Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 [6]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Internet privacy  (Read 20814 times)
N8AUC
Member

Posts: 327




Ignore
« Reply #75 on: May 09, 2017, 09:41:19 AM »

It's about the backdoors more than the encryption perhaps. Chuck Missler spoke years ago of acquiring a software company and eventually hearing the code writers testify about the back doors they had installed.

Funny you should mention "back doors".

I strongly believe that commercial versions of PGP newer than version 7.04 have a back door in them.
I also believe that the open source version, currently at 6.5 does not have a back door in it.

I can't prove it conclusively. But....several years ago, I noticed when creating 4096 bit PGP key pairs, that
given the same seed data and passphrase, the keys created by version 7.04 were consistently 128 bits longer
than those created with version 7.03. Keys created by both versions worked in the latest version. But only keys
created by versions prior to 7.03 worked in the older versions.

I got suspicious of what was going on and called Computer Associates (who owned the rights to PGP at
that time) to find out why. They refused to answer my questions about it.

So like I said, I can't prove it conclusively, but it sure does smell funny.

« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 09:53:26 AM by N8AUC » Logged
N8AUC
Member

Posts: 327




Ignore
« Reply #76 on: May 09, 2017, 09:51:01 AM »

Government intercept un-encrypted traffic and tries to hack servers because as hard as that is, it is far easier than a rotating cypher key. You could spend months cracking a code only to have it change next usage because the cypher key in pipe changes with every connection.

That is the real strength to the HTTPS protocol. Not only the cipher key, but the encryption methodology in use rotate with every connection.
Right now, today, you could have a 256 bit key with AES encryption. Connect again in an hour or two, and you'll have a different key, and a
different encryption methodology. It all gets negotiated between the server and client at each new connection.

And with that being said, it'll keep random run of the mill hackers at bay.
And I can't prove it, but I strongly suspect it won't keep the government out if they really want your traffic.
The FBI's Carnivore system scoops it up, and the NSA analyzes it offline.
That's what that big non-descript data center is for in the middle of nowhere in Utah.

Logged
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2126




Ignore
« Reply #77 on: May 09, 2017, 12:32:19 PM »


The government can break anything. They hire the people that can do it. Encryption did not write itself, so there are experts that wrote the code and can open it up. Come on John, anything that runs on computers is written by someone. So any reasonably smart person can easily see how hiring the right people will get the job done. There is no internet privacy. You just don't want to admit it cause I said it.


Does Government have your magic wall patent they stole off you too???  You are clueless and have not a even remote understanding of how powerful quantum computing is (and not in use yet) and how that a 256bit cypher is a brick wall to one. You do not understand even a 128 bit cypher is very tuff. Government intercept un-encrypted traffic and tries to hack servers because as hard as that is, it is far easier than a rotating cypher key. You could spend months cracking a code only to have it change next usage because the cypher key in pipe changes with every connection. But FIB does not understand that and thinks it is easy to crack when in reality if it was that easy, a lot of online bank would be hacked. Those that are hacked are done with key press logging software collecting and sending data on account login info. There are no key presses to capture for VPN tunnel cypher. BTW the 256 cypher is so tuff there is not need to move to a 384 bit one for quite some time.

Lets see what BS FIB tries to sell next....

JX shuffle 3.0...LOL

Nothing to sell. I don't sell things. I design them. You forgot my job again. You on the other hand are shoveling the fertilizer with the JX shuffle...LOL

Powerful computer that's not in use. Hmmmm So how does a non working device change things? Or is it like a wish sandwich? Or is it a portable Cray computer? Maybe some day this will help? Did you design it John? Is that why it is not in use? JX shuffle again...LOL

As far as the rest, your right that I don't know how to codify it. Not my line of work. If I did I would be one of the experts that the government could hire. But I am not, so guess I won't make the big bucks. Plus when did I say it was so easy...making things up again John. More JX shuffle...LOL

As I said it takes experts to do it. Are you one of those experts John? Or are you just regurgitating things from the web? Your good at that. All part of the JX shuffle...LOL

However I can still put logic together. like IF this encoding is so good and absolutely safe THEN the company I work for could use it and fire the entire cyber security team. (See that, a simple IF-THEN logic.) Don't see it happening any time soon if ever. There is no privacy on the internet.

