08.25.09

Microsoft Wants Only White People in Poland

Posted in Microsoft at 7:41 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

[via]

Permalink 6 Comments      Send this to a friend

Eye on Microsoft: Windows Security News

Posted in Microsoft, Security, Windows at 6:58 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Another day, another expected problem

• Why Windows security is awful

A friend of mine suggested that I should include as boilerplate in my security stories, a line like: “Of course, if you were running desktop Linux or using a Mac, you wouldn’t have this problem.” She’s got a point. Windows is now, always has been, and always will be insecure. Here’s why.

First, desktop Windows stands firmly on a foundation as a stand-alone PC operating system. It was never, ever meant to work in a networked world. So, security holes that existed back in the day of Windows for Workgroups, 1991, are still with us today in 2009 and Windows 7.

[...]

It also doesn’t help any that Microsoft’s data formats can be used to hold active programming code. Microsoft Office formats are commonly used to transmit malware. Microsoft’s latest Office 2010 tries to deal with this by blocking all but read access to documents or ‘sandboxing’ them.. Since you can’t edit a sandboxed document, I’m sure that’s going to go over really well. Of course, what will actually happen is that users won’t use the sandbox utility, and they’ll just spread malware instead.

• 55,000 Web sites hacked to serve up malware cocktail

Security researchers are raising an alarm for a potent malware cocktail — backdoor Trojans and password stealers — being pushed to Windows users from about 55,000 hacked Web sites.

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Vista 7 Campaign Starts Tomorrow

Posted in Apple, FSF, Videos, Vista, Vista 7, Windows at 6:49 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Awareness campaign about the sins of Vista 7 is about to launch

WE AT Boycott Novell have spent the past year exposing the reality behind Vista 7. Knowing how similar it is to the process which preceded the release of Windows Vista, it seemed important to inform people before — not after — Vista 7 fails to gain traction in the market.

Adding to the list of failures, here is another item from the news. It reminds us yet again why Vista 7 is not suitable for sub-notebooks.

Windows 7 cuts almost a third off the battery life of some netbooks shipping today with Windows XP, several recent reviews and user reports say.

Laptop magazine reported in its blog on Monday that during a recent test, a Toshiba netbook lost 2.5 hours of battery life when running Windows 7 instead of XP, or about 30% (6:53 for Windows 7, versus 9:24 for XP).

Compare that to ARM-based sub-notebooks which can run GNU/Linux for an entire day. Windows does not even support ARM.

Come tomorrow, the FSF will unveil the Vista 7 “Sins” campaign. There is a spoiler out there already.

From the info-member list:

This Wednesday, August 26 at 11am, the Free Software Foundation will be launching its Windows7sins.org public awareness campaign, drawing attention to the threats posed by the adoption of Microsoft’s proprietary operating system. We have a launch event here in Boston on the Boston Commons from noon until 3pm, and we need everyone in the area to come along and help out and join in the ceremony as we conduct a ceremonial trashing of proprietary software.

**We’ll be launching our Windows 7 campaign with pomp and fanfare, with a giant 12 foot trashcan being filled with boxes of proprietary software.**

The event promises to be lots of fun, and with thousands of people passing through the Boston Commons every day we hope you will help us connect with the public by handing out information and explaining the benefits of free software. There will be camera crews and photographers capturing the event and we will be getting these images up online as soon as possible on the day.

Let us know you’re coming and bring along your friends and work colleagues – mail campaigns@fsf.org if you have time to help us set up, or just turn up at the Boston Commons near the entrance to the Public Gardens from noon.

If you’re not in the Boston area, there will be plenty for you to do to help us launch the campaign and get the message out. Stay tuned for upcoming instructions…

No doubt the Microsoft-sympathetic Web sites will use this as an opportunity to mock the FSF. They did the same thing when the FSF launched the “Bad Vista” campaign — a campaign which by all means was a great success.

Here is an E-mail which the FSF will distribute (a draft from last week):

RE: Important notice regarding impending lack of privacy, freedom and security from Microsoft Corporation.

