \ _key [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$ gpg --export | dmtxwrite --encoding=8 --format=PNG | lpTo be honest, I thought trusted paper keys were already common knowledge among geeks:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted\_paper\_key [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358430</id>
	<title>Re:Don't use datamatrix</title>
	<author>iluvcapra</author>
	<datestamp>1267721040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's also <a href="http://ronja.twibright.com/optar/" title="twibright.com">OPTAR</a> [twibright.com] for that matter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also OPTAR [ twibright.com ] for that matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also OPTAR [twibright.com] for that matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352106</id>
	<title>You don't need to store it offline....</title>
	<author>KPexEA</author>
	<datestamp>1267618800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Image this scenario. Instead of generating a "key" the traditional way you have the user select a file of his or  her choice, then an offset and length. So if the user has some jpeg on their machine called goodtimes.jpg that is 100k and they input the offset of 3456 bytes and length of 77654 bytes, the key is then generated using the data inside that file. All they need to remember is the filename, offset and length. The file could be stored on the machine in plain site, or on a removeable pen drive. or even on a public website somewhere using http to access it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Image this scenario .
Instead of generating a " key " the traditional way you have the user select a file of his or her choice , then an offset and length .
So if the user has some jpeg on their machine called goodtimes.jpg that is 100k and they input the offset of 3456 bytes and length of 77654 bytes , the key is then generated using the data inside that file .
All they need to remember is the filename , offset and length .
The file could be stored on the machine in plain site , or on a removeable pen drive .
or even on a public website somewhere using http to access it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Image this scenario.
Instead of generating a "key" the traditional way you have the user select a file of his or  her choice, then an offset and length.
So if the user has some jpeg on their machine called goodtimes.jpg that is 100k and they input the offset of 3456 bytes and length of 77654 bytes, the key is then generated using the data inside that file.
All they need to remember is the filename, offset and length.
The file could be stored on the machine in plain site, or on a removeable pen drive.
or even on a public website somewhere using http to access it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353436</id>
	<title>Re:You don't need to store it offline....</title>
	<author>Samah</author>
	<datestamp>1267628280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So if the user has some jpeg on their machine called goodtimes.jpg that is...</p></div><p>I think <b>hello.jpg</b> would be more appropriate, as people would be less inclined to distribute it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if the user has some jpeg on their machine called goodtimes.jpg that is...I think hello.jpg would be more appropriate , as people would be less inclined to distribute it .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if the user has some jpeg on their machine called goodtimes.jpg that is...I think hello.jpg would be more appropriate, as people would be less inclined to distribute it.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353818</id>
	<title>If you want to put an RSA private key on paper...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267631040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could just print a 256-bit random number on the paper.  That feeds a keystream generator (AES-256-CTR, say), which is used as the random number source of a standard RSA private key generator.  It would be relatively slow to regenerate your private key -- lots of primality tests and yadda yadda -- and the keygen code would have to have precisely specified cross-platform behavior so the same random number stream always produced the sameprivate key.  But you could do it!</p><p>It's sort of the flipside of exchanging public key fingerprints: in both cases, a little fun with symmetric algorithms allows you to only print out a small private-key-sized number instead of a much longer asymmetric key.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could just print a 256-bit random number on the paper .
That feeds a keystream generator ( AES-256-CTR , say ) , which is used as the random number source of a standard RSA private key generator .
It would be relatively slow to regenerate your private key -- lots of primality tests and yadda yadda -- and the keygen code would have to have precisely specified cross-platform behavior so the same random number stream always produced the sameprivate key .
But you could do it ! It 's sort of the flipside of exchanging public key fingerprints : in both cases , a little fun with symmetric algorithms allows you to only print out a small private-key-sized number instead of a much longer asymmetric key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could just print a 256-bit random number on the paper.
That feeds a keystream generator (AES-256-CTR, say), which is used as the random number source of a standard RSA private key generator.
It would be relatively slow to regenerate your private key -- lots of primality tests and yadda yadda -- and the keygen code would have to have precisely specified cross-platform behavior so the same random number stream always produced the sameprivate key.
But you could do it!It's sort of the flipside of exchanging public key fingerprints: in both cases, a little fun with symmetric algorithms allows you to only print out a small private-key-sized number instead of a much longer asymmetric key.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353778</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267630620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not just encode it with Code-39 and print it on receipt paper?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just encode it with Code-39 and print it on receipt paper ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just encode it with Code-39 and print it on receipt paper?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352346</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>owlstead</author>
	<datestamp>1267619940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, OK but it is probably practical for most things that require 4096 bits of RSA security. I've currently got two levels of backup. My administration/contacts etc. which is encrypted and backed up to my local ISP at ADSL speeds and on a tiny 2.5" external hdd, and a second one which *should* be stored on a separate hard disk or a RAID system. My favorite CD's I just copy to all my devices. Other things are just not worth backup up, such as 1 TB of downloaded movies - if I like them enough I simply buy the DVD. This one would presumably be for even higher levels of protection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , OK but it is probably practical for most things that require 4096 bits of RSA security .
I 've currently got two levels of backup .
My administration/contacts etc .
which is encrypted and backed up to my local ISP at ADSL speeds and on a tiny 2.5 " external hdd , and a second one which * should * be stored on a separate hard disk or a RAID system .
My favorite CD 's I just copy to all my devices .
Other things are just not worth backup up , such as 1 TB of downloaded movies - if I like them enough I simply buy the DVD .
This one would presumably be for even higher levels of protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, OK but it is probably practical for most things that require 4096 bits of RSA security.
I've currently got two levels of backup.