Nothing is totally safe and there is no internet privacy. Although some sheep will follow their master (you know, the master that tells you the internet is safe) to disaster. Not me. Oh wait the sheep are going to the Hamvention...LOL How bout then barnyards there? LOL

Next up more fumes inspired tales in the JX shuffle 4.0. Why; is anyone's guess. Maybe I should make things up like JX does so I can lower myself to the JX level and really write BS like he does...LOL Nah, sticking to the facts is far more humorous...LOL
Logged

73, Stan
Walk a mile in my shoes BEFORE you tell me how bad they are.
AC7CW
Member

Posts: 1100




Ignore
« Reply #78 on: May 09, 2017, 01:29:42 PM »

It's about the backdoors more than the encryption perhaps. Chuck Missler spoke years ago of acquiring a software company and eventually hearing the code writers testify about the back doors they had installed.

Funny you should mention "back doors".

I strongly believe that commercial versions of PGP newer than version 7.04 have a back door in them.
I also believe that the open source version, currently at 6.5 does not have a back door in it.

I can't prove it conclusively. But....several years ago, I noticed when creating 4096 bit PGP key pairs, that
given the same seed data and passphrase, the keys created by version 7.04 were consistently 128 bits longer
than those created with version 7.03. Keys created by both versions worked in the latest version. But only keys
created by versions prior to 7.03 worked in the older versions.

I got suspicious of what was going on and called Computer Associates (who owned the rights to PGP at
that time) to find out why. They refused to answer my questions about it.

So like I said, I can't prove it conclusively, but it sure does smell funny.



If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and smells like s%^t... don't step in it, right?

I'm sure that our spy agencies will not allow anything to go without backdoors. spying is what they do and they have unlimited money and unlimited clout. The politicians have incentive to support spying for tax collection purposes since everything will collapse if they don't get ever-more tax monies. There won't be much opposition to spying from government...
Logged

Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)
N9KX
Member

Posts: 2072




Ignore
« Reply #79 on: May 17, 2017, 12:47:55 PM »

Interesting read; subtitle: "Microsoft is right to blame the NSA for the WannaCry malware outbreak, but they're not blameless either."

THE REAL ROOTS OF THE WORLDWIDE RANSOMWARE OUTBREAK: MILITARISM AND GREED
Sam Biddle
May 16 2017, 3:19 p.m.

A runaway strain of malware hit Windows computers Friday and spread through the weekend, rendering hundreds of thousands of computers around the world more or less useless. The big twist: The virus was made possible by U.S. government hackers at the National Security Agency. But the finger-pointing won’t stop there, and it probably shouldn’t.

As the worm, known as WannaCry, has been contained, more free time has opened up in which to argue and assign blame beyond the anonymous hackers who used leaked NSA code to assemble the virus, and whatever party decided to turn it into ransomware. Microsoft isn’t holding back.

In an unusually bold and forthright post by president Brad Smith, the company called out the NSA by name for not just creating, but “stockpiling” — and then, like Cyber Frankenstein, losing all control over — the attacks that made WannaCry possible:

This is an emerging pattern in 2017. We have seen vulnerabilities stored by the CIA show up on WikiLeaks, and now this vulnerability stolen from the NSA has affected customers around the world. Repeatedly, exploits in the hands of governments have leaked into the public domain and caused widespread damage. An equivalent scenario with conventional weapons would be the U.S. military having some of its Tomahawk missiles stolen. And this most recent attack represents a completely unintended but disconcerting link between the two most serious forms of cybersecurity threats in the world today – nation-state action and organized criminal action.

Every software weakness the NSA (or CIA, or FBI) decides to use for itself in total secrecy is necessarily one it won’t share with a company like Microsoft so that it can write and release a software update to keep its customers safe. (Whether or not you see this as a good and necessary thing likely has a lot to do with your opinion of whether the NSA too often prioritizes its ability to hurt adversaries over the privacy and safety of U.S. citizens or over the privacy and safety of people in general).