As a decision maker within your organization, you undoubtedly strive to make choices that seek to improve the working lives of your employees, enhance the relationship you have with your customers and potential customers and secure the independence and freedom for your organization to operate.

For many years, companies like yours have relied on Microsoft and the Windows operating system. With the release of Windows 7 in October, Microsoft is selling the new version on a combination of fear and threats. They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary, you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes. With the threat to withdraw their support, they try to strong-arm you into adopting new versions of their software even when you don’t need them and may have a negative consequence to your ability to operate, once again abusing its monopoly position, explicitly inducing vendor lock-in.

Like its plans to include DRM restrictions with Windows Vista, Microsoft’s continued attacks against the security, privacy and freedom of your organization, are no mistake. Microsoft has manipulated computer manufacturers to pre-install its products onto the computers you purchase. With its most recent actions, it further threatens computing standards by polluting and perverting the OpenDocument standard with its own XML-based file format. Today, many decision makers in America are now wholly dependent on Microsoft operating systems, such as Windows 7 for their business computing.

*The root cause of this dependency is proprietary software and with the release of Windows7, you have an opportunity to break your organizations dependency on it*

Free software, such as the GNU/Linux operating system and the office productivity tools set OpenOffice, provide all of the freedoms Microsoft tries to deny, and is therefore better in all areas: security, accountability and monetary cost. Microsoft agrees, and has recently reported as much in their corporate filings:

“The OpenOffice.org project provides a freely downloadable cross-platform application that also has been adapted by various commercial software vendors to sell under their brands, including IBM, Novell, Red Hat, and Sun Microsystems.”

“[Free software] vendors are devoting considerable efforts to developing software that mimics the features and functionality of our products, in some cases on the basis of technical specifications for Microsoft technologies that we make available at little or no cost.”

Free software is more secure because you and the wider community are independently able to read the source code of and customize any program you use in your infrastructure. It saves you from relying on a secretive third party, and the public availability of free software code means that many qualified eyeballs, the security experts and researchers around the world, are continually studying and reporting on its integrity. Replacing all your desktop systems with GNU/Linux will give you independence, access to thousands of free software applications and help break the social ill of proprietary software. Thousands of organizations have already moved to free software. What’s your organizational plan?

*Investing in Microsoft’s Windows 7 will only get you more stuck and more dependent on them.*

Take the next step — evaluate your organizations opportunity to use free software — and sign-up for regular announcements on making the move away from Windows and to receive information about the work of the Free Software Foundation.

[omitted]

A message from the Free Software Foundation, Boston, Mass.

The above is just a draft.

For those who characterise the FSF as “anti-Microsoft”, it is important to remember that the FSF offers no-one special treatment. Apple too is harshly criticised by the FSF (especially over DRM). Earlier today, Popey (Ubuntu enthusiast from the UK) wrote: “Apple blocking anything but quicktime from viewing trailers?”

It seems like a pattern of bad behaviour from Apple.

Following that iPod explosion in the UK, the UK-based Register shares the following new video. [via]

No product is perfect and neither are Apple’s. Yet it is better to criticise Apple for trying to gag those who experienced/witnessed burning Apple products because Apple essentially puts the lives of more people at risk, purely for financial reasons. █

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Links 25/08/2009: CentOS 4.8, UK Concedes to MAFIAA

Posted in News Roundup at 6:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

What If Novell Does Not Own UNIX? Nothing.

Posted in GNU/Linux, IBM, Kernel, Microsoft, Novell, SCO, UNIX at 12:51 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Decision regarding UNIX copyrights is overturned

UNIX has just turned 40. It is a lot older than SCO/Caldera, whose actions against Linux have numerous connections to Microsoft. SCO claims to have just released a product, but the word on everyone’s lips is to do with a court decision reversal. It comes two years after an important ruling.

A federal appeals court Monday overturned a 2007 decision that Novell owns the Unix code, and the ruling now clears the way for SCO to pursue a $1 billion copyright infringement case against IBM.

In a 54-page decision, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals said it was reversing the 2007 summary judgment decision by Judge Dale Kimball of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, which found that Novell was the owner of Unix and UnixWare copyrights.

