Gnutella Forums  

Go Back   Gnutella Forums > Current Gnutella Client Forums > LimeWire+WireShare (Cross-platform) > New Feature Requests
Register FAQ The Twelve Commandments Members List Calendar Arcade Find the Best VPN Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

New Feature Requests Your idea for a cool new feature. Or, a LimeWire annoyance that has to get changed.


Welcome To Gnutella Forums

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, fun aspects such as the image caption contest and play in the arcade, and access many other special features after your registration and email confirmation. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! (click here) (Note: we use Yandex mail server so make sure yandex is not on your email filter or blocklist.)

If you have any problems with the Gnutella Forum registration process or your Gnutella Forum account login, please contact us (this is not for program use questions.) Your email address must be legitimate and verified before becoming a full member of the forums. Please be sure to disable any spam filters you may have for our website, so that email messages can reach you.
Note: Any other issue with registration, etc., send a Personal Message (PM) to one of the active Administrators: Lord of the Rings or Birdy.

Once registered but before posting, members MUST READ the FORUM RULES (click here) and members should include System details - help us to help you (click on blue link) in their posts if their problem relates to using the program. Whilst forum helpers are happy to help where they can, without these system details your post might be ignored. And wise to read How to create a New Thread

Thank you

If you are a Spammer click here.
This is not a business advertising forum, all member profiles with business advertising will be banned, all their posts removed. Spamming is illegal in many countries of the world. Guests and search engines cannot view member profiles.



           Deutsch?              Español?                  Français?                   Nederlands?
   Hilfe in Deutsch,   Ayuda en español,   Aide en français et LimeWire en françaisHulp in het Nederlands

Forum Rules

Support Forums

Before you post to one of the specific Client Help and Support Conferences in Gnutella Client Forums please look through other threads and Stickies that may answer your questions. Most problems are not new. The Search function is most useful. Also the red Stickies have answers to the most commonly asked questions. (over 90 percent).
If your problem is not resolved by a search of the forums, please take the next step and post in the appropriate forum. There are many members who will be glad to help.
If you are new to the world of file sharing please do not be shy! Everyone was ‘new’ when they first started.

When posting, please include details for:
Your Operating System ....... Your version of your Gnutella Client (* this is important for helping solve problems) ....... Your Internet connection (56K, Cable, DSL) ....... The exact error message, if one pops up
Any other relevant information that you think may help ....... Try to make your post descriptive, specific, and clear so members can quickly and efficiently help you. To aid helpers in solving download/upload problems, LimeWire and Frostwire users must specify whether they are downloading a torrent file or a file from the Gnutella network.
Members need to supply these details >>> System details - help us to help you (click on blue link)


Moderators

There are senior members on the forums who serve as Moderators. These volunteers keep the board organized and moving.
Moderators are authorized to: (in order of increasing severity)
Move posts to the correct forums. Many times, members post in the wrong forum. These off-topic posts may impede the normal operation of the forum.
Edit posts. Moderators will edit posts that are offensive or break any of the House Rules.
Delete posts. Posts that cannot be edited to comply with the House Rules will be deleted.
Restrict members. This is one of the last punishments before a member is banned. Restrictions may include placing all new posts in a moderation queue or temporarily banning the offender.
Ban members. The most severe punishment. Three or more moderators or administrators must agree to the ban for this action to occur. Banning is reserved for very severe offenses and members who, after many warnings, fail to comply with the House Rules. Banning is permanent. Bans cannot be removed by the moderators and probably won't be removed by the administration.


The Rules

1. Warez, copyright violation, or any other illegal activity may NOT be linked or expressed in any form. Topics discussing techniques for violating these laws and messages containing locations of web sites or other servers hosting illegal content will be silently removed. Multiple offenses will result in consequences. File names are not required to discuss your issues. If filenames are copyright then do not belong on these forums & will be edited out or post removed. Picture sample attachments in posts must not include copyright infringement.

2. Spamming and excessive advertising will not be tolerated. Commercial advertising is not allowed in any form, including using in signatures.

