Jump to content
 
Sign in to follow this  
kuhla

If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear.

Recommended Posts

Set course, maximum spin. Engage.

 

source - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/world/europe/a-view-of-isiss-evolution-in-new-details-of-paris-attacks.html?_r=0

 

....

The French police report, together with hundreds of pages of interrogation and court records also obtained by The Times, suggest that there are lingering questions about how [...] and the precise encryption and security procedures that allowed the attackers to evade detection during the three months before they struck.
....

As the bodies of the dead were being bagged, the police found a white Samsung phone in a trash can outside the Bataclan.

It had a Belgian SIM card that had been in use only since the day before the attack. The phone had called just one other number — belonging to an unidentified user in Belgium.
....

According to the police report and interviews with officials, none of the attackers’ emails or other electronic communications have been found, prompting the authorities to conclude that the group used encryption. What kind of encryption remains unknown, and is among the details that Mr. Abdeslam’s capture could help reveal.
....

Most striking is what was not found on the phones: Not a single email or online chat from the attackers has surfaced so far.

Even though one of the disposable phones was found to have had a Gmail account with the username “yjeanyves1,” the police discovered it was empty, with no messages in the sent or draft folders. It had been created on the afternoon of the attacks from inside the Appart’City budget hotel.

 

source - http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/273858-house-intel-dem-unclear-if-encryption-helped-brussels-bombers

....

“We do not know yet what role, if any, encrypted communications played in these attacks,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

“But we can be sure that terrorists will continue to use what they perceive to be the most secure means to plot their attacks,” he added.
....

Lawmakers and investigators say authorities are increasingly blind to these plots because of extremists’ use of encryption.
....

A bill from Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) — the leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee — would force companies to decrypt data upon government request.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://www.businessinsider.com/us-targets-burner-phones-after-brussels-attack-2016-3?amp

 

....

 

Congresswoman Jackie Speier, a Democrat representing California’s 14th district, has introduced a the “Closing the Pre-Paid Mobile Device Security Gap Act of 2016,” or HR 4886, which will require people who purchase a prepaid device to provide proper identification.

 

“This bill would close one of the most significant gaps in our ability to track and prevent acts of terror, drug trafficking, and modern-day slavery,” Speier said in a blog post. “The ‘burner phone’ loophole is an egregious gap in our legal framework that allows actors like the 9/11 hijackers and the Times Square bomber to evade law enforcement while they plot to take innocent lives. The Paris attackers also used ‘burner phones.’ As we’ve seen so vividly over the past few days, we cannot afford to take these kinds of risks. It’s time to close this ‘burner phone’ loophole for good.”

 

If this act passes, you would need to provide the same identification as you would when signing up for a traditional phone contract with a carrier: your name, address, and date of birth, and that would be verified after you provide a credit or debit card, and your Social Security or driver’s license number.

....

 

 

This is already required in some countries so I'm not entirely surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be worse, could be Bangladesh or Pakistan, they want your biometric data and sim card registered directly to you:

http://qz.com/360420/pakistans-cellphone-registration-policy-will-do-little-to-curb-terrorism/

https://advox.globalvoices.org/2015/12/22/bangladesh-will-demand-biometric-data-from-all-sim-card-users/

 

I have a feeling people who were using burner phones will now have a random individual buy the phone for them and achieve the same effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking random people though, at least it would be easier to track down that person and follow the clue trails versus a cashier trying to memorize every customer who bought a burner phone. Its not perfect but its significant better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use fake identification. Pay a homeless person to make a straw man purchase.

 

Those are fairly easy to do. All this is going to accomplish is creating a large government database in an attempt to solve a problem that doesn't need to be solved. The number of ways someone can securely transmit information to another person is rather substantial, you could use an encrypted messenger or an encrypted email address or a vpn and a random skype credentials.

The idea that criminals are using burner phones and therefore we should outlaw burner phones is almost as ridiculous as suggesting we should outlaw spoons because of fat people.