This is a blow to Novell (needless to say), but it can also refuel some old FUD about Linux. SJVN is not particularly concerned. As he rightly explains, SCO has no case anyway. SCO did not win a case against Linux; in fact, UNIX ownership is unrelated to Linux and only a peripheral case. Will Microsoft contribute some more funds as it did before?

There’s a fool born every minute, but a fool who wants to invest still more money in legal fees in this money pit? I doubt it. I don’t think even Microsoft, which has bankrolled SCO’s anti-Linux lawsuits, has the stomach for it.

The SCO zombie’s victory is meaningless legal trivia. The company, and its anti-Linux claims, is still dead. The now brainless corpse is just twitching a little still.

According to Tom Harvey’s report, SCO has plans to litigate, but where will the money come from?

The ruling may mean The SCO Group will renew its effort to collect licensing fees from thousands of companies that run the Linux system, said McBride. He also said the ruling again calls into question IBM’s ability to continue marketing its Aix server program, which is derived from Unix.

According to one report, Norris may step in, but will SCO’s new trustee permit this? Slashdot has many comments on the subject and all the documents are here in Groklaw. Wired Magazine puts up an ugly picture of Darl McBride, whereas the AP article quotes him. As The Register puts it:

Novell could not immediately be reached for comment at time of writing.

Novell’s PR Director later posted a statement in the company’s blog.

Precisely what will happen next in the lawsuit remains to be seen, especially in light of the pending SCO bankruptcy and the recent court decision to appoint a Chapter 11 Trustee to take over the business affairs of the company.

SCO still owes money to Novell. If an investor — if any exists at all — shows up to shore up SCO’s lawsuits, Novell might have to be compensated using the allotted funds. Masnick writes:

A judge has overturned part of the lower court’s original ruling on who owns the copyrights to Unix, and ordered a full jury trial take place to determine who actually owns the copyright. Oddly, the court did not overturn the part where SCO has to pay Novell $2.5 million — which could push the company over the final edge. If, however, SCO can stay alive, and it does go to trial, the company could (and likely will) still lose that trial (and, we’re still twiddling our thumbs and waiting for any evidence from SCO that IBM actually infringed on the UNIX copyrights… but that’s another story and another lawsuit).

Likewise, we’re still twiddling our thumbs and waiting for any evidence from Microsoft that Linux actually infringed on Microsoft patents. As Heise once put it, “Pamela Jones [...] has told Infoworld that Microsoft will be the next SCO Group.” Microsoft buddies like Andrew Thomas are already on the scene, seemingly trying to fuel SCO’s cause. █

“…Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit against IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux.”

–Larry Goldfarb, Baystar, key investor in SCO

Permalink 2 Comments      Send this to a friend

Comes: Microsoft’s Anti-GNU/Linux Presentation and Explanation of Bribery

Posted in Antitrust, Courtroom, FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Windows at 6:13 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Microsoft’s “Delta Force” presents an attack plan on GNU/Linux adoption

IT IS not so often that we find so many ‘smoking guns’ in one single Comes vs Microsoft exhibit. We shall tackle this one in several parts, starting with the more obvious bits.

This exhibit is 83 slides long (plus notes) from someone who works for Microsoft. It’s actually called “Delta Force” — the force which fights against GNU/Linux adoption, apparently. The presentation is marked “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” and it is easy to see why. The presenter, Steve Winfield, even mentioned the SCO lawsuit against IBM. “Another deluded fool that sold his integrity to Billistopheles and for what,” remarks one of our readers. Regarding the name “Delta Force”, suggests this reader, “insert a picture from the A Team with Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer face imposed.” Another reader sent in such a picture, but it’s not suitable for publication.

According to Winfield, customers choose GNU/Linux because “Apps are easier to pirate.”

Here is the full presentation (Exhibit PX09346) [PDF], which is available as text at the bottom. Let’s address some interesting portions of it.

Who is responsible?

Steve Winfield
National Technology Strategist
Partner Technology Team (a.k.a. Delta Force)
US Partner Group, Microsoft

This presentation is dated 2005 at the top, or maybe 2003 for the content itself. Either way, it is fairly recent by Comes standards.