3. There will be no excessive use of profanity in any forum.

4. There will be no racial, ethnic, or gender based insults, or any other personal attacks.

5. Pictures may be attached to posts and signatures if they are not sexually explicit or offensive. Picture sample attachments in posts must not include copyright infringement.

6. Remember to post in the correct forum. Take your time to look at other threads and see where your post will go. If your post is placed in the wrong forum it will be moved by a moderator. There are specific Gnutella Client sections for LimeWire, Phex, FrostWire, BearShare, Gnucleus, Morpheus, and many more. Please choose the correct section for your problem.

7. If you see a post in the wrong forum or in violation of the House Rules, please contact a moderator via Private Message or the "Report this post to a moderator" link at the bottom of every post. Please do not respond directly to the member - a moderator will do what is required.

8. Any impersonation of a forum member in any mode of communication is strictly prohibited and will result in banning.

9. Multiple copies of the same post will not be tolerated. Post your question, comment, or complaint only once. There is no need to express yourself more than once. Duplicate posts will be deleted with little or no warning. Keep in mind a forum censor may temporarily automatically hold up your post, if you do not see your post, do not post again, it will be dealt with by a moderator within a reasonable time. Authors of multiple copies of same post may be dealt with by moderators within their discrete judgment at the time which may result in warning or infraction points, depending on severity as adjudged by the moderators online.

10. Posts should have descriptive topics. Vague titles such as "Help!", "Why?", and the like may not get enough attention to the contents.

11. Do not divulge anyone's personal information in the forum, not even your own. This includes e-mail addresses, IP addresses, age, house address, and any other distinguishing information. Don´t use eMail addresses in your nick. Reiterating, do not post your email address in posts. This is for your own protection.

12. Signatures may be used as long as they are not offensive or sexually explicit or used for commercial advertising. Commercial weblinks cannot be used under any circumstances and will result in an immediate ban.

13. Dual accounts are not allowed. Cannot explain this more simply. Attempts to set up dual accounts will most likely result in a banning of all forum accounts.

14. Video links may only be posted after you have a tally of two forum posts. Video link posting with less than a 2 post tally are considered as spam. Video link posting with less than a 2 post tally are considered as spam.

15. Failure to show that you have read the forum rules may result in forum rules breach infraction points or warnings awarded against you which may later total up to an automatic temporary or permanent ban. Supplying system details is a prerequisite in most cases, particularly with connection or installation issues.

Violation of any of these rules will bring consequences, determined on a case-by-case basis.


Thank You! Thanks for taking the time to read these forum guidelines. We hope your visit is helpful and mutually beneficial to the entire community.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old April 4th, 2008
Novicius
 
Join Date: April 4th, 2008
Posts: 1
kenny00064 is flying high
Default that smart junk filter

that smart junk filter should, when you click on something as junk, ask your reason that that particular file is junk. That way files like that in the future can be filtered as junk in the search results
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old May 22nd, 2008
Apprentice
 
Join Date: May 22nd, 2008
Posts: 7
tzxazrael is flying high
Default

whoa! beat me to it. this is the whole reason i came here!

i am COMPLETELY sick and tired of clicking "junk" on those 177KB, 3,462KB, and all the rest of those files that are obviously the same files over and over with simply /YOUR SEARCH PATTERN HERE/ echoed back as the filename.

all it needs is a really simple popup:

------------------------------------------------
Please select the criteria for this file being junk:

[this box could be the filename...] [filesize..] [some] [other] [fields]

[ OK ] [ CANCEL ]
------------------------------------------------

and then you just highlight whichever fields, or parts of the fields, you feel makes it a junk file.

like if your filename returned was
Sesame Street cute girl has shaking orgasm on webcam

you would just highlight the "cute girl has..." part.

or highlight the filesize on that one damn 3,462kb file that turns up on every damn search i've made in the last year.

PLEASE OH PLEASE YE MIGHTY LORDS OF LIMEWIRE!
YOUR HUMBLE PEONS BESEECH THEE!
SAVE US FROM THE TERRORS OF THE SPAM KINGS!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old May 31st, 2008
Disciple
 
Join Date: May 31st, 2008
Posts: 12
biohaze is flying high
Default

i dont think this is a good idea it would take me YEARS to do all that in the past 10 mins i have marked over 200 files as junk i am getting sick of it and i am takeing action since it we need a virus scan BEFORE upload this would solve the problem.

