Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
request for follow up lenn
cuting here from another thread not disputing you but you have a
reference for the below ad not heard it and wanted to follow up on it Hold up example: The late Colonel Rudolph Abel of the KGB, under a cover name as an "artist" with a "hobby of amateur radio" operating in NYC around the late 1950s-early 1960s. His HF radio was used to send-receive encrypted information from the KGB. He was exchanged for Francis Gary Powers, the missle-shot-down pilot of a U-2. Abel used "one-time pads" for encipherment, virtually unbreakable by anything since the encryption key was obtained from natural random noise (or of "noisy" KGB clerk-typists)(take your pick). It's irrelevant whether Abel actually held any sort of amateur radio license (he probably had a cover for one, no details on that) but that was his cover excuse for having/using an HF radio when arrested. Amateur radio in espionage activities! Not a good PR thing but so long ago that most have forgotten it or never knew. The |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
From: an old friend on Jul 29, 10:17 am
cuting here from another thread not disputing you but you have a reference for the below ad not heard it and wanted to follow up on it ================================================== =============== Hold up example: The late Colonel Rudolph Abel of the KGB, under a cover name as an "artist" with a "hobby of amateur radio" operating in NYC around the late 1950s-early 1960s. His HF radio was used to send-receive encrypted information from the KGB. He was exchanged for Francis Gary Powers, the missle-shot-down pilot of a U-2. Abel used "one-time pads" for encipherment, virtually unbreakable by anything since the encryption key was obtained from natural random noise (or of "noisy" KGB clerk-typists)(take your pick). It's irrelevant whether Abel actually held any sort of amateur radio license (he probably had a cover for one, no details on that) but that was his cover excuse for having/using an HF radio when arrested. Amateur radio in espionage activities! Not a good PR thing but so long ago that most have forgotten it or never knew. ================================================== =============== For a couple references on the above, the best one I have is David Kahn's "CODEBREAKERS, A History of Cryptography," a non-fiction best-seller of the 1960s. Been reprinted in soft-cover a couple times, once in hard-cover. Libraries would have it. A couple inches thick in hard-cover. The next reference is Francis Gary Powers' own biography. All of that happened during President Eisenhower's term over 40 years ago...at the time an embarrassment to the United States due to Eisenhower not admitting it at first. Headline stuff then, much press. A search of "Rudolph Abel" will turn up more on the 'web. Search also "one-time pads" for the method of encryption/decryption. The U-2 itself was made, but not fully assembled at Building 82 of Lockheed at (then) Burbank, CA, airport. It was a large hangar-plus-office-space building just off of Winona Avenue crossing the major north-south street of Hollywood Way in the east San Fernando Valley section of Los Angeles. Building 82 was referred to as "the Skunk Works" in reference to the "Lil Abner" comic strip and a local Burbank plastics factory nearby that used to emit stinky smells (long since moved). Heavy security outside but the building was in plain view (along with the building number sign) for many years to drivers on Hollywood Way. The Skunk Works was moved to Palmdale in the high desert years ago and all Lockheed Aircraft buildings have been razed at what is now Bob Hope Airport (formerly Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport). I've never worked for Lockheed but have worked for a couple contractors who supplied avionics for Lockheed, desitined for installation in some Skunk Works program (which ranges from the original P-80 Shooting Star through the U-2 and through the SR-71 Blackbird and on into part of the F-22 engineering, plus a few smaller ones). As far as I know, many details of what went on at the Skunk Works and its aircraft are still "sensitive" even though lots of information on them have been made public. By the way, both the CIA and NSA have virtual museums on the Internet and considerable text on various newsworthy cases of espionage of the last 70+ years. There's also a history of military intelligence found at the Fort Huachuca, AZ, website. Fort Huachuca is the M.I. training center and also the UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) "flight school." It's also the LAST place where the U.S. government teaches morse code cognition as part of military intelligence electronic intercept military occupation specialty training (four different categories), all branches plus civilian government workers. Needless to say, the morse code classes (all done by computer programs now) are NOT a large part of the M.I. school curriculum. dit dit |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