My administration/contacts etc.
which is encrypted and backed up to my local ISP at ADSL speeds and on a tiny 2.5" external hdd, and a second one which *should* be stored on a separate hard disk or a RAID system.
My favorite CD's I just copy to all my devices.
Other things are just not worth backup up, such as 1 TB of downloaded movies - if I like them enough I simply buy the DVD.
This one would presumably be for even higher levels of protection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352018</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>Sponge Bath</author>
	<datestamp>1267618440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfold it? Just be sure not to wipe your ass with it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfold it ?
Just be sure not to wipe your ass with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfold it?
Just be sure not to wipe your ass with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355414</id>
	<title>Re:Don't use datamatrix</title>
	<author>mrmeval</author>
	<datestamp>1267735320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How the fuck are we to know? Where is the patent has expired or the drugged out hippie inventor has released it to the ALL?<br>Srsly<br>ORIGHT I patented that. Never mind.</p><p>It's #OI8urgirfriendoutlastnight</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How the fuck are we to know ?
Where is the patent has expired or the drugged out hippie inventor has released it to the ALL ? SrslyORIGHT I patented that .
Never mind.It 's # OI8urgirfriendoutlastnight</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the fuck are we to know?
Where is the patent has expired or the drugged out hippie inventor has released it to the ALL?SrslyORIGHT I patented that.
Never mind.It's #OI8urgirfriendoutlastnight</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357970</id>
	<title>to remember it</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1267718460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make a song out of it as for emergency numbers : <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK4Xye7AErE" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK4Xye7AErE</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make a song out of it as for emergency numbers : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = RK4Xye7AErE [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make a song out of it as for emergency numbers : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK4Xye7AErE [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352546</id>
	<title>Does the key have to be printed on paper?</title>
	<author>Rhacman</author>
	<datestamp>1267621140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could it perhaps be printed on say, a cracker?  That fellow that swallowed the USB flash drive to prevent investigators from using it for evidence might be interested.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could it perhaps be printed on say , a cracker ?
That fellow that swallowed the USB flash drive to prevent investigators from using it for evidence might be interested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could it perhaps be printed on say, a cracker?
That fellow that swallowed the USB flash drive to prevent investigators from using it for evidence might be interested.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31368242</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>consonant</author>
	<datestamp>1267820700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Robert Langdon made symbology sexy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Robert Langdon made symbology sexy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Robert Langdon made symbology sexy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356564</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>muckracer</author>
	<datestamp>1267706760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; How is this any more secure...Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer?</p><p>Ask this question again after the EMP blast...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; How is this any more secure...Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer ? Ask this question again after the EMP blast.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; How is this any more secure...Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer?Ask this question again after the EMP blast...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352302</id>
	<title>Re:In 2006, a guy recited Pi to 100000 places...</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1267619760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It takes a special kind of mind to do that.</p><p>And that said... I memorized a 48 character hexadecimal password, in case I ever need one.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It takes a special kind of mind to do that.And that said... I memorized a 48 character hexadecimal password , in case I ever need one .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It takes a special kind of mind to do that.And that said... I memorized a 48 character hexadecimal password, in case I ever need one.
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351934</id>
	<title>Another plausible scenario I have to watch out for</title>
	<author>Merc248</author>
	<datestamp>1267618020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guy holding knife and laxatives: "Poop the paper! Poop it now!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guy holding knife and laxatives : " Poop the paper !
Poop it now !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guy holding knife and laxatives: "Poop the paper!
Poop it now!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355904</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1267698300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depending on the pixel size and the quality of the scanner, that shouldn't be a problem.</p><p>In any case, this is probably a better idea than storing it on RFID for the obvious security reasons... paper isn't long-range readable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depending on the pixel size and the quality of the scanner , that should n't be a problem.In any case , this is probably a better idea than storing it on RFID for the obvious security reasons... paper is n't long-range readable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depending on the pixel size and the quality of the scanner, that shouldn't be a problem.In any case, this is probably a better idea than storing it on RFID for the obvious security reasons... paper isn't long-range readable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354068</id>
	<title>different kinds of cryptographic keys</title>
	<author>0ptix</author>
	<datestamp>1267633080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i think you're mixing up key length for symmetric ciphers (like AES, 3DES, Blowfish, etc.) which are generally quite short like 128 or 256 bits and key lengths for \_asymetric\_ cryptosystems which vary much more in length and in the case of RSA are somewhere closer to 2048 and 4096.</p><p>The reason is that for symmetric ciphers we \_believe\_ to be secure the best an attacker can do is brute force the key space. so that means brute forcing 2^128 or 2^256 possible keys. That's a hell of a lot of work. with current technology probably infeasible.</p><p>but for asymmetric schemes it's not as straightforward. To get a glimpse of why this is think about RSA keys. The public key is an exponent e and an integer n which is the product of two large primes. Now not every string of 4096 is actually represents such a pair number of numbers. (in particular not every bit-string is the product of two primes). so not every string of that length is a valid key. so brute forcing the key space doesn't mean trying every possible string of that length. just the ones which are the product of two primes which is a fair bit less.</p><p>Another reason for comparatively longer keys is this. In generally, for many asymmetric cryptosystems there are various attacks known which are still super-polynomial (i.e. inefficient) but are never the less sub-exponential which is what a brute force key search would be. so you have to adjust your key length to reflect these faster attacks even if brute forcing wouldn't be feasible even for shorter keys. (i think some examples of such attacks for factoring (which would break RSA) are the Pollard-Rho method, varients of Quadratic Sieve algorithm, and the Eleptic Curve method.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i think you 're mixing up key length for symmetric ciphers ( like AES , 3DES , Blowfish , etc .