Make it MANDATORY. Dont let files be uploaded with out virus scan first this would solve our problem. I dont just mean with one program. I mean with Nortan, Bull Dog, AVG, Spybot search and destroy, etc . . .

Sure this would probally lag the uploads to the server but still at least it wouldnt be so junky
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old May 31st, 2008
Apprentice
 
Join Date: May 22nd, 2008
Posts: 7
tzxazrael is flying high
Default

and where precisely would this virus scanner be put?
the upload is from the (alleged) spammer's computer. from there it goes thru the "series of tubes" to the downloaders computer.

there is no 'central location' where all the files could be scanned before being made available to downloaders.

the point of this idea is that instead of marking hundreds of identical files as junk just because they have a different name.... and then new ones continue to show up and still need to be marked as junk.... you simply point out to the system -why- said file is junk. then the system can scan any results you get back and automatically junk anything that turns up.

a virus-scanner solution will not fix this. the problem originates at the source, and the source has no interest in fixing it -- the source doesn't even consider it broken. if you put a forced virus-scan limitation into it, then you're going to get someone who writes a hack for it because they don't want to use anti-virus... or wore because they are one of the ones deliberately distributing them.


me personally, i don't consider 99% of the junk results i get to even be potential viruses, simply because most of them are not executable files.
go ahead and paste a virus into an mp3 file; you'll get a bit of static, or a corrupted file, or the player will just ignore it. the players don't execute the code, they just read it.

to make an exxagerated comparison.. it would be like taking a sheet of player-piano music, and drawing the plans for a bomb on them. the player piano will just read the sheet and play the piano music automatically. and when it gets to the bomb, it just keeps on playing and can't recognize it. maybe you've damaged some of the holes the piano is reading so it screws a few notes up.

if you took the sheet out of the piano and processed it differently, sure, you could make a dangerous bomb off it. but the automated piano isn't capable of doing it, and neither are most modern media players*

*to note; make sure you turn off "automatically open links in media" wherever possible.. once the player open some random website, all guarantees are off. but to-date, i've only ever noticed this in .wmv files, and i learend a long time ago to filter out *.wmv with the existing junk filters.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old May 31st, 2008
Disciple
 
Join Date: May 31st, 2008
Posts: 12
biohaze is flying high
Default

the only way i could see something like this happening is if you use a checksum on programs that contain the viruses and block the ones with that checksum. But then still you can download a RAR file that is a working game and it could still contain a virus. So the only way to really do this would be through checksums.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old May 31st, 2008
Apprentice
 
Join Date: May 22nd, 2008
Posts: 7
tzxazrael is flying high
Default

but again, what compares the checksums?

if it's on the sender's computer, they'll just write a hack to get around it, and then people will be less careful because they assume 'the network is protecting us'.

if it's on the receivers' computer, we need to store a checksum for.. well.. every file limewire/gnutella has ever seen. will limewire be shipping with a new HDD to store that on now? "new limewire, better compression, only a 5gig dowload". and thats still the same as it being on the senders' computer anyways. plus what keep the list itself safe from hacking thru a virus obtained elsewhere?

and if we put it on the limewire central server -- oh wait, there still isn't one.

i hope i'm not coming off condescending here, i'm certainly not trying to. it would be a perfectly acceptable method of protection in a more limited, client/server type setup. like an MMO style game sending patches to the clients. in a peer-to-peer system, where thousands of new files a day might be seen, theres just no way to keep up.

every time limewiere started up it would have to scan & compare every file against its database, to make sure it hasn't changed. that might take hours if you're sharing say 1000 files, and need to scan, hash, then compare against the 100,000,000 files in the database.

if you edit an mp3 to clip 2-3 seconds of silence off at the end, guess what, it's a "new file".

and then if it finds say 1 or 2 files you added that aren't catalogued what does it do? send a report and ban you till they get processed?
or risk lettng you onto the network to share these potentially dangerous viruses? (even tho it's just your shopping list in a txt file, that you saved in the wrong directory).