The presentation is filled with the TCO lies, which Microsoft paid Gartner [1, 2, 3] and IDC [1, 2] to generate. We have other Comes exhibits that show this very clearly. These were funded by Microsoft and Microsoft even intervened to affect the outcome.

In future posts we shall address other classic FUD like security figures that combine numbers from systems that are not comparable. Microsoft hides many of its security patches, but that is another long story.

Today we would like to focus on Microsoft’s unethical behaviour, which this presentation reflects on.

Some weeks ago we presented testimonies from academic departments that got hijacked by what some call “Microsoft minions”.

For Microsoft, based on the presentation, this is a well-understood strategy. See the part where it says:

Ask the partner to give you heads up on customer situations – bribe them!

Does Microsoft admit bribing as a strategy? That would be a felony, a crime.

Around page/slide 62, the presenter talks about how they are fighting GNU/Linux at CIO level. Slide 53 says “Escalate to CompHot”. Remember CompHot [1, 2, 3, 4]? That’s the anti-GNU/Linux programme/fund.

“Contact CompHot,” it says. Further down this slide says:

Find and Lean on your insider friend, ‘the fox’. Having a trusted MSfriend in the account is critical. Some people (unix Bigots) can think of lots of reasons to not have a MS solution. MS folks may not be the strongest voice but they are true believers (Protect them, make them look good).

“Find and Lean on your insider friend,” eh?

Sounds like this ‘myth’ of “Microsoft minions” is not so far fetched after all. Paranoia it ain’t when they’re really out to get you.

Moreover, as Jason put it: “Again, it is Microsoft that applies the religious analogies to tar the FLOSS community with the “cult”/”zealot”/”fundamentalist” brush.”

Separately, he wrote: “This is a good presentation to read — even though most of it is structured as “Am not! Are too!”– because a lot of these slides show up in other internal MS presentations. There also a few good references about the “backchannel” competition Microsoft like so much: bribe someone, lean on an insider.

“And, finally, it’s topped off with the “bigots” / “true believers” mentality. Another example of Microsoft being the one to view things in religious terms (but it is the vocal members of the FLOSS community that are painted with the “zealotry” brush.”

“Sounds like this ‘myth’ of “Microsoft minions” is not so far fetched after all.”Microsoft’s staff loves accusing its competition of being “a cult” when it is them — Microsoft and its ecosystem — who act like a cult against anything that is not Microsoft. Hypocrisy to the extreme.

Further on it says: “Leverage existing MS technology clout”. Think of Exchange/SharePoint for example. Microsoft uses these as ‘Trojan horses’ to work its way up the stack and establish total lock-in. Now we have this on paper to be shown as evidence that it is no side-effect but a deliberate strategic act.

Throughout this exhibit, Microsoft also refers to an internal network, “http://linux“, as already seen before. It contains “TCO studies and tools” for Microsoft employees to fight against what it calls "Linux infestation". It’s related to CompHot.

Similarly, based on this presentation, Microsoft has an “Office compete team”, which is accessible internally through “http://officemarketing/staroffice“.

Page 57 contains a style that’s similar to Microsoft TE training material (“Evangelism is War”). It is important to understand how Microsoft views itself.

Regarding EDGI, which is not referred to by name in this presentation, Jason wrote: “This is how the EDGI program plays out in actual practice. Under honest and fair evaluation, an organization decides to go with Linux, and Microsoft comes in the the funds to distort the market, because they know they will make it up in the long run.”

Without further ado, here is the full presentation, which we intend to revisit, but then taking another angle. █

Appendix: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit PX09346, as text

Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

More Monkey and MonkeyLight Business

Posted in Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Vista 7 at 4:29 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Planet of the Mono

Summary: Moonlight and Mono news from the past week or so

Earlier this month we mentioned the release of the beta of Moonlight 2 [1, 2, 3], which was highlighted in some places that habitually mention it (also here). Long-time Mono proponent Ryan Paul and also eWeek do it as a matter of routine, whereas many Linux sites turn a blind eye to Mono- and Moonlight-related news.