) which are generally quite short like 128 or 256 bits and key lengths for \ _asymetric \ _ cryptosystems which vary much more in length and in the case of RSA are somewhere closer to 2048 and 4096.The reason is that for symmetric ciphers we \ _believe \ _ to be secure the best an attacker can do is brute force the key space .
so that means brute forcing 2 ^ 128 or 2 ^ 256 possible keys .
That 's a hell of a lot of work .
with current technology probably infeasible.but for asymmetric schemes it 's not as straightforward .
To get a glimpse of why this is think about RSA keys .
The public key is an exponent e and an integer n which is the product of two large primes .
Now not every string of 4096 is actually represents such a pair number of numbers .
( in particular not every bit-string is the product of two primes ) .
so not every string of that length is a valid key .
so brute forcing the key space does n't mean trying every possible string of that length .
just the ones which are the product of two primes which is a fair bit less.Another reason for comparatively longer keys is this .
In generally , for many asymmetric cryptosystems there are various attacks known which are still super-polynomial ( i.e .
inefficient ) but are never the less sub-exponential which is what a brute force key search would be .
so you have to adjust your key length to reflect these faster attacks even if brute forcing would n't be feasible even for shorter keys .
( i think some examples of such attacks for factoring ( which would break RSA ) are the Pollard-Rho method , varients of Quadratic Sieve algorithm , and the Eleptic Curve method .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i think you're mixing up key length for symmetric ciphers (like AES, 3DES, Blowfish, etc.
) which are generally quite short like 128 or 256 bits and key lengths for \_asymetric\_ cryptosystems which vary much more in length and in the case of RSA are somewhere closer to 2048 and 4096.The reason is that for symmetric ciphers we \_believe\_ to be secure the best an attacker can do is brute force the key space.
so that means brute forcing 2^128 or 2^256 possible keys.
That's a hell of a lot of work.
with current technology probably infeasible.but for asymmetric schemes it's not as straightforward.
To get a glimpse of why this is think about RSA keys.
The public key is an exponent e and an integer n which is the product of two large primes.
Now not every string of 4096 is actually represents such a pair number of numbers.
(in particular not every bit-string is the product of two primes).
so not every string of that length is a valid key.
so brute forcing the key space doesn't mean trying every possible string of that length.
just the ones which are the product of two primes which is a fair bit less.Another reason for comparatively longer keys is this.
In generally, for many asymmetric cryptosystems there are various attacks known which are still super-polynomial (i.e.
inefficient) but are never the less sub-exponential which is what a brute force key search would be.
so you have to adjust your key length to reflect these faster attacks even if brute forcing wouldn't be feasible even for shorter keys.
(i think some examples of such attacks for factoring (which would break RSA) are the Pollard-Rho method, varients of Quadratic Sieve algorithm, and the Eleptic Curve method.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355580</id>
	<title>Re:Don't use datamatrix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267694160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Datamatrix is the Gif of the barcode world. It has a bunch of patents covering it.</p></div><p>Other than the unrelated issue a completely dismissed false claim made a few years ago, this is essentially BS.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>can be read with a laser (instead of an imager)</p> </div><p>This is an advantage today (well for the consumer market I mean)?? Nearly everybody with has access to portable imaging equipment today (cell phones, webcams, digital cameras), some that are quite cheap.</p><p>A barcode laser module is a pretty specialized piece of equipment. Even a linear imaging sensor's advantages would only kick in in large deployments (e.g. retail)..</p><p>Also, PDF417 can't compete with the data densities afforded by Data Matrix, Aztec, or QR code. There is quite a bit of overhead in PDF417 to give it the "localizing" capability that allows it to be read with a linear imager (laser or CMOS/CCD).<br>They just don't fulfill all the same needs.. So: "PDF417 [wikipedia.org] does mostly the same thing" is not quite accurate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Datamatrix is the Gif of the barcode world .
It has a bunch of patents covering it.Other than the unrelated issue a completely dismissed false claim made a few years ago , this is essentially BS.can be read with a laser ( instead of an imager ) This is an advantage today ( well for the consumer market I mean ) ? ?
Nearly everybody with has access to portable imaging equipment today ( cell phones , webcams , digital cameras ) , some that are quite cheap.A barcode laser module is a pretty specialized piece of equipment .
Even a linear imaging sensor 's advantages would only kick in in large deployments ( e.g .
retail ) ..Also , PDF417 ca n't compete with the data densities afforded by Data Matrix , Aztec , or QR code .
There is quite a bit of overhead in PDF417 to give it the " localizing " capability that allows it to be read with a linear imager ( laser or CMOS/CCD ) .They just do n't fulfill all the same needs.. So : " PDF417 [ wikipedia.org ] does mostly the same thing " is not quite accurate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Datamatrix is the Gif of the barcode world.
It has a bunch of patents covering it.Other than the unrelated issue a completely dismissed false claim made a few years ago, this is essentially BS.can be read with a laser (instead of an imager) This is an advantage today (well for the consumer market I mean)??
Nearly everybody with has access to portable imaging equipment today (cell phones, webcams, digital cameras), some that are quite cheap.A barcode laser module is a pretty specialized piece of equipment.
Even a linear imaging sensor's advantages would only kick in in large deployments (e.g.
retail)..Also, PDF417 can't compete with the data densities afforded by Data Matrix, Aztec, or QR code.