and then on top of that.. who catalogues all these tens of hundreds of thousands of files? by my guessing, you'd need a handful of people working full time jobs, just to keep the database up to date.


and then from there, you still need to get that database out to the users. every limewire user downloading an update every time they start limewire that might potentially be larger than the installer itself.

coz sooner or later someone's going to accidentally shar their c:\windows\ folder, and 50- to 100,000 files go on the pile in one dump.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old June 1st, 2008
Disciple
 
Join Date: May 31st, 2008
Posts: 12
biohaze is flying high
Default

if theres no center server then what is goin to keep up with the criterias of the junk filters? The program it self? couldnt their possibly be a hack made for that?

A good way to keep up with checksums would be to make a file attached with the download that only limewire reads with a checksums everytime its searched if this checksums = the checksum of a virus mark as junk or completely stop shareing

If limewire checks the checksum and it doesnt add up dont allow it to share ( to prevent people from tampering with it)

I anit saying someone would have to keep up with all the checksums of the files loaded just the checksums of viruses (this would reduce work load)

But still yes their would probally be ways to hack this but THERE IS A WAY TO "HACK" (get around) any kind of security measure we can take espically if its programed into the program itself.

O ya what keeps up with what files are junk the individual programs on every computer or a server?

If kept on a server then the checksum thing would be more feasible because limewire is also haveing problems with bungholes marking LEGIT perfectly good files as junk so if this was controlled by a central server monitoring the files for viruses or empty files Screw wrong named fie thats what bitiz ticket is for if you don't use it before u download something your bound to run into trouble sooner or later?

What would stop these bungholes from MASS JUNKING perfectly good files? Wait maybe not mass junking but AUTO JUNKING good filesif theres no center server then what is goin to keep up with the criterias of the junk filters? The program it self? couldnt their possibly be a hack made for that?

A good way to keep up with checksums would be to make a file attached with the download that only limewire reads with a checksums everytime its searched if this checksums = the checksum of a virus mark as junk or completely stop shareing

If limewire checks the checksum and it doesnt add up dont allow it to share ( to prevent people from tampering with it)

I anit saying someone would have to keep up with all the checksums of the files loaded just the checksums of viruses (this would reduce work load)

But still yes their would probally be ways to hack this but THERE IS A WAY TO "HACK" (get around) any kind of security measure we can take espically if its programed into the program itself.

O ya what keeps up with what files are junk the individual programs on every computer or a server?

If kept on a server then the checksum thing would be more feasible because limewire is also haveing problems with bungholes marking LEGIT perfectly good files as junk so if this was controlled by a central server monitoring the files for viruses or empty files Screw wrong named fie thats what bitiz ticket is for if you don't use it before u download something your bound to run into trouble sooner or later?

What would stop these bungholes from MASS JUNKING perfectly good files? Wait maybe not mass junking but AUTO JUNKING good files

*edit*

O ya what what would reasons you could type in this box?

Virus: Will not work program doesnt have virus scan to scan all the files
Size: A lot of files have the sames size but arent all junk
Program not working right: How would filter be able to determine this?
wrong name: filter cant detect this
name: some files have same names but are the real deal

If there are anymore pretty sure filter wouldnt be able to real determine if the file is the real thing or not

About the only way i can see that a filter would be able to determine if something is the real thing is through a checksum seeing as how that is what a checksum is for since a computer doesnt know what the file is suppose to do it just understands what the file is telling it to do and doesnt think like humans do

Another thing about this on top of auto junking IF this reason based filter could work think how much of a battle it would become to fight autojunking we have enough problems dealing with it already!