The government’s official decision to withhold or disclose is driven by something called the Vulnerabilities Equity Process (or VEP), and its exact mechanism is not entirely known. The VEP is meant to balance the advantages gained by keeping a given software vulnerability secret versus the potential risks to the world at large.

When the NSA adds to its arsenal an undisclosed software vulnerability, known as a “zero day,” rather than reporting it to the maker of the software, any common cybercriminal who happens to independently discover it will be free to exploit the security hole for their own ends, sometimes for years and years. Even if everything goes according to plan for the NSA, this sort of stockpiling values the military and intelligence community’s offensive capabilities over the digital safety of, well, literally everyone else, and is rightfully controversial.

But per Microsoft’s point, things aren’t going according to plan recently, and our nation’s secret keepers have been having a lot of trouble keeping their computer weapons away from the likes of the Shadow Brokers and Wikileaks. It’s a true and damning argument on Smith’s part: Whether due to internal leakers or  external attackers, two of the most advanced and secretive spy agencies in the world have seen some of their most prized offensive tools snatched out of the shadows and not only made public, but weaponized against British hospitals, Chinese universities, and FedEx. Congressman Ted Lieu, a rare legislator with any background in computer science, sees WannaCry as an opportunity to overhaul the VEP in favor of more disclosure: “Currently the Vulnerabilities Equities Process is not transparent and few people understand how the government makes these critical decisions,” the California Democrat wrote in a statement as WannaCry raged around the world. “Today’s worldwide ransomware attack shows what can happen when the NSA or CIA write malware instead of disclosing the vulnerability to the software manufacturer.”

The NSA did not create WannaCry. Rather, it discovered weaknesses in various versions of Windows and wrote programs that would allow American spies to penetrate computers running Microsoft’s operating system, and it was one of these programs, codenamed ETERNALBLUE and repurposed by still-unidentified hackers, that allowed WannaCry to spread as quickly and uncontrollably as it did last week. Whether or not you think the causal chain is such that the NSA is in some sense morally responsible, it’s undeniable that without the agency’s work, there is no ETERNALBLUE, and without ETERNALBLUE, there is no May 2017 WannaCry Crisis. In this sense, Microsoft is right–but the blame shouldn’t end there.

Microsoft also did not create WannaCry. But it did create something something nearly as bad: Windows Vista, an operating system so horrendously bloated, broken, and altogether unpleasant to use that many PC users back in 2007 skipped upgrading altogether, opting instead to stick with the outdated Windows XP, a decision that has left many people on that decade-and-a-half-old operating system even today, years after Microsoft stopped updating it.

When Microsoft responded to the startling initial reports of ETERNALBLUE’s public release by noting it had already inoculated Windows against the threat via software patch, it did not mention that XP users were not included. Using an operating system after its expiration date is unwise, but in fairness to the millions of people around the world still using old versions of Windows, expecting consumers to regularly buy expensive software of uncertain quality is unwise too. It’s only relatively recently that Microsoft has started to shake off the stink from Vista (and the confusing Windows Cool.

Some of the NSA’s defenders are quick to blame computer owners and IT administrators for not keeping their software current, but less likely to blame Microsoft for writing insecure code, alienating customers with shoddy operating systems and planned obsolescence, or dropping support for older OSes still in wide use. (The fact that Microsoft did actually release a WannaCry security patch for Windows XP over the weekend shows that it’s entirely possible to make old software safer). It can’t be overstated that the choice to let older versions of Windows lapse into a condition of permanent insecurity is as much a business strategy as an engineering decision, and one that leaves Microsoft customers in the lurch when something like WannaCry breaks loose. In the case of a large, high-stakes organization like a hospital or manufacturing plant, upgrading to the next version of Windows isn’t just a matter of waiting for the progress bar to fill, but a nightmarish web of compatibility issues with specialized hardware and niche, 3rd party software. If letting a computer network in you administer run Windows XP is negligent, it’s surely a negligence that pales compared to losing a military cyberweapon, or abandoning vulnerable customers whose computers work more or less fine.

