Jump to content
mortagen

Free internet... what's stopping me or you other than morals?

Recommended Posts

Is it illegal for me to broadcast free access to my internet access but only for like 50mb per day.

I do not steal old ladies internet FFS my god! I am not sending you a cake bowiee I didn't reveal shit it was relevant.

 

I am not talking about using other peoples unsecured internet I am talking about choosing to give some of your internet for free to people who might otherwise

inadvertently use unsecured old ladies internets. In fact with a free broadcast system you could actively choose to be an internet superhero and only give your internet to old ladies.

 

% of world population of internet users wise the fact any of these discussions on old ladies download quota exist is because australia is one only a few that is stupid.

The ideas expressed in this post only concern old ladies cake and stupid restrictive internet.

 

This thread is dead to me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it illegal for me to broadcast free access to my internet access but only for like 50mb per day.

I do not steal old ladies internet FFS my god! I am not sending you a cake bowiee I didn't reveal shit it was relevant.

 

I am not talking about using other peoples unsecured internet I am talking about choosing to give some of your internet for free to people who might otherwise

inadvertently use unsecured old ladies internets. In fact with a free broadcast system you could actively choose to be an internet superhero and only give your internet to old ladies.

If you want to do that go ahead you are giving permission. BUT it seems to have escaped you that this thread is discussing using another's internet connection without permission.

 

Oh and you revealed the crux of my PM. Revealing anything from a PM is bad form :( You did not even extend me the courtesy of replying to my PM except in open forum.

Edited by bowiee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all the user reference manual is not for the same revision of the device I was talking about, so you need to make sure we are talking about the same thing. Secondly, your link is to the reference manual, NOT the quick setup guide I talk about in the point above. So, my 'claim' that the setup guide for this device contains NO reference to wifi security stands. I also provided examples where the quick setup guides stepped you through setting up an unsecured wifi, then linked you to a web page once the unsecured wifi was already setup. There was also NO indication of the ramifications of not setting up security.

Really. Maybe you could have specified which revision you were referring to. You are confused. Let me repeat what I said, with emphasis.

 

I did not say that security was present in the quick setup guide you linked to, rather that it was present in the quick setup program. The pdf I linked to for the wgt624 has a screenshot of this, so I am curious to see if you will continue to deny it.

 

Again, it is not a 'reference' manual, but just a manual. It is not the complex documentation experts look to, but the easy to understand guide for users that comes with the device.

 

Do you really think security options would have *decreased* with newer revisions?

 

You aren't listening. You pull pages out of reference manuals for devices, I'm showing you what's in the quick setup guides. I've shown you guides that don't even mention wifi security in the quick setup guide, and I've shown you guides where wifi security is linked to, but not setup, at the end of the setup guide - so if you followed the instructions in the quick setup guide, you would have enabled an unsecured wifi. network. NONE of the setup guides I linked to talked about the ramifications of not setting up security, which is probably the major flaw.

Not reference manuals. Easy to understand manuals and guides that ship with the device. You seemed to have missed the point that the quick setup guide ends with the first screen of software setup. The software setup contains an option for security. Ergo, security is a part of the quick setup process.

 

I won't be discussing this point any further. Anybody not incompetent with working with these devices can see from themselves for the evidence I provided.

 

Trump? You totally miss the point. As I've said previously, if non-computer literate people go through the quick setup guide and their device works, why would they look at the manual at all? There is nothing in the wgt624 quick setup guide, for example, that says "now turn off the device you have just setup until you read the reference manual". There is also nothing in any of the quick setup guides that point out the ramifications of not setting up wifi security. What does this mean?

Because the quick setup guide is purely for hardware.

 

Because when the quicksetup program, not guide is completed through, there is an option for security.

 

Not to mention this is netgear specific, and in the case of the linksys, the manual would be read. Did you read these guides? They are not hard to understand reference manuals, but simple easy to understand guides. Or are you ignoring them because their existence completely shatters your point?

 

Also, I meant trump as in, a user *would* refer to this just as much, if not more so than your diagram for setting up the hardware.