 

Did you know playing games on Korean servers require a Korean version of a social security number to be registered to the account? Do you know how easy it is to buy one and use it?

 

Worse yet even if we assume that this is a fantastic idea and we should register everything with biometric data so the glorious government can track everything because I have nothing to hide. You still create the issue of too much data to analyze. The government has access to that data with a quick subpoena, hell the NSA monitors every single communication that travels outside of the US (and frankly most that travel internal as well). It's not a matter of being able to more easily/readily track people at this point it's far more an issue of sifting through the huge magnitude of data, and adding more data isn't going to solve the issue.

 

If you can't find the needles in a haystack why the fuck do you want to add more hay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://www.engadget.com/2016/03/28/apple-s-encryption-battle-with-the-fbi-is-over-for-now/

 

 

The Department of Justice has dropped its case against Apple. After over a month of court motions, congressional hearings and public fights over circumventing the security of the iPhone 5C used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook, the government has decided it doesn't need Apple after all. Instead, the third party brought in to break Apple's encryption has been successful according to court documents.
....

 

Apple was surprised about last week's filing to vacate the hearing, but vowed that if the case progressed, it would seek information about the party and the method used to hack into the iPhone. Now that the Justice Department has backed out, it can't file for information about the researcher or the method used. According to the Guardian, the government has deemed the exploit classified.
....

 

[more at source]

 

The number of conspiracy theories that have come out of this latest news is pretty impressive and I'm not sure if I should believe them or not. Apple says they will try to further increase security. I wonder when round 2 starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Backdoor is open for business boys. Here we fucking go.

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - The FBI has agreed to help an Arkansas prosecutor unlock an iPhone and iPod belonging to two teenagers accused of killing a couple.

Faulkner County Prosecuting Attorney Cody Hiland said Wednesday that the FBI agreed to the request from his office. The trial for 18-year-old Hunter Drexler was delayed Tuesday so prosecutors could ask for help.

http://www.htssite.com/2016/03/after-only-72-hours-fbi-has-already-started-helping-other-police-department-gain-access-to-iphone.html

 

So when the FBI said they would only be using it on this one device and they didn't want a backdoor... about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/first-came-the-breathalyzer-now-meet-the-roadside-police-textalyzer/

 

 

....

Now there's a so-called "textalyzer" device to help the authorities determine whether someone involved in a motor vehicle accident was unlawfully driving while distracted.
....

Under the first-of-its-kind legislation proposed in New York, drivers involved in accidents would have to submit their phone to roadside testing from a textalyzer to determine whether the driver was using a mobile phone ahead of a crash. In a bid to get around the Fourth Amendment right to privacy, the textalyzer allegedly would keep conversations, contacts, numbers, photos, and application data private. It will solely say whether the phone was in use prior to a motor-vehicle mishap. Further analysis, which might require a warrant, could be necessary to determine whether such usage was via hands-free dashboard technology and to confirm the original finding.

The legislation was prompted by intense lobbying from the group Distracted Operators Risk Casualties (DORCs). The son of its co-founder, Ben Lieberman, was killed in 2011 by a distracted driver in New York. The proposed law has been dubbed "Evan's Law" in memory of 19-year-old Evan Lieberman.
....

Cellebrite already has roadside devices to scrape the contents of a phone, so this technology would just dial it back a bit. If the legislation passes, Cellebrite would have to bid on the project, as would other tech firms.
....

The law, which is before the New York Senate Transportation Committee, would recast the motor-vehicle driving law to make it so that motorists give "implied consent" for "determining whether the operator of a motor vehicle was using a mobile telephone or portable electronic device at or near the time of the accident or collision, which provides the grounds for such testing. No such electronic scan shall include the content or origin of any communication, game conducted, image or electronic data viewed on a mobile telephone or a portable electronic device."

Police will inform motorists involved in an accident that "the person's license or permit to drive and any non-resident operating privilege shall be immediately suspended and subsequently revoked should the driver refuse to acquiesce to such field test."
....