There is quite a bit of overhead in PDF417 to give it the "localizing" capability that allows it to be read with a linear imager (laser or CMOS/CCD).They just don't fulfill all the same needs.. So: "PDF417 [wikipedia.org] does mostly the same thing" is not quite accurate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354372</id>
	<title>4096 is trivial to store on paper</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1267636560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geesh, in base-64 it's only 683 characters.</p><p>Typed out at 65 characters per line that's less than 11 lines of text.  Big deal.</p><p>Any halfway-decent OCR program should be able to read that error-free, assuming you don't spill coffee on it first.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geesh , in base-64 it 's only 683 characters.Typed out at 65 characters per line that 's less than 11 lines of text .
Big deal.Any halfway-decent OCR program should be able to read that error-free , assuming you do n't spill coffee on it first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geesh, in base-64 it's only 683 characters.Typed out at 65 characters per line that's less than 11 lines of text.
Big deal.Any halfway-decent OCR program should be able to read that error-free, assuming you don't spill coffee on it first.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353866</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>fractalspace</author>
	<datestamp>1267631340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thats why you should immediately scan it and store it on a USB stick as a pdf file.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats why you should immediately scan it and store it on a USB stick as a pdf file .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats why you should immediately scan it and store it on a USB stick as a pdf file.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358260</id>
	<title>Re:I'll hold out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267720200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those are different kinds of keys, symmetric versus asymmetric. 256 bit symmetric keys are still quite standard and safe. 128 bit asymmetric haven't been for a long, long time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those are different kinds of keys , symmetric versus asymmetric .
256 bit symmetric keys are still quite standard and safe .
128 bit asymmetric have n't been for a long , long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those are different kinds of keys, symmetric versus asymmetric.
256 bit symmetric keys are still quite standard and safe.
128 bit asymmetric haven't been for a long, long time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355150</id>
	<title>Re:In 2006, a guy recited Pi to 100000 places...</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1267645500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now, I want half of you to mod this funny, because it is.</p></div><p>It's not if you have to explain your joke.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , I want half of you to mod this funny , because it is.It 's not if you have to explain your joke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, I want half of you to mod this funny, because it is.It's not if you have to explain your joke.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352124</id>
	<title>Bar Codes Are Not Error Prone</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1267618920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be hell if you lost the symbology though.  Otherwise, this is very practical to the few who understand what been done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be hell if you lost the symbology though .
Otherwise , this is very practical to the few who understand what been done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be hell if you lost the symbology though.
Otherwise, this is very practical to the few who understand what been done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357208</id>
	<title>Too big.</title>
	<author>bytesex</author>
	<datestamp>1267713420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>By the time that 2D barcodes get this huge, it's probably better to invest in proper character reading devices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By the time that 2D barcodes get this huge , it 's probably better to invest in proper character reading devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the time that 2D barcodes get this huge, it's probably better to invest in proper character reading devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352574</id>
	<title>Re:no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267621260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds great as long as nothing happens between now and 21 weeks from now.  Make that 42 weeks if he manages to fill it in that time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds great as long as nothing happens between now and 21 weeks from now .
Make that 42 weeks if he manages to fill it in that time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds great as long as nothing happens between now and 21 weeks from now.
Make that 42 weeks if he manages to fill it in that time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356144</id>
	<title>PaperBak anyone ?</title>
	<author>sebsauvage</author>
	<datestamp>1267701180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>PaperBak anyone ? <a href="http://ollydbg.de/Paperbak/" title="ollydbg.de" rel="nofollow">http://ollydbg.de/Paperbak/</a> [ollydbg.de] <br>
<br>
It gives you this kind of prints: <br>
<a href="http://sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback\_a4.png" title="sebsauvage.net" rel="nofollow">http://sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback\_a4.png</a> [sebsauvage.net] <br>
<a href="http://sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback\_detail.png" title="sebsauvage.net" rel="nofollow">http://sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback\_detail.png</a> [sebsauvage.net] <br>
<br>
I save my private GPG key on paper this way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>PaperBak anyone ?
http : //ollydbg.de/Paperbak/ [ ollydbg.de ] It gives you this kind of prints : http : //sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback \ _a4.png [ sebsauvage.net ] http : //sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback \ _detail.png [ sebsauvage.net ] I save my private GPG key on paper this way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PaperBak anyone ?
http://ollydbg.de/Paperbak/ [ollydbg.de] 

It gives you this kind of prints: 
http://sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback\_a4.png [sebsauvage.net] 
http://sebsauvage.net/i/ccm/paperback\_detail.png [sebsauvage.net] 

I save my private GPG key on paper this way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352492</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1267620840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's cheap?</p><p>Also doesn't need electricity, won't suffer a hard drive crash, and is easily duplicated (may or may not be good). Also it's pretty cheap and easy to make paper fairly durable. Laminate itt, print it on photo paper...hell, there's no reason you really need to use paper at all. You could store it on film, you could store it on wood or a clay tablet probably...hell with sufficient desire you could make it out of cement or even friggin' trees. The interesting thing about this is not the fact that it's stored on paper, the interesting thing is the method of creating the pattern and reading it back it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's cheap ? Also does n't need electricity , wo n't suffer a hard drive crash , and is easily duplicated ( may or may not be good ) .
Also it 's pretty cheap and easy to make paper fairly durable .
Laminate itt , print it on photo paper...hell , there 's no reason you really need to use paper at all .
You could store it on film , you could store it on wood or a clay tablet probably...hell with sufficient desire you could make it out of cement or even friggin ' trees .
The interesting thing about this is not the fact that it 's stored on paper , the interesting thing is the method of creating the pattern and reading it back it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's cheap?Also doesn't need electricity, won't suffer a hard drive crash, and is easily duplicated (may or may not be good).