The NSA surely wants to do its work in full secrecy, undisturbed as much as possible by obligations to anyone or anything else–it’s the business they’re in. Microsoft surely wants to continue to sell successive versions of Windows every several years and gradually forget about its earlier attempts–it’s the business they’re in. But these two agendas, of militarism, absolute secrecy, and software profit maximization create an environment that allows something like WannaCry to stomp all over the globe, hobbling hospitals and train stations in its wake.

source: https://theintercept.com/2017/05/16/the-real-roots-of-the-worldwide-ransomware-outbreak-militarism-and-greed/
Logged
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2126




Ignore
« Reply #80 on: May 17, 2017, 12:58:56 PM »

Nice post.

More proof there is no internet privacy.
Logged

73, Stan
Walk a mile in my shoes BEFORE you tell me how bad they are.
AC7CW
Member

Posts: 1100




Ignore
« Reply #81 on: May 19, 2017, 05:16:11 PM »

A bible quote [paraphrased]: [from Proverbs or Ecclesiastes, not really sure] "Show me a man that will not spend money on his business and I'll show you a man that doesn't make money". This problem is nothing new.
Logged

Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)
KD8TUT
Member

Posts: 522




Ignore
« Reply #82 on: May 28, 2017, 08:48:22 PM »

While VPN proxies are fine for hiding your activity from your ISP- there's only a few ways to to become completely anonymous across the internet.

TOR:

The first is TOR (The Onion Router). Which was developed by the Department of the Navy and then open sourced. It provides encrypted communication, traffic obfuscation, and out proxy services across multiple encrypted hops- allowing you to surf the web without an eavesdropper being able to know where the traffic is really coming from. However malicious out-proxy operators can sniff your un-encrypted (non https) web traffic for passwords and identity information where the darknet meets the internet.

It also hosts "hidden services"... which are more or less websites hosted within the TOR network inaccessible to the general internet. Many of these host illegal content.

TOR has really fallen from grace in my eyes since it's become primarily a refuge for child pornographers and drug dealers. It's security has also been compromised by law enforcement through traffic correlation.

However, if you are a journalist, free speech advocate, a publisher of leaked secrets, or an IT professional- TOR can be very useful.

However, even when TOR is configured as a so called "middle node" you may be passing encrypted traffic which contains illegal activity. You'll not know it, or be able to identify it. But from an ethical standpoint you've been warned.

Ten years ago I would have recommended TOR. And even wrote some documentation for the project. But today I cannot recommend it. My feelings on this issue are a combination of ethical and technical concerns.

I2P:

I2P is a different type of anonymity network. It only has one public well known out-proxy, and it's aim is not focused on anonymous browsing, but rather to be a network unto itself, with it's own services like web hosting, mail, IRC, instant messaging, files transfer services, BitTorrent, and a number of other emergent technologies which pop up all the time.

The encryption on this network is 512k EdDSA- which s fast and secure.

The system gives you the ability to host a website which is only viewed in network. I'm sure this is taken advantage of by criminals. But since I'm not a criminal I do not go looking for them, and the I2P network as a whole does not promote them.

The mail services available are both internal, and one bridges to the internet. So you can communicate at will with someone without revealing your identity- both in and out of the network.

There is a central IRC server which is very active.

Instant messaging is available.

Any protocol you can run on the internet you can run on this network.

There are multiple BitTorrent trackers in the network for in-network file sharing. The ones that are considered central to the network do not allow child porn. I do not know of any others- though I suspect they exist. There is a BitTorrent client built into the system.

So in short it's a very different environment than TOR. With very limited out proxy capability.

This network will almost certainly allow you to communicate with people anonymously.

The drawback of this network- is you had best be very good with computers. You'll have to learn how to run the I2P network which is not trivial. But it is a great learning experience!

There are smaller networks floating around... Freenet is one. That might be worth trying out. But really- TOR and I2P are the big ones with I2P being a lesser known, but very useful and secure, form of encrypted internet overlay.

Outside of this type of system- you really cannot be secure on the internet. But like anything else- you tolerance for privacy, or lack of it, is going to depend on factors which are personal.