The cause of the accident that killed Evan Lieberman was discovered after the Lieberman family subpoenaed the mobile phone records of the driver involved in the crash, which showed that the motorist was allegedly distracted while driving.

 

I'm very confused how this is technically feasible. Unless I unlock my phone, it cannot be accessed by a local data connection. Doesn't that break this whole piece of legislation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this article and there are multiple issues with it. First, this bill has not even passed a committee let alone a house/senate vote in New York's congress. Secondly if they went ahead with this they would most likely be using the current cell phone cloning tools they have, which will basically scrape all the data off of your phone and create an image (this tech is also used by phone sellers to transfer data between devices).

From my limited understanding the current version of these devices cannot bypass the lock on encrypted devices (I believe it brute forces its way passed unencrypted devices). So if you have marshmallow or iOS9 you're most likely going to need to unlock the phone first.

Also the threat is that if you did not unlock your phone for the authorities they would immediately revoke your drivers license, similar to refusal to comply with a drug/alcohol test to determine DUI.

 

Technically I've heard that the law protects you against unlawful incrimination by not requiring you to provide the authorities your pin/password, however I've heard rumors that it does not provide the same protection to fingerprints. I am fuzzy on this particular law and I would imagine something like this will end up before a higher court eventually.

 

Also if NY is stupid enough to try and pass this law (distinct possibility) it will almost undoubtedly be challenged in courts vigorously.

 

Sadly this is another case of legislators that don't quite understand the issues with privacy, let alone how valuable people's phones are. Instead of the threat of terrorism the state of NY is opting to appeal with the "think of the children" strategy to try and pass this legislation off as a means to stop people from texting and driving (especially naming the bill after some dead kid, real classy). Phones are no longer a means of just communicating between people, but are small computers that can contain huge amounts of sensitive information. People are still legislating them like the only thing people do on phones is talk and text.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically I've heard that the law protects you against unlawful incrimination by not requiring you to provide the authorities your pin/password, however I've heard rumors that it does not provide the same protection to fingerprints.

 

No rumor. There is precedent. Virginia v Baust 2014

 

source - http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/telecommunications/court-rules-police-may-compel-suspects-to-unlock-fingerprint-protected-smartphones

 

 

....

 

Judge Frucci ruled that phone passwords were entitled to protection under the Fifth Amendment’s promise that no person “shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” Id. He stressed that the password existed only in the defendant’s mind, and thus compelling the defendant to provide a passcode constituted a testimonial communication. The Fifth Amendment protects against such compulsion.

 

On the other hand, Judge Frucci concluded that smartphone fingerprint protection did not qualify for the Fifth Amendment privilege. He noted that producing a fingerprint did not require the communication of knowledge, but was rather analogous to being ordered to produce a DNA sample or a key, which is constitutionally permissible. Judge Frucci also cited a 1967 Supreme Court case, United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967), for the proposition that the Fifth Amendment “offers no protection against compulsion to submit to fingerprinting.” Baust, No. CR14-1439, at 3 (Va. Cir. Oct. 28, 2014).

....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/14/fbi-san-bernardino-iphone-technique-secret-reuters/

The feds might never let Apple in on the secret of the technique they used to unlock the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone 5c. According to Reuters, the hackers who discovered the flaw that led to the FBI's iPhone-cracking tool have the sole legal ownership of the method. Agents might not even know what the vulnerability is or how its resulting hardware works exactly. If you'll recall, a recent Washington Post report revealed that the feds got help from a group of hackers -- from outside the US, Reuters' sources said -- with a history of selling software vulnerabilities to the US government. They were paid a flat fee for the flaw they brought the FBI and the tool they developed.