Also it's pretty cheap and easy to make paper fairly durable.
Laminate itt, print it on photo paper...hell, there's no reason you really need to use paper at all.
You could store it on film, you could store it on wood or a clay tablet probably...hell with sufficient desire you could make it out of cement or even friggin' trees.
The interesting thing about this is not the fact that it's stored on paper, the interesting thing is the method of creating the pattern and reading it back it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352204</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1267619280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer?</p></div></blockquote><p>If you use the standalone computer for anything but storing the key, or fail to physically secure the standalone computer from access (separate to any physical security on any computer on which data resides that is secured with the key) it is obviously more secure to keep the key on paper, physically secured in something that isn't opened except to access the key.</p><p>If you don't use the standalone computer for anything else, and have it separately physically secured, then for any reasonable use of the word "computer", it will probably be equally secure, and vastly less expensive to separately secure the key on paper, instead.</p><p>Perhaps the more relevant comparison is separately securing paper vs. separately securing long-term electronic storage media. The sheet of paper will probably be cheaper in any case (though the price difference drops if you are using inexpensive electronic storage media rather than a dedicate computer), and will likely be more likely to be practically usable to access data a longer time into the future. Though in this case, a key factor is making sure the paper has the key in a human-readable form as well as a machine-readable form, since long-term availability of tools to read any particular machine-readable format is an issue. If you use text in an OCR-friendly font, the human readable format and the machine readable format can be the same.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer ? If you use the standalone computer for anything but storing the key , or fail to physically secure the standalone computer from access ( separate to any physical security on any computer on which data resides that is secured with the key ) it is obviously more secure to keep the key on paper , physically secured in something that is n't opened except to access the key.If you do n't use the standalone computer for anything else , and have it separately physically secured , then for any reasonable use of the word " computer " , it will probably be equally secure , and vastly less expensive to separately secure the key on paper , instead.Perhaps the more relevant comparison is separately securing paper vs. separately securing long-term electronic storage media .
The sheet of paper will probably be cheaper in any case ( though the price difference drops if you are using inexpensive electronic storage media rather than a dedicate computer ) , and will likely be more likely to be practically usable to access data a longer time into the future .
Though in this case , a key factor is making sure the paper has the key in a human-readable form as well as a machine-readable form , since long-term availability of tools to read any particular machine-readable format is an issue .
If you use text in an OCR-friendly font , the human readable format and the machine readable format can be the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Than a 4096 Bit RSA Key that is stored on a standalone computer?If you use the standalone computer for anything but storing the key, or fail to physically secure the standalone computer from access (separate to any physical security on any computer on which data resides that is secured with the key) it is obviously more secure to keep the key on paper, physically secured in something that isn't opened except to access the key.If you don't use the standalone computer for anything else, and have it separately physically secured, then for any reasonable use of the word "computer", it will probably be equally secure, and vastly less expensive to separately secure the key on paper, instead.Perhaps the more relevant comparison is separately securing paper vs. separately securing long-term electronic storage media.
The sheet of paper will probably be cheaper in any case (though the price difference drops if you are using inexpensive electronic storage media rather than a dedicate computer), and will likely be more likely to be practically usable to access data a longer time into the future.
Though in this case, a key factor is making sure the paper has the key in a human-readable form as well as a machine-readable form, since long-term availability of tools to read any particular machine-readable format is an issue.
If you use text in an OCR-friendly font, the human readable format and the machine readable format can be the same.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355808</id>
	<title>Re:I'll hold out</title>
	<author>paul248</author>
	<datestamp>1267696920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're confusing symmetric with asymmetric encryption.  128 bits is still pretty good for a symmetric key (like AES), while 2048 bits is pretty good for an asymmetric key (like RSA).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're confusing symmetric with asymmetric encryption .
128 bits is still pretty good for a symmetric key ( like AES ) , while 2048 bits is pretty good for an asymmetric key ( like RSA ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're confusing symmetric with asymmetric encryption.
128 bits is still pretty good for a symmetric key (like AES), while 2048 bits is pretty good for an asymmetric key (like RSA).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358460</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267721220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Print the key on acid-free paper using a laser printer and store it for a looong time.</i></p><p>I know there are chemists here, and hope that someone can confirm or deny that, I suspect it will be confirmed, since laser "ink" is actually plastic that's melted to the paper. Normal ink had been used for centuries, melting plastic on paper is relatively new. Also, I wonder of the heat needed to print on a laser printer would affect the paper's life?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Print the key on acid-free paper using a laser printer and store it for a looong time.I know there are chemists here , and hope that someone can confirm or deny that , I suspect it will be confirmed , since laser " ink " is actually plastic that 's melted to the paper .
Normal ink had been used for centuries , melting plastic on paper is relatively new .
Also , I wonder of the heat needed to print on a laser printer would affect the paper 's life ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Print the key on acid-free paper using a laser printer and store it for a looong time.I know there are chemists here, and hope that someone can confirm or deny that, I suspect it will be confirmed, since laser "ink" is actually plastic that's melted to the paper.
Normal ink had been used for centuries, melting plastic on paper is relatively new.
Also, I wonder of the heat needed to print on a laser printer would affect the paper's life?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026</id>
	<title>In 2006, a guy recited Pi to 100000 places...</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1267618440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what could be so hard about memorizing a measly 800 or so characters?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what could be so hard about memorizing a measly 800 or so characters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what could be so hard about memorizing a measly 800 or so characters?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31376412</id>
	<title>Re:Ummmm....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267788480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The source machine burned in a fire, but you're safe and secure since the backup is encrypted.  Oh wait!  The decryption key was on the source machine and since you were being secure you never copied to another machine!  If you had only kept that piece of paper in your bank's safety deposit box instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The source machine burned in a fire , but you 're safe and secure since the backup is encrypted .