“…[M]any Linux sites turn a blind eye to Mono- and Moonlight-related news.”These feature-by-feature imitations of Microsoft software are generally treated with suspicion in the GNU/Linux community, and rightly so. Here is new software called PDF Mod. “There are likely some bugs,” writes the author, “but in my testing it is quite useful and slick already. It’s built on top of libpoppler/poppler-sharp, PdfSharp, Gtk#/Cairo, and Banshee’s Hyena library. The app itself is a paltry 2009 lines of .cs files.”

As one person points out in the comments: “It seemed a cool hack until the point I realized it is in Mono. I can’t express any interest on that.” There is an update on this.

The Mono-Nono Web site has commented on the article from Heise regarding Mono:

Next, it reinforces the point that Mr. de Icaza was totally serious back when he said that “Gnome 4.0 should be based on .NET” – that’s exactly what he thought then, and exactly what he thinks now. It’s dressed up a bit in pseudo-technical rhetoric, but the underlying desire is the same.

Simon Phipps made a blog post titled “Monkey Business” where in reference to the same article he wrote: “Very interesting overview of the story of Mono and Miguel’s role in it. If you’ve not been following that story all along, it’s an especially useful summary and briefing. Note also the GNOME acronym expansion.”

Linux.com has this new article about Moonlight where criticism of the software is also being voiced.

But to critics of Novell’s moves to align with Microsoft to offer Moonlight as a way to make Silverlight-enabled content work for Linux users, the bad karma continues. Instead of this being a good thing for Novell and Linux users, critics argue, the Moonlight project helps Microsoft maintain a leadership role in a development platform that only gives lip service to the open source community, they say.

GreyGeek remarks on the above as follows:

Novell’s CEO, a former IBM/Windows guy, told us. He said he couldn’t sell Linux against Windows. So, he sold out Linux and the FOSS community by implicitly claiming that Linux contains MS IP, and now pays ROYALTY to Microsoft for every copy of SLES sold, in return for special treatment and immunity from possible lawsuits.

[...]

As far as MONO and MoonLight being on a Linux desktop, Microsoft’s James Plamondon said it best: “Every application written to Microsoft’s standards is a WIN for Microsoft…”

In other words, “He who controls the desktop API controls the desktop.”

My question has always been: “What advantage for Linux and FOSS is there in giving Microsoft direct or indirect control of the Linux desktop?”

ABSOLUTELY NONE. To do so would result, eventually, in the destruction of Linux, a goal Microsoft has NEVER ceased to attain. So, why do certain people CONTINUE to campaign, even with hostility, in order to help Microsoft attain it’s goal?

Linux.com quoted only a portion of my explanation, which goes as follows:

There are more reasons than people are led to believe (a form of distraction that trivialises the criticism by posing the issues incorrectly and then addressing straw men). The main issue is proliferation of Microsoft de facto standards on the Web (and later on the desktop). Other issues, including patents, are secondary.

Allow me to explain.

In its leaked evangelical slides (approved by Microsoft’s highest chiefs for presentation), James Plamondon, a Microsoft Technical Evangelist, presented the company’s views on standards. From Exhibit 3096 (Comes v. Microsoft litigation) we gather the following quote:

“Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory; every line of code that is written to any other standard, is a small defeat.”

This quote is symbolic, but it is one among many which show the company’s realisation that in order to increase its dominance it must have other, competing developers rely on its own APIs, formats, protocols, etc.

Coming into play then are various factors, such as:

1. Microsoft’s tool kit is typically ahead (examples: Silverlight vs Moonlight, Visual Studio vs MonoDevelop, .NET vs Mono). This leads to correct perceptions that anything other than Microsoft’s offering is “cheap imitation”.

2. Migration is made easier from competing products over to Microsoft’s “superior” offerings, as explained in (1). It’s like a migration route and we have real-world examples.

3. If Microsoft’s competition happened to leapfrog Microsoft in its own territory, then it can devise patents as a tool as intimidation, taxation (royalties), and — if all else fails — litigation. Microsoft has already sued TomTom and Melco over Linux patents (few people know about the latter case, but Processor.com alluded to it). FAT is an example of a Submarine Patent, which corresponds to Microsoft specs and patents.