In the current state of affairs- I'd recommend I2P. It's a better place for a law abiding citizen to engage in their right to privacy.
Logged

Putting a Shatnerologist in a room full of ordinary people is like putting a velociraptor in a room full of wiener dogs.
N0YXB
Member

Posts: 1206




Ignore
« Reply #83 on: May 29, 2017, 09:09:33 AM »

Excellent post, thank you.
Logged
AC7CW
Member

Posts: 1100




Ignore
« Reply #84 on: May 29, 2017, 11:52:06 AM »

ProtonMail is hosted in Switzerland where other governments won't even ask to see your emails because the Swiss never sign on to such... It's gotten to be a bit more convenient to use over the last year to the point where it's pleasant.

Logged

Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)
W9IQ
Member

Posts: 1845




Ignore
« Reply #85 on: May 29, 2017, 12:14:42 PM »

Unfortunately, the story is not that clean. Switzerland and the US have treaties in place whereby Switzerland is compelled to turn over emails when it would be legally proper to do so in the US. You may recall that the US finally prevailed in getting full disclosure of hidden bank accounts in Switzerland that were held by US citizens...

Last time I checked, there were security flaws in the browser version due to JS reloading allowing the possibilty of malicious code insertion. They also did not provide encryption key fingerprinting which leaves it vulnerable to man in the middle attacks.

It will probably get better over time and it is already better than most but it is not a panacea.

- Glenn W9IQ
Logged

- Glenn W9IQ

I never make a mistake. I thought I did once but I was wrong.
KA4LFP
Member

Posts: 257




Ignore
« Reply #86 on: June 29, 2017, 08:20:27 PM »


True. The ISP can only see the VPN endpoint address, and not what is in the encrypted tunnel.
But I wouldn't bet a nickel against the government being able to browse those encrypted
tunnels at will.


I kinda doubt that. Encryption is pretty strong plus it is a rotating key mean with each session the key changes so even if you crack key being used it would be worthless next session. Most have moved up from 128 bit to 196 or  256 bit encryption which is a very tuff not to crack (not that 128 is easy)

For run of the mill stuff, you're probably right John. 256 bit AES is pretty robust. 
But I think it would be rather foolish to underestimate the NSA. They don't call that place the "puzzle palace" for nothing.

Gotta agree with Kraus as well. If you don't want it heard, don't say it, especially over the internet. The web never forgets.
Don't say anything over the internet that you wouldn't stand on a rooftop and shout out loud to the general public.





Actually, the way to sniff traffic isn't to try to crack the 256bit encryption.
It's to have access to the underlying key ring infrastructure that was used to create those keys in the first place.
Thats' almost certainly the level of access NSA has -- the ability to regenerate any such key they want to, from having full access to the starting point.
I'm not qualified to explain why that's possible - it's way over my head, but that's what I've been told by cryptography specialists -- sort of like  owning the "primary key" to think in DB terms, is the way to make sense of it --

When you own the key to the puzzle that everyone else is using to generate their puzzle pieces from....you don't need to crack their key - in essence, you gave it to them in the first place...

Logged
WB8LZR
Member

Posts: 40


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #87 on: July 01, 2017, 12:50:08 PM »

And don't forget DNS and how it works by definition/default.  Every time you type in a URL that's NOT YET IN YOUR PC's cache, it's in the Domain Name Server you just made that request through.  Default for MS AD DNS is 7 days.  That's easy to change to the size of the hard drive, or to save indefinitely.

AND, don't forget the previous administration just gave away control of IANA/ICANN to the international community.  How'd they do this?  They handed the private key to the root and TLD DNS servers over on a thumb drive to a group of people from the international community still trying to figure out how they're going to assign names and numbers now.

So, along with creating a list of IPs to sites I use (bank, news, webmail, etc) and allowing only those and deny everything else, add that list of domains/IPs to your local host file so you quit using DNS.    ... but even that's not enough to remain anonymous.

...


I fully agree with the DNS statement.  Even though I don't use Windows, on my Unix machine I run a DNS cache, and keep it forever.  After I run the cache for a while, I firewall the DNS port (figuring that I'd collected all the domains I care about).  This is disadvantagous in situations where not resolving a domain could cause a site to behave poorly, so I'm not recommending it except to people who know what they're doing.