FBI Director James B. Comey said during a privacy conference last week that the government is considering whether to give Apple details about the technique. See, the White House typically subjects the security flaws it gets a hold of to a procedure called the Vulnerabilities Equities Process. It gives various agencies the chance to discuss what should be done to those security flaws, and whether they should be disclosed to their respective companies. Unfortunately, the process' rules don't cover vulnerabilities discovered and owned by private companies. The only way the government can decide on this particular flaw's fate is to give the equities process an overhaul.

 

It got a chuckle out of me but I believe the FBI on this one. Anyone with half a brain that is part of the gray-hat company that did this is going to be super protective of their methodologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/18/blackberry-ceo-wont-say-whether-he-gave-up-encryption-keys/

Here's what we know, thanks to an investigation by Motherboard and Vice: The Royal Canadian Mounted Police have a key that unlocks encrypted messages on every single non-corporate BlackBerry. Here's what we don't know: whether BlackBerry gave that key to the RCMP.
[....]


The details are crucial on this one. Non-corporate BlackBerry devices apparently all use the same encryption key in their messenger application. The company holds that key. They can provide it. Corporate BlackBerry devices, managed with an on-prem BES server, have their keys generated and stored on-prem. Blackberry does not hold those keys. This is different from the Apple case but I can imagine the media casually equating the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in a solid dose of irony we have this article posted 19 hours ago detailing why Blackberry is leaving the Pakistani market.

The truth is that the Pakistani government wanted the ability to monitor all BlackBerry Enterprise Service traffic in the country, including every BES e-mail and BES BBM message. But BlackBerry will not comply with that sort of directive. As we have said many times, we do not support “back doors” granting open access to our customers’ information and have never done this anywhere in the world.

http://www.albanydailystar.com/business/blackberry-is-leaving-from-pakistan-due-countrys-monitoring-data-demand-chattanooga-daily-science-12150.html

 

I think the point here is two-fold. Blackberry doesn't give a shit about you as a consumer (go figure) and only cares about it's enterprise customers. Better yet, even if you believe their claim that they care about your privacy and have only given this key to the RCMP for consumer blackberries that still puts them in a situation of providing a back door to customer information (and not to mention has their COO flat out lying on a the companies' official blog.)

The best they can hope for with regards to this damage control is to try claim that because they do not hold the keys to enterprise encryption they cannot backdoor enterprise devices, but I somehow doubt that's going to win them many accolades.

 

Blackberry has been dying for a while, and stuff like this isn't going to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in a solid dose of irony we have this article posted 19 hours ago detailing why Blackberry is leaving the Pakistani market.

The truth is that the Pakistani government wanted the ability to monitor all BlackBerry Enterprise Service traffic in the country, including every BES e-mail and BES BBM message. But BlackBerry will not comply with that sort of directive. As we have said many times, we do not support “back doors” granting open access to our customers’ information and have never done this anywhere in the world.

http://www.albanydailystar.com/business/blackberry-is-leaving-from-pakistan-due-countrys-monitoring-data-demand-chattanooga-daily-science-12150.html

 

I think the point here is two-fold. Blackberry doesn't give a shit about you as a consumer (go figure) and only cares about it's enterprise customers. Better yet, even if you believe their claim that they care about your privacy and have only given this key to the RCMP for consumer blackberries that still puts them in a situation of providing a back door to customer information (and not to mention has their COO flat out lying on a the companies' official blog.)

 

The best they can hope for with regards to this damage control is to try claim that because they do not hold the keys to enterprise encryption they cannot backdoor enterprise devices, but I somehow doubt that's going to win them many accolades.

 

Blackberry has been dying for a while, and stuff like this isn't going to help.

 

There is no information that indicates that blackberry gave the key to anyone. For all we know, they decrypted the messages themselves and turned those over or are providing a middle-man decrypt-and-dup service that the RCMP accesses. It has not been clearly stated one way or the other. That was the main point being made in the engadget article.