 

It means at the end of the quick setup guide there will be an enabled unsecured wifi network. Even you cannot deny that fact.

No, it means at the end of the quick setup program, the user will have a secured or unsecured network, depending on what they chose during the quick setup process. Even you cannot deny that fact.

 

Wrong. You say that the quick setup guide is mainly just the physical setup. Ask yourself the question. If a person follows the quick setup guide, what is the result? The answer is, an enabled, unsecured wifi network.

NO. NO. NO. If the person follows the quick setup guide they linked to, then they have their hardware connected. That is all. They then begin the quick setup process, which is not documented in your quick setup guide except for the first screen. If you continue the process, then security is an option.

 

Why would the manual and quick setup guide document different quick setup procedures?

 

Well I've shown your last comment to be blatantly false.

 

I said, I provided an example that show there ARE quick setup guides that don't mention wifi security AT ALL.. You couldn't disprove it.

 

I said, There was also NO indication of the ramifications of not setting up security.(in the quick setup guides). You couldn't disprove it.

 

I said, You believe that non-computer literate users should read the reference guide cover to cover, well in reality, as has been pointed out by people who deal with these sorts of folks as a part of their job, this does not happen.

, and that one stands also.

 

Your tactic has been to pull pages out of user guides showing security setup steps.

 

As I have shown, quick setup guides step people through how to setup a non-secure wifi, and don't mention the ramifications . Non-computer literate people may not read user guides because of this, and most would not understand it anyway. This leaves them with an unsecured network.

 

I know your next post will rant about page X in the user manual, but as I've pointed out on numerious occasions, most non-computer literate people will stop at the end of the quick setup guide and not read the manual becaus, (a) their device now works and they don't want to tinker with it in fear of stopping it from working, and (b)the ramifications of an unsecured network aren't mention in the quick setup guides I've shown, so the risk is not explained where it should be.

 

I'll leave you to the many other good arguments others are making around this subject.

You have not shown anything to be false, and your claims are still very wrong. Have you actually set up one of these devices?

 

Your tactic has been to show diagrams for plugging in the hardware, which are hardly relevenat, and do not negate the use of a user guide for software. The basis of your point is that a quick setup guide, ie a diagram for plugging in hardware, is enough to result in a completely operational and unsecured wifi network without the user being asked or informed about security. This is false. Not to mention you continue to ignore the multiple other avenues of being informed of security risks.

 

You are twisitng my words, and trying to twist my point. Calling user guides reference manuals, stating I believe "non-computer literate users should read the reference guide cover to cover" is just false, and underhanded. I expected more of you. As it is, I believe users should read the simple and easy to understand guide that comes with their device if they set it up themselves, which is normally top of everything when you open the box, and impossible to miss.

 

Your premisies are false, as ar the claims and assertions you are basing them on.

 

--EDIT :

Your simpleton black and white view does not apply here, nor anywhere else in the real world.

 

Someone offers their opinion of the overall argument and you offer nothing back apart from a childish insult. You need to pull your head in.

I get annoyed when Bowiee only botheres to post to insult me by calling me a troll. Are you really so daft as to miss the fact that he insulted me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pantsmonkey,

 

I get your point, but I think that is a whole different topic.

 

You claim that the analogy of a locked door, tap in a person's front yard is overly simplistic. You claim to have refuted at least the locked door theory when in fact you haven't.

 

It is a simple analogy for a reason. The flaw with your entire argument is that in effect you have made an argument by over complicating your reasoning.

 

For the record, I have read over what you have posted - I have actually copied and pasted it. It makes a compelling argument to my customers who question the need of locking down wifi in relation to the sociopaths who believe it's their god given right to take what isn't theirs. It is quite fascinating to be honest.

 

You have not, at any stage refuted the locked door argument. You have dismissed it. How can anyone argue with someone who simply dismisses a point with anything resembling common sense, reason or fact?

 

You don't actually make an argument to ignore. It's your refusal to address the core issue that is in itself the undoing of your entire line of thinking.

Wow. You just lost any remaining credibility by your arrogance, and comparing me to a sociopath. Nice.