Oh wait !
The decryption key was on the source machine and since you were being secure you never copied to another machine !
If you had only kept that piece of paper in your bank 's safety deposit box instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The source machine burned in a fire, but you're safe and secure since the backup is encrypted.
Oh wait!
The decryption key was on the source machine and since you were being secure you never copied to another machine!
If you had only kept that piece of paper in your bank's safety deposit box instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352090</id>
	<title>Re:What Happens When ...</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1267618680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All matrix codes have enough redundancy to allow successful decoding when the image is partially damaged. Some have so much redundancy that you can tear them in half and still recover the contents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All matrix codes have enough redundancy to allow successful decoding when the image is partially damaged .
Some have so much redundancy that you can tear them in half and still recover the contents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All matrix codes have enough redundancy to allow successful decoding when the image is partially damaged.
Some have so much redundancy that you can tear them in half and still recover the contents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353258</id>
	<title>Re:In 2006, a guy recited Pi to 100000 places...</title>
	<author>jamesh</author>
	<datestamp>1267626840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>when you put 4096 bit encryption into the hands of an average person, they really do type 12345 one hundred and sixty times.</p></div><p>I'm obviously above average then - i'd use cut &amp; paste to do the job in seconds!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>when you put 4096 bit encryption into the hands of an average person , they really do type 12345 one hundred and sixty times.I 'm obviously above average then - i 'd use cut &amp; paste to do the job in seconds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when you put 4096 bit encryption into the hands of an average person, they really do type 12345 one hundred and sixty times.I'm obviously above average then - i'd use cut &amp; paste to do the job in seconds!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354942</id>
	<title>Uses</title>
	<author>Revenger75</author>
	<datestamp>1267642800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that what post-it notes are for...?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that what post-it notes are for... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that what post-it notes are for...?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358036</id>
	<title>Solved</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1267718820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is the RSA2048 number printed twice on a US letter paper. Tell me if you have an problems reading this:</p><p><a href="http://drop.io/9x9qo5p" title="drop.io">http://drop.io/9x9qo5p</a> [drop.io]<br><a href="http://drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/screen-shot-2010-03-04-at-10-04-40-am-png" title="drop.io">http://drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/screen-shot-2010-03-04-at-10-04-40-am-png</a> [drop.io]<br><a href="http://drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/document1-pdf" title="drop.io">http://drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/document1-pdf</a> [drop.io]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is the RSA2048 number printed twice on a US letter paper .
Tell me if you have an problems reading this : http : //drop.io/9x9qo5p [ drop.io ] http : //drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/screen-shot-2010-03-04-at-10-04-40-am-png [ drop.io ] http : //drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/document1-pdf [ drop.io ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is the RSA2048 number printed twice on a US letter paper.
Tell me if you have an problems reading this:http://drop.io/9x9qo5p [drop.io]http://drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/screen-shot-2010-03-04-at-10-04-40-am-png [drop.io]http://drop.io/9x9qo5p/asset/document1-pdf [drop.io]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351944</id>
	<title>First Po..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267618020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hang on!  let me get my giant barcode out of my pocket!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hang on !
let me get my giant barcode out of my pocket !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hang on!
let me get my giant barcode out of my pocket!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356760</id>
	<title>Re:I'll hold out</title>
	<author>owlstead</author>
	<datestamp>1267709580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Non-sense.</p><p>First 128 bit keys were always too short for RSA keys, that's for symmetric keys.<br>2048 bit is far from standard, just take a look at your browsers certificate store and especially the certificates of many sites.<br>2048 bit is far from being broken. Although the security of RSA is non-linear with key-length, breaking 2048 bits is way way more difficult than breaking 1024 bit keys.<br>4096 bit is more than enough for "Long-term protection: Generic application-independent recommendation, protection from 2009 to 2040" according to eCrypt II (see link below).<br>16Kib is longer than the recommendation against "quantum computers", by which they don't mean 4 qubit quantum machines that can break 2x2 sudoku's, and then it would make much more sense to switch to Elliptic Curve Cryptography anyway (if Microsoft ever upgrades their crypto libs to fully support ECC instead of a limited set of NIST curves of course).</p><p>For a better description of key sizes and their estimated security please take a look at <a href="http://www.keylength.com/" title="keylength.com">http://www.keylength.com/</a> [keylength.com] .</p><p>Mods, this is a rather obvious troll, please mod parent DOWN.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Non-sense.First 128 bit keys were always too short for RSA keys , that 's for symmetric keys.2048 bit is far from standard , just take a look at your browsers certificate store and especially the certificates of many sites.2048 bit is far from being broken .
Although the security of RSA is non-linear with key-length , breaking 2048 bits is way way more difficult than breaking 1024 bit keys.4096 bit is more than enough for " Long-term protection : Generic application-independent recommendation , protection from 2009 to 2040 " according to eCrypt II ( see link below ) .16Kib is longer than the recommendation against " quantum computers " , by which they do n't mean 4 qubit quantum machines that can break 2x2 sudoku 's , and then it would make much more sense to switch to Elliptic Curve Cryptography anyway ( if Microsoft ever upgrades their crypto libs to fully support ECC instead of a limited set of NIST curves of course ) .For a better description of key sizes and their estimated security please take a look at http : //www.keylength.com/ [ keylength.com ] .Mods , this is a rather obvious troll , please mod parent DOWN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Non-sense.First 128 bit keys were always too short for RSA keys, that's for symmetric keys.2048 bit is far from standard, just take a look at your browsers certificate store and especially the certificates of many sites.2048 bit is far from being broken.