Last edited by biohaze; June 1st, 2008 at 02:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old June 1st, 2008
Apprentice
 
Join Date: May 22nd, 2008
Posts: 7
tzxazrael is flying high
Default

limewire doesn't work around a central server. it never has. that's why it's "peer to peer" filesharing. "peers" being the end user computers, that is,everyone on the network. client/server models don't work in filesharing, because if anyone uploads copyrighted or other unacceptable data, the copyright holders come n and have that server shut down.

as for what keeps up with the junk filters; the destination computer handles it. same as it does now. just with better handling. and sure you could make a hack to get around it.. but why would you hack around your own chosen filters? we aren't asking for network-wide systems to be implemented, just a more successful endpoint system.

the problem with checksums is that all they can do is verify that the file is the same as the one that is originally sent. yes if a virus is checksummed, and that checksum is recordd and blocked, it eliminates that virus. except that if you take the file and add a small block of random data to the end, the checksum changes. meaning the same virus in a slightly different wrapper keeps going.

basically the direction your checksum idea is moving in is that limewire should have a built in anti-virus, and while i don't think it would be so bad, that's a lot more complicated than i would expect the devs to have time for.

we're asking for improvements on the existing junk-filter system; a simple interface to assign more detailed rules, to better keep out what we determine is crap.

and the same as the current system, it doesn't matter what i tell my computer is junk; it's my computer handling it, and has no effect on what your computer sees as junk or 'good'. mass-junking, auto-junking.. whatever. it only limits that user's possible results.

bitiz ticket? i completely couldn't follow this part. is this a program i haven't heard of?

as for the last block;
viruses; no you can't filter that, you're right. the dev's don't have the time, i'm sure, to add a completely new and unrelated (to any existing programming) subsystem not to mention keeping it up to date and such.

size; in 20 years of working with computers, i've found that very few files actually have the exact same size without being the same file. if i were to point out "that 3,462KB file" in a room full of people dealing with this problem, i bet most people would almost instantly know the file i'm referring to.

not working right; well how can any filter determine this? it only works by actually trying to use it. but it might still be a perfectly legit program.

wrong name; again same thing. i downloaded "german techno - track 10" from somewhere once. turned out to be Eminem. but it was still a valid file.


i suggested things like..
-parts- of a name. like when spammers echoyour results back to you and append a specific phrase to it like "cute girl has shaking orgasm on webcam" -- being able to tell it "this is junk because of this part of the filename".

-exact- filesize match. 3,462KB shows up too often, and is never legit. 177kb. 399kb. etc. the files that keep showing back up with your search results echoed as the filename. currently telling the system it's junk only blocks that name, so it shows up again with a different name on your very next search.

....
actually y'know honestly these are the only 2 filters i want added. we can already filter by filetype so all those .wmv, .vbs, .bat, .pif, .scr, etc.. are already blocked.

and between filetype and filesize, i imagine we could catch 80% of the junk out there. 95% when you add in the "catchphrases". the other 5% ? well hell, nothing's perfect, and i'm prepared to handle those one-on-one.


oh and ... no. checksums are for determinng if the file you received is the same as the file was sent. if the file has a virus attached? the checksum will still be perfectly valid. it'll still say "yes this file transferred correctly". they aren't just clipping viruses on randomly before sending files. and if one file is blocked, they'll just switch it up.

as for auto-junking? uh.. what?
the junk filters exist on your system, and your system only. if you are having a problem with it, then you've mis-junked something. junking something doesn't send any reporting to the network.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old November 15th, 2008
Apprentice
 
Join Date: November 15th, 2008
Posts: 9
Calabrese is flying high
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzxazrael View Post
whoa! beat me to it. this is the whole reason i came here!

i am COMPLETELY sick and tired of clicking "junk" on those 177KB, 3,462KB, and all the rest of those files that are obviously the same files over and over with simply /YOUR SEARCH PATTERN HERE/ echoed back as the filename.

all it needs is a really simple popup:

------------------------------------------------
Please select the criteria for this file being junk:

[this box could be the filename...] [filesize..] [some] [other] [fields]

[ OK ] [ CANCEL ]
------------------------------------------------

and then you just highlight whichever fields, or parts of the fields, you feel makes it a junk file.

like if your filename returned was
Sesame Street cute girl has shaking orgasm on webcam

you would just highlight the "cute girl has..." part.

or highlight the filesize on that one damn 3,462kb file that turns up on every damn search i've made in the last year.