an_old_friend:
Perhaps spread spectrum is used by spies, who knows, or sat links--we will always catch only the poorest of spies--undoubtedly they DO NOT represent the "good ones." But, most radio is a poor vector for spies, the internet is a much more viable medium... A true "random number generator" has escaped being ever realized in a practical form. The "random noise" from the background radiation of the universe comes very, very close. In computing, if a very high quality "random number generator" is needed, it will always be outboard (white noise generator.) No computer algorithm ever developed is able to generate REAL random numbers. Success is only measured in how close they can come to the ideal... .... the "noise" from a large number of typists keyboards might be close enough, although not perfectly random, for some applications... John "an old friend" wrote in message oups.com... cuting here from another thread not disputing you but you have a reference for the below ad not heard it and wanted to follow up on it Hold up example: The late Colonel Rudolph Abel of the KGB, under a cover name as an "artist" with a "hobby of amateur radio" operating in NYC around the late 1950s-early 1960s. His HF radio was used to send-receive encrypted information from the KGB. He was exchanged for Francis Gary Powers, the missle-shot-down pilot of a U-2. Abel used "one-time pads" for encipherment, virtually unbreakable by anything since the encryption key was obtained from natural random noise (or of "noisy" KGB clerk-typists)(take your pick). It's irrelevant whether Abel actually held any sort of amateur radio license (he probably had a cover for one, no details on that) but that was his cover excuse for having/using an HF radio when arrested. Amateur radio in espionage activities! Not a good PR thing but so long ago that most have forgotten it or never knew. The |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
From: John Smith on Jul 29, 1:12 pm
an_old_friend: Perhaps spread spectrum is used by spies, who knows, or sat links--we will always catch only the poorest of spies--undoubtedly they DO NOT represent the "good ones." But, most radio is a poor vector for spies, the internet is a much more viable medium... Ahem...those "number stations" on HF aren't for sports scores or lottery numbers... :-) A true "random number generator" has escaped being ever realized in a practical form. Untrue, John. PRSG (Pseudo-Random Sequence Generators) have been in common use in both communications and instrumentation for about three decades now. Using just 9 standard digital logic packages with a 10 MHz clock, the PRSG I built for instrumentation would not repeat until 913 years had passed. Reference: Electronics Designer's Casebook Number 3, a collection of Electronics magazine articles published between February '78 and January '79. I was the author of that. "Electronics" magazine was a bi-weekly industry/subscription periodical published by McGraw-Hill; McGraw Hill morphed it into four separate monthlies. The "random noise" from the background radiation of the universe comes very, very close. No, does NOT "come close," that IS the definition of random. In computing, if a very high quality "random number generator" is needed, it will always be outboard (white noise generator.) No computer algorithm ever developed is able to generate REAL random numbers. Success is only measured in how close they can come to the ideal... Sigh. PERIODICITY is at question? I would say that a repeat period of a century or more is pretty dang good. Periodicity greater than that is found in the DES and some of the algorithms at the NSA. SOME finite periodicity is NECESSARY to set code keys and thus enabling a decode to start to prepare to get ready to begin. That just cannot be done with true random noise thingies. In some of the Swiss (formerly Swedish) Crypto AG products, a true natural random noise source generates the random key patterns for both encryption and decryption sequences. A problem there is that the decrypt sequence MUST be identical to the encrypt sequence and that decrypt sequence transported to a recipient. With the DES and similar PRSG-driven sequences, the decrypt key is NOT required to be sent separately...all that is required is to set the sequence at some pre-determined state (the "code key" enters that) and this aligns the sequence with the received sequence...a sync is possible and decrypt can proceed. As to "simple algorithm" periodicity, a 913 year pattern repeat at a 10 MHz clock is quite long. That was achieved with a 2^33-1 sequence bit pattern Exclusive-ORed with a 2^25-1 bit pattern. Each of the individual PRSGs had NO common factors in periodicity so they Ex-ORed to a pattern of 2.88 x 10^17 clock periods. That could be implemented on any PC (I did that just for funzies) with a 2 GHz clock and sequence faster than the hardware version clock at 10 MHz. So that one repeated about every 100 years... ... the "noise" from a large number of typists keyboards might