But I discovered that there is a lot of DNS traffic that doesn't resolve to anything.  IMO these domains are NOT MEANT to resolve.  They constitute a "tracking cookie" in their own right, because the DNS server can collect the data (whether or not a response is generated).  I'm talking about the remote site's DNS server, not the local ISP one.  Anyway, I found some news sites have scripts that prompt as many as 1300 DNS request within a short span of time, and over only a small number of pages.  IMO - essentially it amounts to a catalog of every article and every graphic and every ad.   Scary.  Turning the javascript off helps with this.

What is interesting about the DNS is that it's "invisible" - sort of - because nobody pays any attention to it.  And, in 99 percent of cases, it's unencrypted.  So, any eavesdropper (like an ISP) - doesn't need to decrypt anything, and can passively sniff your "catalog".   Food for thought.

Anyway, the 6L6 was by first rig (Ameco AT-1).

  - Ron



Logged
N0YXB
Member

Posts: 1206




Ignore
« Reply #88 on: July 01, 2017, 12:53:20 PM »

And don't forget DNS and how it works by definition/default.  Every time you type in a URL that's NOT YET IN YOUR PC's cache, it's in the Domain Name Server you just made that request through.  Default for MS AD DNS is 7 days.  That's easy to change to the size of the hard drive, or to save indefinitely.

AND, don't forget the previous administration just gave away control of IANA/ICANN to the international community.  How'd they do this?  They handed the private key to the root and TLD DNS servers over on a thumb drive to a group of people from the international community still trying to figure out how they're going to assign names and numbers now.

So, along with creating a list of IPs to sites I use (bank, news, webmail, etc) and allowing only those and deny everything else, add that list of domains/IPs to your local host file so you quit using DNS.    ... but even that's not enough to remain anonymous.

...


I fully agree with the DNS statement.  Even though I don't use Windows, on my Unix machine I run a DNS cache, and keep it forever.  After I run the cache for a while, I firewall the DNS port (figuring that I'd collected all the domains I care about).  This is disadvantagous in situations where not resolving a domain could cause a site to behave poorly, so I'm not recommending it except to people who know what they're doing.

But I discovered that there is a lot of DNS traffic that doesn't resolve to anything.  IMO these domains are NOT MEANT to resolve.  They constitute a "tracking cookie" in their own right, because the DNS server can collect the data (whether or not a response is generated).  I'm talking about the remote site's DNS server, not the local ISP one.  Anyway, I found some news sites have scripts that prompt as many as 1300 DNS request within a short span of time, and over only a small number of pages.  IMO - essentially it amounts to a catalog of every article and every graphic and every ad.   Scary.  Turning the javascript off helps with this.

What is interesting about the DNS is that it's "invisible" - sort of - because nobody pays any attention to it.  And, in 99 percent of cases, it's unencrypted.  So, any eavesdropper (like an ISP) - doesn't need to decrypt anything, and can passively sniff your "catalog".   Food for thought.

Anyway, the 6L6 was by first rig (Ameco AT-1).

  - Ron


Interesting information gentlemen. And thanks for the food for thought.
Logged
KD8TUT
Member

Posts: 522




Ignore
« Reply #89 on: July 01, 2017, 03:16:36 PM »


Actually, the way to sniff traffic isn't to try to crack the 256bit encryption.
It's to have access to the underlying key ring infrastructure that was used to create those keys in the first place.
Thats' almost certainly the level of access NSA has -- the ability to regenerate any such key they want to, from having full access to the starting point.
I'm not qualified to explain why that's possible - it's way over my head, but that's what I've been told by cryptography specialists -- sort of like  owning the "primary key" to think in DB terms, is the way to make sense of it --

When you own the key to the puzzle that everyone else is using to generate their puzzle pieces from....you don't need to crack their key - in essence, you gave it to them in the first place...



Well it's a little more straight forward than that... there's a "private key" and a "public key".

If a hacker or government actor gets the private key- it's all over. That's the one bit of data which unravels the whole thing.

Without getting all technical and everything: This is one huge reason why server security is so important.

1. Hack server

2. Locate private keys

3. Encryption between that server and clients is useless
Logged

Putting a Shatnerologist in a room full of ordinary people is like putting a velociraptor in a room full of wiener dogs.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 [6]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!