PLEASE OH PLEASE YE MIGHTY LORDS OF LIMEWIRE!
YOUR HUMBLE PEONS BESEECH THEE!
SAVE US FROM THE TERRORS OF THE SPAM KINGS!
The junk filter is useless. It can not recognize the same exact file. On the other hand, if you accidentally download the file and do a new search, Limewire recognizes the file as having been downloaded. Therefore, the junk filter does not work.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old November 15th, 2008
Apprentice
 
Join Date: November 15th, 2008
Posts: 9
Calabrese is flying high
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzxazrael View Post
limewire doesn't work around a central server. it never has. that's why it's "peer to peer" filesharing. "peers" being the end user computers, that is,everyone on the network. client/server models don't work in filesharing, because if anyone uploads copyrighted or other unacceptable data, the copyright holders come n and have that server shut down.

as for what keeps up with the junk filters; the destination computer handles it. same as it does now. just with better handling. and sure you could make a hack to get around it.. but why would you hack around your own chosen filters? we aren't asking for network-wide systems to be implemented, just a more successful endpoint system.

the problem with checksums is that all they can do is verify that the file is the same as the one that is originally sent. yes if a virus is checksummed, and that checksum is recordd and blocked, it eliminates that virus. except that if you take the file and add a small block of random data to the end, the checksum changes. meaning the same virus in a slightly different wrapper keeps going.

basically the direction your checksum idea is moving in is that limewire should have a built in anti-virus, and while i don't think it would be so bad, that's a lot more complicated than i would expect the devs to have time for.

we're asking for improvements on the existing junk-filter system; a simple interface to assign more detailed rules, to better keep out what we determine is crap.

and the same as the current system, it doesn't matter what i tell my computer is junk; it's my computer handling it, and has no effect on what your computer sees as junk or 'good'. mass-junking, auto-junking.. whatever. it only limits that user's possible results.

bitiz ticket? i completely couldn't follow this part. is this a program i haven't heard of?

as for the last block;
viruses; no you can't filter that, you're right. the dev's don't have the time, i'm sure, to add a completely new and unrelated (to any existing programming) subsystem not to mention keeping it up to date and such.

size; in 20 years of working with computers, i've found that very few files actually have the exact same size without being the same file. if i were to point out "that 3,462KB file" in a room full of people dealing with this problem, i bet most people would almost instantly know the file i'm referring to.

not working right; well how can any filter determine this? it only works by actually trying to use it. but it might still be a perfectly legit program.

wrong name; again same thing. i downloaded "german techno - track 10" from somewhere once. turned out to be Eminem. but it was still a valid file.


i suggested things like..
-parts- of a name. like when spammers echoyour results back to you and append a specific phrase to it like "cute girl has shaking orgasm on webcam" -- being able to tell it "this is junk because of this part of the filename".

-exact- filesize match. 3,462KB shows up too often, and is never legit. 177kb. 399kb. etc. the files that keep showing back up with your search results echoed as the filename. currently telling the system it's junk only blocks that name, so it shows up again with a different name on your very next search.

....
actually y'know honestly these are the only 2 filters i want added. we can already filter by filetype so all those .wmv, .vbs, .bat, .pif, .scr, etc.. are already blocked.

and between filetype and filesize, i imagine we could catch 80% of the junk out there. 95% when you add in the "catchphrases". the other 5% ? well hell, nothing's perfect, and i'm prepared to handle those one-on-one.


oh and ... no. checksums are for determinng if the file you received is the same as the file was sent. if the file has a virus attached? the checksum will still be perfectly valid. it'll still say "yes this file transferred correctly". they aren't just clipping viruses on randomly before sending files. and if one file is blocked, they'll just switch it up.

as for auto-junking? uh.. what?
the junk filters exist on your system, and your system only. if you are having a problem with it, then you've mis-junked something. junking something doesn't send any reporting to the network.
As you sound far more knowledgeable about computers than myself, I would like to ask what seems to me a very simple question. If Limewire can recognize the same file when it comes to placing a check mark or other icon indicating that I have downloaded it and still follow that same file every time it comes up in a search, why can't the junk file do the same? Everything I mark as junk comes back up just fine again and again.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.

Copyright © 2020 Gnutella Forums.
All Rights Reserved.