Although the security of RSA is non-linear with key-length, breaking 2048 bits is way way more difficult than breaking 1024 bit keys.4096 bit is more than enough for "Long-term protection: Generic application-independent recommendation, protection from 2009 to 2040" according to eCrypt II (see link below).16Kib is longer than the recommendation against "quantum computers", by which they don't mean 4 qubit quantum machines that can break 2x2 sudoku's, and then it would make much more sense to switch to Elliptic Curve Cryptography anyway (if Microsoft ever upgrades their crypto libs to fully support ECC instead of a limited set of NIST curves of course).For a better description of key sizes and their estimated security please take a look at http://www.keylength.com/ [keylength.com] .Mods, this is a rather obvious troll, please mod parent DOWN.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352442</id>
	<title>the question is mute</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267620420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is so obviously an advertisement for the Safeberg product... but also is so stupid of an idea that: ok, I'll bite.</p><p>Storing your key as a UPC graphic is NO MORE SECURE than printing out the hex characters in human readable format. Granted it takes more time to manually copy... But what? you think that your thief don't have a camera on hand to peruse your key later or just steal the paper? This is called security by obscurity... which doesn't count towards security in a meaningful way.</p><p>Then there is the paper vs other storage formats. How the heck does this company believe that putting digital keys on paper is any more secure then putting them onto a digital storage medium. If data is burned onto a CD or stored onto a USB key and removed from the computer... it is just as "offline" as any other non-digital object. So what's with the paper.</p><p>Are you looking to save money? Paper vs USB/CD? Not relivent unless you have thousands of keys and want to individually secure or release them on demand. So for the average user or business... there is no cost savings benefit.</p><p>Also, USB is physically strong. Depending on the housing, you can usually put it through the washing machine or run over it with a car. Do that with paper.</p><p>This is so ridiculous. Some guy must have thought this was a brilliant idea at one time. Too bad he wasted so much money on this idea by setting up a bogus website to appear as a valid company with good/usable ideas. Please avoid this product and their proprietary suggestions at all costs. I think their concept is actually a reduction in data security and integrity.</p><p>IMO, based on the video and what I read on their site... Safeberg is a very bad company with very bad ideas.</p><p>Real Solution: put your digital keys on USB. Store your USB in a safe private place. Call a bank and get a lock box.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is so obviously an advertisement for the Safeberg product... but also is so stupid of an idea that : ok , I 'll bite.Storing your key as a UPC graphic is NO MORE SECURE than printing out the hex characters in human readable format .
Granted it takes more time to manually copy... But what ?
you think that your thief do n't have a camera on hand to peruse your key later or just steal the paper ?
This is called security by obscurity... which does n't count towards security in a meaningful way.Then there is the paper vs other storage formats .
How the heck does this company believe that putting digital keys on paper is any more secure then putting them onto a digital storage medium .
If data is burned onto a CD or stored onto a USB key and removed from the computer... it is just as " offline " as any other non-digital object .
So what 's with the paper.Are you looking to save money ?
Paper vs USB/CD ?
Not relivent unless you have thousands of keys and want to individually secure or release them on demand .
So for the average user or business... there is no cost savings benefit.Also , USB is physically strong .
Depending on the housing , you can usually put it through the washing machine or run over it with a car .
Do that with paper.This is so ridiculous .
Some guy must have thought this was a brilliant idea at one time .
Too bad he wasted so much money on this idea by setting up a bogus website to appear as a valid company with good/usable ideas .
Please avoid this product and their proprietary suggestions at all costs .
I think their concept is actually a reduction in data security and integrity.IMO , based on the video and what I read on their site... Safeberg is a very bad company with very bad ideas.Real Solution : put your digital keys on USB .
Store your USB in a safe private place .
Call a bank and get a lock box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is so obviously an advertisement for the Safeberg product... but also is so stupid of an idea that: ok, I'll bite.Storing your key as a UPC graphic is NO MORE SECURE than printing out the hex characters in human readable format.
Granted it takes more time to manually copy... But what?
you think that your thief don't have a camera on hand to peruse your key later or just steal the paper?
This is called security by obscurity... which doesn't count towards security in a meaningful way.Then there is the paper vs other storage formats.
How the heck does this company believe that putting digital keys on paper is any more secure then putting them onto a digital storage medium.
If data is burned onto a CD or stored onto a USB key and removed from the computer... it is just as "offline" as any other non-digital object.
So what's with the paper.Are you looking to save money?
Paper vs USB/CD?
Not relivent unless you have thousands of keys and want to individually secure or release them on demand.
So for the average user or business... there is no cost savings benefit.Also, USB is physically strong.
Depending on the housing, you can usually put it through the washing machine or run over it with a car.
Do that with paper.This is so ridiculous.
Some guy must have thought this was a brilliant idea at one time.
Too bad he wasted so much money on this idea by setting up a bogus website to appear as a valid company with good/usable ideas.
Please avoid this product and their proprietary suggestions at all costs.
I think their concept is actually a reduction in data security and integrity.IMO, based on the video and what I read on their site... Safeberg is a very bad company with very bad ideas.Real Solution: put your digital keys on USB.
Store your USB in a safe private place.