 

I have gone to great lengths to refute the locked door argument, and done so successfully. I did not simply dismiss it, or I would not have written many paragraphs explaining why I think it is incorrect. The thing is, you are apparently to simple to see this as you can't get over it being more than a moral issue. Maybe some of you people should actually try searching on this subject. There are many people who agree with my point of view, many highly respected, and none of them sociopaths.

 

You baited me in with the sociopath remark, but as I said, I won't be responding to you again unless you can actually be bothered to make ana rgument in response to mine which you claim to have read, instead of regressing the thread.

 

 

I will tell you one last thing. If you were caught stealing someone's unsecured internet connection and the owner complained to police that you stole a service he is paying for ,and that you did not have permission to use.

 

You will be charged with theft. this is the "core issue" that "The Tick" and others here are trying to get you to see.

 

Me accusing you of being a troll is correct, you come to a forum, attack the regulars, promote ideas you cannot support, and post simply to to sit back and laugh at those who try to explain that your view is incorrect. = Trollish behaviour. But hey keep going so people can see you for what you really are.

Attack the regulars? Am I not a regular? I voice my opinions, and back them up. They are different to the majority in this thread, but by no means are they a minority view. WOuld you prefer it if I simply did not respond, even if i consider the arguments presented to be crap? If you consider people voicing their opinion trolling, then you really need to look up the definition of the word.

 

As for my being charged, I would simply tell the police the owner made the connection available for me to use.

 

The law is much trickier in a scenario such as this. I am not aware of any cases in Australia where a person was charged simply for connection to an open wifi network. Indeed, this differs by country, and I don't know what the stance is in Australia. The laws you have linked to are not necessarily what someone would be charged under, as the courts would have to decide if connection to an open wifi network was in fact unauthorized.

 

 

Actually just went through this the other day. Had an elderly retired gentleman who was having internet problems and asked me to look at it.

His problem was he had added a wireless router to his connection and was trying to access the net through that via cat5 with the modem still in modem mode, so the usual double nat/dhcp problem. Got that fixed by bridging the modem and using the router to do the connection.

While doing this I noticed wireless was on and unsecured and asked him about it.

Wireless was for his wife's new laptop and he had no idea about wireless security and neither did his wife. As Mac Dude said the setup/user guide made no mention of it and when I tried to explain it they could not understand it as it was "all to technical". End result I had to secure it for them and set the notebook to always connect and remember the settings.

On your logic using their connection is acceptable, and I suppose when you used a few GB of their 600Mb/month plan you would feel no responsibility for the several hundred dollars of excess usage fees they would incur.

What a nice chap you are.

Which model of router was this, that security was omitted from the user guide?

 

Even if this is so, was their no advice from the isp, from windows etc...

 

People really need to stop implying I would take advantage of peoples connections in a negative manner. I might argue that Marijuana should be legal, without ever having smoked it. The negative implications come down to insults, and are unnecessary and childish.

 

If you want to do that go ahead you are giving permission. BUT it seems to have escaped you that this thread is discussing using another's internet connection without permission.

How would you distinguish if you were allowed to connect to an open wifi network or not, in the absence of a visible sign or indicative SSID?

Edited by TheSecret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your tactic has been to show diagrams for plugging in the hardware, which are hardly relevenat, and do not negate the use of a user guide for software.

Anyone can check the quick setup guides I've linked to which show this to be blatant bullshit. While I have disagreed with you in many threads, you have never stooped to such misrepresentation and utter lies. But now I know what to expect in the future. Very sad indeed.

 

Anyone else who is interested can very easily check this statement of yours and prove it false.

 

ciao.

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously. I wanna summarise my points again, because people get in deep and forget the basic point of this thread.

 

1. yes people SHOULD secure their wireless, but if they dont, it doesnt mean you're allowed to steal it aimlessly.

 

2. Open wireless points are a godsend, and often contain nice file shares, if im bored or need access I will use them, often connecting to their printer after and printing them how to secure it.