 

This does not mean there is no privacy concern here and that having one key that the company holds that affects a large number of their devices is not a liability but I just don't want to details on this ignored because they are important in differentiating this from some of the other debates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They also fully admit that they believe in "corporate responsibility" and will "act in accordance with lawful requests." Which means they roll over for any subpoena that gets floated there way. I think that's a terrible policy as a company, I may not like apple products, but their consumer practices and their idea of brand protection/privacy is pretty solid. On the flip side you have companies like Blackberry and Amazon which gives the keys to the kingdom to just about anyone who asks, and considering how much digital information is worth I can assure you that agencies are asking.

 

I know it's much harder for companies to even attempt to stand up to the government requests but the erosion of privacy rights is quickly reaching a turning point and unfortunately I don't think it's going to change for the better any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://news.softpedia.com/news/dutch-police-shuts-down-blackberry-pgp-based-mobile-network-503291.shtml

 

 

[....]

Dutch law enforcement, in cooperation with government agencies from other countries, has forced Ennetcom, a Dutch company providing encryption communications for mobile devices, to shut down its operations, three days ago, on April 19.

[....]

Following this announcement, the company's network was closed down, and clients weren't able to carry out any type of data transfers. Ennetcom had around 19,000 registered users.

"Ennetcom accused of helping drug dealers"

Ennetcom (Encrypted Network Communications) is a mobile network that relays all its traffic via BlackBerry Enterprise Servers (BES) using its PGP encryption system that the company calls Mobile Encryption Gateway. Additionally, customers also have to purchase specialized handsets to access the Ennetcom network.

The company claims that "it is impossible to intercept and decrypt any data that is sent from one handset to another." According to Dutch media, this is the reason the company's operations were suspended.

Dutch and international law enforcement agencies are saying that drug dealers are among Ennetcom's most devoted clients and have moved on to seize the company's servers.

[....]

 

It's not even some kind of guilt by association. It was a legal service. Apparently the Dutch don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at this point everyone is flailing trying to stop anything that could possibly be used for illegal activity. This is a nasty knee-jerk reaction by the Dutch, but considering how woefully unprepared much of Europe is to handle their own security (let alone cross border security and enforcement) I guess they're just trying to dismantle anything they can't handle.

 

Of course please do not mention to the Europeans that the most recent attack was carried out on unencrypted cell phone traffic, that might make someone look stupid.

 

I likewise find it amusing and sad that the NSA is actually upset with the FBI director trying to ban encryption, they're actively opposing him on the matter. If the NSA is telling you to back off, then your head is so far up your own ass you can't even see daylight.

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/2016/comey-resign/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/child-porn-suspect-jailed-for-7-months-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives/

 

 

[....]

The suspect, a former Philadelphia Police Department sergeant, has not been charged with any child porn crimes. Instead, he remains indefinitely imprisoned in Philadelphia's Federal Detention Center for refusing to unlock two drives encrypted with Apple's FileVault software in a case that once again highlights the extent to which the authorities are going to crack encrypted devices. The man is to remain jailed "until such time that he fully complies" with the decryption order.

[....] [more at source]

 

 

 

Encryption is a crime. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned that this was a great case for the government to pick. There are precious few privacy advocate groups that will stand behind a person being accused of possessing child pornography.

Also since other courts have ruled that the police cannot force you to provide a password, of course it gets nice and murky because at this point the judicial branch is now making the laws up with their own rulings:

The Fifth Amendment protects you from being forced to give the government self-incriminating testimony. Courts have generally accepted that telling the government a password or encryption key is “testimony.” A police officer cannot force or threaten you into giving up your password or unlocking your electronic devices. However, a judge or a grand jury may be able to force you to decrypt your devices in some circumstances.

Source: https://www.eff.org/issues/know-your-rights#38

 

As far as encryption as a whole being a crime, it gets murkier still. Some companies will act as "good citizens" and provide law enforcement with full access to their employees data once they receive a "lawful order" Blackberry rolls over pretty much all the time, Amazon supposedly will open any AWS system if asked by the FISA court. Other companies like Apple will clearly fight back to protect not only their brand/reputation but also because they've elected to draw some clear lines in the sand on how much they're willing to provide to the government, their line happens to be writing software and/or compromising the underlying encryption they use.