be close enough, although not perfectly random, for some applications... The humans-replacing-monkeys (at the KGB) was taken from David Kahn's "The Codebreakers" and was a quote from someone else. Today, at this "late" hour of 5:15 PM PDT, thousands of WLANs are very busy within RF range of one another, NOT interfering with each other thanks to some clever and longer PRSGs. All those WLANs can also synchronize with one another should they have to start from power-down condition. Add to that the garage door openers which have a very short data burst on an RF carrier...add millions more in remote keyless entry automobile "watch fob" transmitters. Their pattern security is so good that they CAN and HAVE replaced mechanical counterparts in any environment. [yes, the auto fob transmitters have keys attached as a security in case the car battery goes kafooey...and for the mental/emotional security of the numbnuts conservatives who don't trust those new-fangled digital gizmos] For pseudo-random number generation in theory, along with tests on things therein being random, there are 155 pages worth of good stuff in Donald E. Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming," Chapter 3, Volume 2. I have the three-volume set and will entertain any offers of purchase (plus shipping costs)...provided I can trust the buyer (this group doesn't ensure my trust much...). bit bit |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ups.com... From: John Smith on Jul 29, 1:12 pm an_old_friend: Perhaps spread spectrum is used by spies, who knows, or sat links--we will always catch only the poorest of spies--undoubtedly they DO NOT represent the "good ones." But, most radio is a poor vector for spies, the internet is a much more viable medium... Ahem...those "number stations" on HF aren't for sports scores or lottery numbers... :-) A true "random number generator" has escaped being ever realized in a practical form. Untrue, John. PRSG (Pseudo-Random Sequence Generators) have been in common use in both communications and instrumentation for about three decades now. Using just 9 standard digital logic packages with a 10 MHz clock, the PRSG I built for instrumentation would not repeat until 913 years had passed. Reference: Electronics Designer's Casebook Number 3, a collection of Electronics magazine articles published between February '78 and January '79. I was the author of that. "Electronics" magazine was a bi-weekly industry/subscription periodical published by McGraw-Hill; McGraw Hill morphed it into four separate monthlies. The "random noise" from the background radiation of the universe comes very, very close. No, does NOT "come close," that IS the definition of random. In computing, if a very high quality "random number generator" is needed, it will always be outboard (white noise generator.) No computer algorithm ever developed is able to generate REAL random numbers. Success is only measured in how close they can come to the ideal... Sigh. PERIODICITY is at question? I would say that a repeat period of a century or more is pretty dang good. Periodicity greater than that is found in the DES and some of the algorithms at the NSA. SOME finite periodicity is NECESSARY to set code keys and thus enabling a decode to start to prepare to get ready to begin. That just cannot be done with true random noise thingies. In some of the Swiss (formerly Swedish) Crypto AG products, a true natural random noise source generates the random key patterns for both encryption and decryption sequences. A problem there is that the decrypt sequence MUST be identical to the encrypt sequence and that decrypt sequence transported to a recipient. With the DES and similar PRSG-driven sequences, the decrypt key is NOT required to be sent separately...all that is required is to set the sequence at some pre-determined state (the "code key" enters that) and this aligns the sequence with the received sequence...a sync is possible and decrypt can proceed. As to "simple algorithm" periodicity, a 913 year pattern repeat at a 10 MHz clock is quite long. That was achieved with a 2^33-1 sequence bit pattern Exclusive-ORed with a 2^25-1 bit pattern. Each of the individual PRSGs had NO common factors in periodicity so they Ex-ORed to a pattern of 2.88 x 10^17 clock periods. That could be implemented on any PC (I did that just for funzies) with a 2 GHz clock and sequence faster than the hardware version clock at 10 MHz. So that one repeated about every 100 years... ... the "noise" from a large number of typists keyboards might be close enough, although not perfectly random, for some applications... The humans-replacing-monkeys (at the KGB) was taken from David Kahn's "The Codebreakers" and was a quote from someone else. Today, at this "late" hour of 5:15 PM PDT, thousands of WLANs are very busy within RF range of one another, NOT interfering with each other thanks to some clever and longer PRSGs. All those WLANs can also synchronize with one another should they have to start from power-down condition. Add to that the garage door openers which have a very short data burst on an RF carrier...add millions more in remote keyless entry automobile "watch fob" transmitters. Their pattern security is so good that they CAN and HAVE replaced mechanical counterparts in any environment. [yes, the auto fob transmitters have keys attached as a security in case the car battery goes kafooey...and for the mental/emotional security of the numbnuts conservatives who don't trust those new-fangled digital gizmos] For pseudo-random number generation in theory, along with tests on things therein being random, there are 155 pages worth of good stuff in Donald E. Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming," Chapter 3, Volume 2. I have the three-volume set and will entertain any offers of purchase (plus shipping costs)...provided I can trust the buyer (this group doesn't ensure my trust much...). bit bit Hello, Len Oh, come on! There are some folks you can trust. You can trust me! Would you have a spare 10 or 20 grand you can loan me until payday? When's payday? I dunno, you're the one that's working. )) So long as the key is changed *before* any repeat of the pattern, no harm is done - at least I would suspect. Just remember, one dot if by land and two dots if by sea .... or is that one dash? Hey, care to loan me 50K? 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
From: "Jim Hampton" on Sat 30 Jul 2005 03:18
wrote in message oups.com... From: John Smith on Jul 29, 1:12 pm an_old_friend: Hello, Len Oh, come on! There are some folks you can trust. You can trust me! Of course. I trust you to write stuff in here about beer... Would you have a spare 10 or 20 grand you can loan me until payday? No. There's "trust" and there's "dumb****behavior." Tsk. Your sales technique needs a LOT of work...! When's payday? I dunno, you're the one that's working. Some of the time. I don't HAVE to, but it's fun to keep one's hand in some of the time. So long as the key is changed *before* any repeat of the pattern, no harm is done - at least I would suspect. Depends on the length of the sequence and your analysis tools. If only 9 stock chips can make a sequence that is 2.8 x 10^17 bits long (periodicity), DOES IT MATTER? Just remember, one dot if by land and two dots if by sea .... or is that one dash? Hey, care to loan me 50K? Paul Revere, did you go and sell all your silverware stock and get drunk again?!? Geez... Remember: "One dot if by land, two dots if by sea, hear three dots you better get your S out of there cuz' they commin in fast by air!" dit bit |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Len:
I am afraid we cannot grant you the benefit of the doubt, and the possibility you are only frugal with your money. Since you now have refused all unreasonable requests for a sizeable loan, we must dismiss you as a "Tight A$$ED Dude", you will not be asked again! grin John wrote in message ups.com... From: "Jim Hampton" on Sat 30 Jul 2005 03:18 wrote in message roups.com... From: John Smith on Jul 29, 1:12 pm an_old_friend: Hello, Len Oh, come on! There are some folks you can trust. You can trust me! Of course. I trust you to write stuff in here about beer... Would you have a spare 10 or 20 grand you can loan me until payday? No. There's "trust" and there's "dumb****behavior." Tsk. Your sales technique needs a LOT of work...! When's payday? I dunno, you're the one that's working. Some of the time. I don't HAVE to, but it's fun to keep one's hand in some of the time. So long as the key is changed *before* any repeat of the pattern, no harm is done - at least I would suspect. Depends on the length of the sequence and your analysis tools. If only 9 stock chips can make a sequence that is 2.8 x 10^17 bits long (periodicity), DOES IT MATTER? Just remember, one dot if by land and two dots if by sea .... or is that one dash? Hey, care to loan me 50K? Paul Revere, did you go and sell all your silverware stock and get drunk again?!? Geez... Remember: "One dot if by land, two dots if by sea, hear three dots you better get your S out of there cuz' they commin in fast by air!" dit bit |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Len:
Many computer studies have been done on those numbers stations attempting to correlate them with detectable events/changes/occurrences in the world--to deduce what they are about. Last time I really checked, some were claiming it had to do with banks, markets, money... That is all wet? John wrote in message ups.com... From: John Smith on Jul 29, 1:12 pm an_old_friend: Perhaps spread spectrum is used by spies, who knows, or sat links--we will always catch only the poorest of spies--undoubtedly they DO NOT represent the "good ones." But, most radio is a poor vector for spies, the internet is a much more viable medium... Ahem...those "number stations" on HF aren't for sports scores or lottery numbers... :-) A true "random number generator" has escaped being ever realized in a practical form. Untrue, John. PRSG (Pseudo-Random Sequence Generators) have been in common use in both communications and