 

3. OPs questoin, nothing but morals is stoping people. Laws exist, but they dont technically STOP people.

 

4. If people WANT to share their internet, so be it. remember that what people do on YOUR connection is YOUR responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some articles that people reading this thread may find interesting.

 

http://blogs.computerworld.com/why_its_ok_to_steal_wi_fi

 

http://www.cse.uconn.edu/~robert/CSE260/wi...0connection.pdf

 

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/com...itymatters_0110

 

Oh, and The Tick?

 

Using your tap analogy, if your car had broken down and needed water in suburbia, and someone had left there hose on in there front lawn running, would you use it?

 

Your tactic has been to show diagrams for plugging in the hardware, which are hardly relevenat, and do not negate the use of a user guide for software.

Anyone can check the quick setup guides I've linked to which show this to be blatant bullshit. While I have disagreed with you in many threads, you have never stooped to such misrepresentation and utter lies. But now I know what to expect in the future. Very sad indeed.

 

Anyone else who is interested can very easily check this statement of yours and prove it false.

 

ciao.

 

I feel it is you who are stooping.., so either this is a huge misunderstanding, or one of us is lying, and it isn't me.

 

I looked at the quick guide you linked to. It contained a pdf in a zip file. This pdf was two pages in length, in landscape format.

 

The first page contained visual diagrams for plugging in cables, with a very small section showing how to connect to the router.

 

The second page is much smaller in content, and contains the end of the steps for using the smart wizard, as well as how to contact technical support.

 

It does not list the steps of the smart wizard.

 

The manual I linked to, shows that wireless security is part of the smart wizard process.

 

I won't accuse you of lying, I think it was just that you are simply wrong, and unable to admit it.

 

I am more than happy to post screenshots if need be.

 

Also, on this page it should be noted that it is advertised "Simple and secure way to share your high-speed Internet connection" as a selling point. Simple and secure.

 

Also on this page it states "Wireless encryption (WEP or WPA-PSK) can be easily activated ". can be easily activated

 

Seriously Mac Dude, care to explain this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel it is you who are stooping.., so either this is a huge misunderstanding, or one of us is lying, and it isn't me.

Let's examine this comment, and let's make it simple.

 

In your previous reply to a post of mine you made these statements :

 

Because the quick setup guide is purely for hardware.

 

...

 

Your tactic has been to show diagrams for plugging in the hardware, which are hardly relevenat...

 

Here are links to the two install guides/quick setup guides I have consistently used during this thread :

http://downloads.linksysbycisco.com/downloads/DSL_QI,1.pdf

http://kb.netgear.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1845

 

Here is the simple question. Are these guides "purely for hardware" as you state?

 

Below are two images taken from these guides :

 

Posted Image

Posted Image

 

These instructions are obviously not for plugging in the hardware.

 

So, back to the simple question. No the guides are not purely for hardware as you stated. So people can make their own judgment when you made the statement,

 

or one of us is lying, and it isn't me.

I wanted to think you weren't just trolling, but obviously I was wrong. I leave you to what will undoubtedly be another reply refuting my statements with irrelevant references...

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's examine this comment, and let's make it simple.

 

In your previous reply to a post of mine you made these statements :

 

Because the quick setup guide is purely for hardware.

 

...

 

Your tactic has been to show diagrams for plugging in the hardware, which are hardly relevenat...

 

Here are links to the two install guides/quick setup guides I have consistently used during this thread :

http://downloads.linksysbycisco.com/downloads/DSL_QI,1.pdf

http://kb.netgear.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1845

 

Here is the simple question. Are these guides "purely for hardware" as you state?

 

Below are two images taken from these guides :

 

Posted Image

Posted Image

 

These instructions are obviously not for plugging in the hardware.

 

 

So, back to the simple question. No the guides are not purely for hardware as you stated. So people can make their own judgment when you made the statement,

 

or one of us is lying, and it isn't me.

I wanted to think you weren't just trolling, but obviously I was wrong. I leave you to what will undoubtedly be another reply refuting my statements with irrelevant references...

 

Way to sink lower and lower!

 

Now you are deliberately misrepresenting your points. You deliberately left out the hardware setup in your screenshots, when they are the majority of the guides. Here is the first page of the linksys quick guide, that you decided to leave out to try and further your point.