 

The real issues will be if the legislation actually passes laws limiting or restricting encryption. And of course the penultimate test would be if those laws are signed into action, how quickly they'll be sent up to the supreme court. Simple fact is that so many government agencies can (and should) be using strong encryption, so if the US congress decides to start stripping away those protections, how does it do that without making huge exceptions for the government? What about sensitive financial data? Medical Data? Once you start down that path to ruin it quickly becomes unenforceable.

 

I don't agree with the "encryption is a crime" statement you have, because we haven't hit that point just yet. A more accurate rendition would be "a judge can imprison you forever if you choose not to decrypt your data for the government" and frankly I'm sure someone like the ACLU will eventually push this case through enough appeals courts to get a better ruling on this.

This is why we need a decent legislative body to provide the government with actual laws to put in place rather than having the judiciary make shit up as they go along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/06/federal-court-fourth-amendment-does-not-protect-your-home-computer

....a federal district court in Virginia ruled that a criminal defendant has no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in his personal computer, located inside his home. According to the court, the federal government does not need a warrant to hack into an individual's computer.
[...more at source...]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source - http://bigstory.ap.org/7d57f576e3f74b6ca4cd3436fbebf160

​FBI Director James Comey warned
....

"The conversation we've been trying to have about this has dipped below public consciousness now, and that's fine," Comey said at a symposium organized by Symantec, a technology company. "Because what we want to do is collect information this year so that next year we can have an adult conversation in this country."
....

He also stood by the Justice Department's decision to bring indictments against Chinese and Iranian officials in major cyberattack cases in the last two years, rejecting criticism from those who call criminal charges meaningless gestures unlikely to result in convictions.
....

"We are working hard to make people at keyboards feel our breath on their necks and try to change that behavior," he said. "We've got to get to a point where we can reach them as easily as they can reach us and change behavior by that reach-out."

 

Fear will keep the local systems in line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy how James Comey changes from an incompetent fuckwit when dealing with certain investigations about the dissemination of classified materials, to Darth Vader when he's talking about "reaching them as easily as they can reach us" when dealing with other digital threats, some of which are apparently foreign based.

 

Honestly it sickens me that people like him are in power and actively trying to degrade any possible semblance of privacy for anyone.

 

How will privacy and anonymity be attacked? [...] Pick a fear common to lots of people, something that will evoke a gut reaction: "Four Horsemen" - drug-dealers, money-launderers, terrorists, and pedophiles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse

 

I like how that particular quote is from at least as far back as 1994.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not government related but this time but instead a business. This is one anecdote so I'm not sure how reliable it is but if half of it is true just wow lol

 

Also more at source than just the quote below

 

source - http://shivankaul.com/blog/2016/12/07/clean-your-desk-yet-another-amazon-interview-experience.html

....

..... I’m asked to raise my laptop and show my desk through the webcam, which I do. At this point I was told:

“Clean your desk.”

I wasn’t sure I’d heard correctly.

“Clean your desk, please. Your institution [Amazon] has mandated that there cannot be any written material next to you while you take the exam.”

“Cleaning my desk” would take upwards of an hour to do properly, and there was a lot of paper I didn’t want getting mixed up, so I suggested half-jokingly I take the exam on my bed.

“Yes, but first you have to show me the bed and remove the sheets to make sure no written material is hidden underneath. Also, you cannot have access to a pen or paper. Please also keep your cellphone far behind you, where I can see it.”

So here I am, taking an interview that is supposed to mimic real working conditions. On my bed. With my Macbook on my lap. Without access to pen and paper.

After about 5 more rounds of “pick up your laptop and show a 360 degree view of your room” and “please show your floor, no sir, you need to get up from your chair and push it away and then show”, I’m allowed to start. I’m helpfully told that I can take one bathroom break, for 5 minutes, in between two tests.
....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...