There are other factors that fit this recurring pattern, which is mostly about control.

Let’s focus on Silverlight and delve into Moonlight more specifically. Microsoft has a lot to gain here with Novell. First of all, Microsoft keeps regulators at a distance (Novell’s deal harmed the Samba case in Europe, it helped OOXML, and it helps Silverlight). Silverlight had several States complain in 2007 . ECIS also filed a complaint for similar reasons. They realised there was a plot to harm the Web and replace HTML with XAML. When only one company delivers the renderer/viewer, this puts the whole Web in jeopardy and competing operating platforms at Microsoft’s mercy. Flash may raise similar issues, but Adobe is not prolific further down the stack, so it’s rather agnostic. Moonlight came a while later, but it was falsely (yet repeatedly) characterised as a “port” of Silverlight or the “Linux version” of Silverlight, which it is not. Moonlight is almost designed to be inferior and deliver a poorer experience to GNU/Linux users. It’s always behind. Then there is the legal complication, which the SFLC addressed last year. As a result of it, Red Hat concluded that it cannot ship Moonlight.

Watch out for Microsoft’s new attempts to absorb PHP using .NET. Krill has some more details on how Microsoft uses “open source” to merely transform PHP programmers into .NET.

In summary, Mono and Moonlight are all smoke and hype. They can be be harmful. We are still keeping track of the hype Microsoft generates for Vista 7 and it’s sad to see Novell using similar tactics. The video below was uploaded to YouTube a few days ago. It’s called “The Goodbye Novell Blues”. Since Novell spends much of its time promoting Microsoft these days, it’s time to say “goodbye” to Novell. █

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend

Small Updates on ODF and OOXML

Posted in Courtroom, Microsoft, Open XML, OpenDocument, Patents at 3:46 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: ODF Workshop arrangements and i4i appeal scheduled

Jomar Silva has just updated the agenda of the ODF Workshop. “[W]e’re trying to do a live streamming on the second day,” he writes, adding about the event that “It will be 5 days discussing and building the basis of a new world…”

As one person remarks, “Someone please confirm that ODF files open on HTC Hero or on Android . I’m sick of saving my docs in .doc format just to see them on phone”

See, that’s the reason a standard like ODF is necessary. To depend on one vendor as though it is the universal owner of all documents in the world is simply not acceptable. This is not about “hate” as FCW puts it in the headline, it’s about practicality. Why is Microsoft so keen on hating international standards despite people’s demand for this? In Wikipedia, for example, HAl is removing references to “{{FLOSS}}” as though it is a dirty word when used in conjunction with ODF.

ODF is also distanced from the issue of software patents, for now. Matthew McKenzie, a proponent of Free software, writes:

According to i4i, the company has already concluded that the current version of OpenOffice.org — and presumably ODF — do not violate its patents. There is some speculation, however, that future releases might tempt the company to revisit this question.

Bear in mind: An attack on OpenOffice.org or ODF would risk war with companies like IBM and Novell that use — and have an interest in defending — both technologies.

The last company that tried this against IBM was a rotting penny-stock carcass called SCO. We all know how that turned out.

A few days ago we cited Andy Updegrove's take on the i4i case [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11]. Sam Dean — like many others — takes it for gospel, whereas one of our readers claims that Updegrove is utterly wrong and simply won’t ever admit it. “So to summarize,” writes the reader, “Microsoft either wins that motion for a stay or it promptly settles with i4i pretty much on i4i’s terms. That’s the squeeze play the i4i lawyers had as their litigation strategy.

“It’s a safe bet that settlement negotiations are already under way to determine what the settlement will be if Microsoft does not win that stay. In fact, there may already be a settlement agreement that makes what i4i gets contingent on how the motion to stay is decided by the Court of Appeals.”

An appeal is already scheduled. The date to eye is September 23^rd.

On Sept. 23, a federal appeals court will hear Microsoft’s appeal of the injunction prohibiting it from selling versions of Microsoft Word with custom XML capabilities.

According to our reader, Microsoft should already be forbidden from selling Microsoft Word, regardless of whether it agrees with the judge or not. █

Permalink Comments off      Send this to a friend