 

The linksys guide has 4 relevant pages in English(..and why would a user look at a 60 page quicksetup guide but not the 41 page manual?), and roughly half the content relates to setting up hardware.

 

Can someone tell me how this is hard to understand? That is the entire chapter, and is before the section on connecting to the internet.

 

Indeed, this is chapter 3, and it seems ever easier to understand than your quick setup guide.

 

Oh, and look here, when setting up the wireless connection. Wireless security MUST be setup. Right under basic wireless settings.

 

To summarize for you.

 

For this router, you may connect to the internet without wireless security settings, but you may not setup a wireless network without being confronted about the wireless security settings.

 

Now, the Netgear. The missing pages that you left out are here. Indeed, you left out maybe 90% of the guide. How was my previous description of the guide not accurate?

 

I have shown that the quick setup guide is indeed for settinging up hardware. I have already pointed out, that the quick setup guide does not cover the software setup process, but only shows the first screen.

 

Since the manual states that the software setup process includes options for wireless security, and this does not contradict the manual, then it is fair to reason that the quick setup process includes options for security.

 

You're obviously finding this all a bit hard to follow. So I will point it out again.

 

From page 24 of the manual: "When you get to the wireless settings, you will have to select the country where you are located and decide whether you want to have security on your wireless links (Netgear strongly recommends enabling security)."

 

For this router, you may connect to the internet without wireless security settings, but you may not setup a wireless network without being confronted about the wireless security settings.

 

Understand that? Care to refute it?

 

The funny thing is, this discussion is all but irrelevant. You have failed to address my other points such as ISP's, online advice, Windows warnings etc, and keep focusing on this. I have conclusively shown your point to be false. You were either lying, or are wrong. You were definitely deliberately misleading people in any event. An apology would be nice.

 

I have shown Mac Dude to be blatantly wrong, and to be deliberately misleading people. There will likely be no acknowledgment of this, nor an admission of error. It really gives a good character indication.

Edited by TheSecret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, big thread =P

 

I think in most cases stealing is wrong, but sometimes like pantsmonkey a someone may want to make it available. There is no way to be sure though and you should assume that by default it is not allowed. thesecret is wrong about this, but he is right regarding the routers. quick setup guides are for hardware and are normally just pictures for plugging in cables, then the manual is used to do stuff. you cant setup a wireless connection without configuring securitty settings either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it's ethical or not, leaving your door unlocked for instance still leaves you partially to blame for your shit getting stolen.

 

I'm sure there aren't many insurance companies out there that would cover you for theft if there were no locks on your doors or windows.

While it's still illegal for people do steal from you, you're still at least partially to blame for the loss

 

A better way of putting it is that if you have WIFI and leave it unsecured, and someone downloads some illegal content it is you who will be liable because saying "someone else did it over my unsecured wifi" won't fly in court.

 

Whether it's illegal or not for someone to steal internet off you, you're still a moron for letting it happen in the first place.

Edited by Linux_Inside V2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's stopping me other than morals? All the WiFi networks in range are protected by WPA/WPA2 :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A better way of putting it is that if you have WIFI and leave it unsecured, and someone downloads some illegal content it is you who will be liable because saying "someone else did it over my unsecured wifi" won't fly in court.

That's crap.

 

If you leave your keys in your car and someone steals it, using it in a robbery, you aren't liable for the robbery. Router logs will show a different device connection. It will 'fly in court'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A better way of putting it is that if you have WIFI and leave it unsecured, and someone downloads some illegal content it is you who will be liable because saying "someone else did it over my unsecured wifi" won't fly in court.

That's crap.

 

If you leave your keys in your car and someone steals it, using it in a robbery, you aren't liable for the robbery. Router logs will show a different device connection. It will 'fly in court'.

 

Truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I thought this thread would just slip away and die...................... As it should. I cannot imagine what more could be added, except to go over the same ground again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A better way of putting it is that if you have WIFI and leave it unsecured, and someone downloads some illegal content it is you who will be liable because saying "someone else did it over my unsecured wifi" won't fly in court.