Call a bank and get a lock box.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352324</id>
	<title>And this is practical, how?</title>
	<author>he-sk</author>
	<datestamp>1267619880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do people actually use the systems they produce and sell?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people actually use the systems they produce and sell ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people actually use the systems they produce and sell?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353686</id>
	<title>But how?</title>
	<author>ColaMan</author>
	<datestamp>1267630020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But how to store an 800-character key offline?</i></p><p>Uhm, 10 lines of 80 characters? 20 lines of 40 characters, if you think 80 in one hit might make you cross-eyed. Is it that hard to manually type in? For a backup copy that you will only ever be likely to type in once or twice, ever?</p><p>Or is this just another Slashvertisement(tm)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But how to store an 800-character key offline ? Uhm , 10 lines of 80 characters ?
20 lines of 40 characters , if you think 80 in one hit might make you cross-eyed .
Is it that hard to manually type in ?
For a backup copy that you will only ever be likely to type in once or twice , ever ? Or is this just another Slashvertisement ( tm ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how to store an 800-character key offline?Uhm, 10 lines of 80 characters?
20 lines of 40 characters, if you think 80 in one hit might make you cross-eyed.
Is it that hard to manually type in?
For a backup copy that you will only ever be likely to type in once or twice, ever?Or is this just another Slashvertisement(tm)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352086</id>
	<title>How much added security?</title>
	<author>SmilingBoy</author>
	<datestamp>1267618680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the source computer is vulnerable, the private key will be vulnerable as well as soon as you use a device connected to the compromised computer to scan it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the source computer is vulnerable , the private key will be vulnerable as well as soon as you use a device connected to the compromised computer to scan it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the source computer is vulnerable, the private key will be vulnerable as well as soon as you use a device connected to the compromised computer to scan it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354348</id>
	<title>Re:How is this any more secure</title>
	<author>Tuoqui</author>
	<datestamp>1267636380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not store it on a USB key... It's much easier or burn it to a blank CD. If you dont need to store it for 1000 years, in which case you might have a better luck storing it by chipping it into stone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not store it on a USB key... It 's much easier or burn it to a blank CD .
If you dont need to store it for 1000 years , in which case you might have a better luck storing it by chipping it into stone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not store it on a USB key... It's much easier or burn it to a blank CD.
If you dont need to store it for 1000 years, in which case you might have a better luck storing it by chipping it into stone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356660</id>
	<title>Re:I'll hold out</title>
	<author>egcagrac0</author>
	<datestamp>1267708200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, I'm not confusing symmetric with asymmetric.  Really.  You can all buy me a subscription to apologize when it turns out that 16384 bit RSA is cracked in 2015.</p><p>Our definitions of "good enough" may differ somewhat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I 'm not confusing symmetric with asymmetric .
Really. You can all buy me a subscription to apologize when it turns out that 16384 bit RSA is cracked in 2015.Our definitions of " good enough " may differ somewhat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I'm not confusing symmetric with asymmetric.
Really.  You can all buy me a subscription to apologize when it turns out that 16384 bit RSA is cracked in 2015.Our definitions of "good enough" may differ somewhat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076</id>
	<title>no thanks my Hard drive is too big</title>
	<author>Spy Handler</author>
	<datestamp>1267618620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Online backup is practical</p></div><p>not for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.</p><p>Right now backing up from hard drive to hard drive takes forever (hours). How the fuck am I gonna back up to a remote server over the internet at 60 kbytes/sec?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Online backup is practicalnot for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.Right now backing up from hard drive to hard drive takes forever ( hours ) .
How the fuck am I gon na back up to a remote server over the internet at 60 kbytes/sec ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Online backup is practicalnot for my 1.5 terabyte HDD which is about half full.Right now backing up from hard drive to hard drive takes forever (hours).
How the fuck am I gonna back up to a remote server over the internet at 60 kbytes/sec?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31416512</id>
	<title>Re:I'll save you some money</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1268161080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, you all complain about fingerprint scanners, and then you use something that is just as insecure.</p><p>I use a smart-card in a class 3 reader with display and pinpad. The key never leaves the reader. And in case of danger, I just need to destroy the card.</p><p>Of course I&rsquo;m still fucked, if someone manages to get the card intact and tries to torture me.<br>Or just if someone is just ignoring that I just wrecked my own and only access to the system. (But at least my data will be safe, when I&rsquo;m beat to pulp.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>(The only solution to that would be a storage that destroys itself if its timer is not reset from time to time. And the timer could only be reset with the use of the card and key.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , you all complain about fingerprint scanners , and then you use something that is just as insecure.I use a smart-card in a class 3 reader with display and pinpad .
The key never leaves the reader .
And in case of danger , I just need to destroy the card.Of course I    m still fucked , if someone manages to get the card intact and tries to torture me.Or just if someone is just ignoring that I just wrecked my own and only access to the system .
( But at least my data will be safe , when I    m beat to pulp .
; ) ( The only solution to that would be a storage that destroys itself if its timer is not reset from time to time .
And the timer could only be reset with the use of the card and key .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, you all complain about fingerprint scanners, and then you use something that is just as insecure.I use a smart-card in a class 3 reader with display and pinpad.
The key never leaves the reader.
And in case of danger, I just need to destroy the card.Of course I’m still fucked, if someone manages to get the card intact and tries to torture me.Or just if someone is just ignoring that I just wrecked my own and only access to the system.
(But at least my data will be safe, when I’m beat to pulp.
;)(The only solution to that would be a storage that destroys itself if its timer is not reset from time to time.
And the timer could only be reset with the use of the card and key.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353624</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31359104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31376412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31368242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_2235219_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31416512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31376412
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31359104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353502
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352086
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353276
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352516
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31416512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354372
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31354348
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_2235219.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31356216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31351992
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31357540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31355088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31358460
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31368242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31353274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_2235219.31352052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