instrumentation for about three decades now. Using just 9 standard digital logic packages with a 10 MHz clock, the PRSG I built for instrumentation would not repeat until 913 years had passed. Reference: Electronics Designer's Casebook Number 3, a collection of Electronics magazine articles published between February '78 and January '79. I was the author of that. "Electronics" magazine was a bi-weekly industry/subscription periodical published by McGraw-Hill; McGraw Hill morphed it into four separate monthlies. The "random noise" from the background radiation of the universe comes very, very close. No, does NOT "come close," that IS the definition of random. In computing, if a very high quality "random number generator" is needed, it will always be outboard (white noise generator.) No computer algorithm ever developed is able to generate REAL random numbers. Success is only measured in how close they can come to the ideal... Sigh. PERIODICITY is at question? I would say that a repeat period of a century or more is pretty dang good. Periodicity greater than that is found in the DES and some of the algorithms at the NSA. SOME finite periodicity is NECESSARY to set code keys and thus enabling a decode to start to prepare to get ready to begin. That just cannot be done with true random noise thingies. In some of the Swiss (formerly Swedish) Crypto AG products, a true natural random noise source generates the random key patterns for both encryption and decryption sequences. A problem there is that the decrypt sequence MUST be identical to the encrypt sequence and that decrypt sequence transported to a recipient. With the DES and similar PRSG-driven sequences, the decrypt key is NOT required to be sent separately...all that is required is to set the sequence at some pre-determined state (the "code key" enters that) and this aligns the sequence with the received sequence...a sync is possible and decrypt can proceed. As to "simple algorithm" periodicity, a 913 year pattern repeat at a 10 MHz clock is quite long. That was achieved with a 2^33-1 sequence bit pattern Exclusive-ORed with a 2^25-1 bit pattern. Each of the individual PRSGs had NO common factors in periodicity so they Ex-ORed to a pattern of 2.88 x 10^17 clock periods. That could be implemented on any PC (I did that just for funzies) with a 2 GHz clock and sequence faster than the hardware version clock at 10 MHz. So that one repeated about every 100 years... ... the "noise" from a large number of typists keyboards might be close enough, although not perfectly random, for some applications... The humans-replacing-monkeys (at the KGB) was taken from David Kahn's "The Codebreakers" and was a quote from someone else. Today, at this "late" hour of 5:15 PM PDT, thousands of WLANs are very busy within RF range of one another, NOT interfering with each other thanks to some clever and longer PRSGs. All those WLANs can also synchronize with one another should they have to start from power-down condition. Add to that the garage door openers which have a very short data burst on an RF carrier...add millions more in remote keyless entry automobile "watch fob" transmitters. Their pattern security is so good that they CAN and HAVE replaced mechanical counterparts in any environment. [yes, the auto fob transmitters have keys attached as a security in case the car battery goes kafooey...and for the mental/emotional security of the numbnuts conservatives who don't trust those new-fangled digital gizmos] For pseudo-random number generation in theory, along with tests on things therein being random, there are 155 pages worth of good stuff in Donald E. Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming," Chapter 3, Volume 2. I have the three-volume set and will entertain any offers of purchase (plus shipping costs)...provided I can trust the buyer (this group doesn't ensure my trust much...). bit bit |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
From: "John Smith" on Fri 29 Jul 2005 20:38
Len: Many computer studies have been done on those numbers stations attempting to correlate them with detectable events/changes/occurrences in the world--to deduce what they are about. Last time I really checked, some were claiming it had to do with banks, markets, money... That is all wet? As "wet" as the bottom of the Marianas Trench. Don't go there... wet bet |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Len:
10mhz? My gawd man, I can walk that fast! I stand behind what I said, no perfect random number generators exist, if you need a really good one--it can't be done with computer algorithms (but, the one doing our lottery is a really **** poor one--probably worse than your "no repeats for 913 year one @ 10mhz" even... grin It most EXACTLY becomes a question of, "How good of a random number generator do you need?" I grant you, most apps do not need that good of one, games of chance in reno/las vegas are ran off damn poor ones... Also, if you read about egg at princeton.edu, you will see that computer random number generators are really a bad idea, the human mind can influence results... on some quantum-metaphysical level it seems the mind has powers which we have only guessed about in fairy tales... I leave that to your further research however... Remember Len, we really do agree on most though... or, close enough... John wrote in message ups.com... From: John Smith on Jul 29, 1:12 pm an_old_friend: Perhaps spread spectrum is used by spies, who knows, or sat links--we will always catch only the poorest of spies--undoubtedly they DO NOT represent the "good ones." But, most radio is a poor vector for spies, the internet is a much more viable medium... Ahem...those "number stations" on HF aren't for sports scores or lottery numbers... :-) A true "random number generator" has escaped being ever realized in a practical form. Untrue, John. PRSG (Pseudo-Random Sequence Generators) have been in common use in both communications and instrumentation for about three decades now. Using just 9 standard digital logic packages with a 10 MHz clock, the PRSG I built for instrumentation would not repeat until 913 years had passed. Reference: Electronics Designer's Casebook Number 3, a collection of Electronics magazine articles published between February '78 and January '79. I was the author of that. "Electronics" magazine was a bi-weekly industry/subscription periodical published by McGraw-Hill; McGraw Hill morphed it into four separate monthlies. The "random noise" from the background radiation of the universe comes very, very close. No, does NOT "come close," that IS the definition of random. In computing, if a very high quality "random number generator" is needed, it will always be outboard (white noise generator.) No computer algorithm ever developed is able to generate REAL random numbers. Success is only measured in how close they can come to the ideal... Sigh. PERIODICITY is at question? I would say that a repeat period of a century or more is pretty dang good. Periodicity greater than that is found in the DES and some of the algorithms at the NSA. SOME finite periodicity is NECESSARY to set code keys and thus enabling a decode to start to prepare to get ready to begin. That just cannot be done with true random noise thingies. In some of the Swiss (formerly Swedish) Crypto AG products, a true natural random noise source generates the random key patterns for both encryption and decryption sequences. A problem there is that the decrypt sequence MUST be identical to the encrypt sequence and that decrypt sequence transported to a recipient. With the DES and similar PRSG-driven sequences, the decrypt key is NOT required to be sent separately...all that is required is to set the sequence at some pre-determined state (the "code key" enters that) and this aligns the sequence with the received sequence...a sync is possible and decrypt can proceed. As to "simple algorithm" periodicity, a 913 year pattern repeat at a 10 MHz clock is quite long. That was achieved with a 2^33-1 sequence bit pattern Exclusive-ORed with a 2^25-1 bit pattern. Each of the individual PRSGs had NO common factors in periodicity so they Ex-ORed to a pattern of 2.88 x 10^17 clock periods. That could be implemented on any PC (I did that just for funzies) with a 2 GHz clock and sequence faster than the hardware version clock at 10 MHz. So that one repeated about every 100 years... ... the "noise" from a large number of typists keyboards might be close enough, although not perfectly random, for some applications... The humans-replacing-monkeys (at the KGB) was taken from David Kahn's "The Codebreakers" and was a quote from someone else. Today, at this "late" hour of 5:15 PM PDT, thousands of WLANs are very busy within RF range of one another, NOT interfering with each other thanks to some clever and longer PRSGs. All those WLANs can also synchronize with one another should they have to start from power-down condition. Add to that the garage door openers which have a very short data burst on an RF carrier...add millions more in remote keyless entry automobile "watch fob" transmitters. Their pattern security is so good that they CAN and HAVE replaced mechanical counterparts in any environment. [yes, the auto fob transmitters have keys attached as a security in case the car battery goes kafooey...and for the mental/emotional security of the numbnuts conservatives who don't trust those new-fangled digital gizmos] For pseudo-random number generation in theory, along with tests on things therein being random, there are 155 pages worth of good stuff in Donald E. Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming," Chapter 3, Volume 2. I have the three-volume set and will entertain any offers of purchase (plus shipping costs)...provided I can trust the buyer (this group doesn't ensure my trust much...). bit bit |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC AND AKC SUCK $#!#! | CB | |||
The Power Of the AKC | CB | |||
another one bites the dust courtesy of the akc | CB | |||
N8WWM's Trace-route information | CB | |||
N8WWM's Household: link request | CB |