That's crap.

 

If you leave your keys in your car and someone steals it, using it in a robbery, you aren't liable for the robbery. Router logs will show a different device connection. It will 'fly in court'.

 

 

How many routers keep logs, and for how long are the logs kept? do the logs stay when the device is rebooted? I know my router doesn't log mac addresses or save them over power cycling. and i know for a fact that plenty don't. especially plain old access points or ad-hoc networks.

 

And would you be liable if your car had no security preventing anyone from stealing it? I doubt you'd be able to claim insurance on an unlockable car. and if you could, your premium would be astronomical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And would you be liable if your car had no security preventing anyone from stealing it? I doubt you'd be able to claim insurance on an unlockable car. and if you could, your premium would be astronomical.

That's not what ythe analogy says - you're saying if the car is left with the keys in it AND used for illegal acts, you as the owner are liable for those illegal acts. Sure, you may lose the car but you won't be liable for what's done with it. And yes, my old netgear router maintains logs, as do many, which aren't lost in a reboot, though that doesn't really matter...

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my Airport Express doesn't even maintain logs over reboot, but it doesn't matter since the only way anyone's connecting to my network is by stealing my laptop.

Which doesn't really matter, because I wasn't stupid enough to leave it unsecured, as a matter of fact my wireless authentication is WPA2-EAP requiring signed certificates for authentication.

 

Stealing wifi access is like stealing from someones home, people can't be trusted so you should lock up or expect some thief to steal your shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring the issue of router logs and such, it would depend on how you were sharing the connection in regards to liability. AFAIK, under current legislation, if you are legally sharing the connection, or if someone breaks into your network, you will not be liable for acts committed.

 

If you refuse to enable security on your connection when there is no reason not to, and make your connection available(which is more than likely a violation of the ISP contract you would have signed), then you would be liable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point that's being missed by anyone assuming people "can't help but be informed" about *whatever* is this one:

 

People don't read. They just don't. As soon as the thing starts working, they switch off their brains and go back to YouTube. Consider that the only educational campaigns that have ANY effect are the ones accompanied by TV advertising.

 

My current employer offers a web-based service with an interface that shares commonalities with that served up via browser by your average router. In order to be processed properly, the data entry parts must take certain forms, be within certain limits, and the system quickly redirected the user to an error page that gave a brief but exact description of what they needed to do.

 

Invariably the user would call us and say "the system's broken, I don't know what went wrong but it's just not working." In the end we turned off all error-checking for client accounts (we have to check the data anyway) just so that they'd use the system.

 

Moral of the story: people don't read, and if you're prepared to concede that people are pretty dumb anyway then leaving wireless wide open may be a choice of convenience for geeks like us, but it's literally a no-brainer for them. They see it works, so they use it without thinking about it. This doesn't mean they want (or are even aware of the possibility of) others accessing their family photo albums, legal documents, music and internet connection. To them, computing really is a mystery unlike the everyday ordinariness of a wooden door or sliding window.

 

I would encourage M_S-style wardriving (ie getting their printers to output "secure your wireless network") as it's mere harmless mischief, informative and will hopefully scare the people into action. Justifying stealing someone's download limit by saying "it'll be their first run-in with that sort of thing, they'll be more cautious in future" is stupid. More likely the Mum will accuse the Son of downloading pr0n/gaming/whatever.

 

*Cue that all-too familiar music ... "Would you steal a handbag? ..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how does one prove that their network was broken in to?

logs...

 

 

Logs will show you that it has successfully authenticated, they won't show ARP Replay attacks, or brute force attacks using pcap dumps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how does one prove that their network was broken in to?

logs...

 

 

Logs will show you that it has successfully authenticated, they won't show ARP Replay attacks, or brute force attacks using pcap dumps.

 

The onus of proof isn't on the innocent party to prove they are innocent. An open network with no illegal content on their PC would get them off - there is no proof they downloaded anything. It's the same if someone steals your car for a robbery. Your car at the scene makes you a suspect but on it's own it won't convict you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×