Note
Access to this page requires authorization. You can try signing in or changing directories.
Access to this page requires authorization. You can try changing directories.
The information published in this post is now out-of-date and one or more links are invalid.
—IEBlog Editor, 20 August 2012
My name is John, and I work on the Internet Explorer team. It's a little hard to explain my actual function on the team, but my current official title is "Development Manager". I'm also something of an adrenaline junkie. I'm big into back country and park/pipe snow boarding, semi-closed circuit rebreather and mixed gas diving, hiking and climbing up and around Mount Rainer, and spelunking into Internet Explorer code and architecture (I’m not sure which of my passions is most challenging). Frankly, I tend to agree with a lot of the criticism that has accumulated over the past several years and is being voiced on this blog. The opportunity to make this better is exactly why I love (or is it lust?) to work on the IE team.
There is something liberating about working on a difficult problem. I think it removes the fear of failure that freezes a lot of people in their tracks. It also lets you take bigger, bolder steps forward than you might otherwise take. For some reason, once a team "gels" under this sort of pressure and becomes motivated to accomplish the impossible, it seems to become unstoppable. Whatever it is, it definitely is addicting to work in the types of teams that result from facing these sorts of challenges. IE has always been one of these teams as far back as I can remember.
The IE team's most important challenge today, and consequently the area of the team's largest investment in blood and sweat, is providing our users with a trustworthy browsing experience. In conventional software development, it is relatively easy to know your competition. To win, all you have to do is build a better product than they do. Today, we've got a new kind of opponent who is leaner, faster and far more devious and ingenious than any we have encountered in the past. I’m talking about the malicious hackers who lurk in the seedy corners of the Internet. These hackers have learned to turn our own creation against us, and most importantly, they are using this knowledge to do real harm to our users. This is why my team and I take this challenge very personally, and why we are especially proud of the hard work that we put in to Internet Explorer in XPSP2. If you haven't done so all ready, and you care about your computer's security at all, I strongly encourage you to install and run RC2 today, and the RTM version when it comes out.
The problem with compatibility (and the rest of the world) is that while we would all like to see things as black and white, they really smear into varying shades of grey. Different customers have different expectations of the product and different understanding of the specification - sometime so different that they conflict directly with one another. It's inevitable that once a product ships, especially an extremely complex and sophisticated platform component like IE, someone will come to depend on behavior that someone else would consider a bug. Combine this with aggressive security and performance objectives, and you have a nearly impossible challenge before you. But like I said earlier, the IE team thrives on exactly this sort of challenge. And, we're not afraid to move the bar in a thoughtful way when it's in the best interest of our customers. Consider this (perhaps poorly titled) article; while we continually strive for compatibility, this author notes some recent issues.
I apologize up-front for being vague; there are many real world examples and challenging investigations that I'd love to share the details of with you. Unfortunately, I can't disclose details of how my team and I deal with security investigations. My goal is to find ways to share as much of this information with you as possible. If it helps, it is our full time job to solve these sorts of issues. Walking the razor's edge between security and compatibility is a challenging job, but it's a job that we love to do, a job that we are passionate about, and a job at which we will not accept failure at any cost. As I've said before, take a hard look at XPSP2; it's a preview of good things to come from this team.
A bunch of my teammates and I will be hanging around BlackHat and Defcon this week. It's a great conference, and while most of the sessions tend to cater more to the IT Pro crowd, I've found a lot of the talks to be really informative. At the very least, taking a week to step back from the minute details of client side security to try to become immersed in the bigger problem of Internet/Networking Security has been enlightening, and something I want to share with the rest of my team. It's also a chance to meet and talk directly to the folks who find security issues and report them. All in all, I expect this to be a good conference this year, with a lot of opportunity to stay abreast of what is happening in our community. We'll be traveling somewhat incognito, but if you happen to be there and think you recognize one of us, feel free to stop and say hello.
// John
Comments
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"The IE team's most important challenge today, and consequently the area of the team's largest investment in blood and sweat, is providing our users with a trustworthy browsing experience."
Let me be honest here. Personally, I can't say that I've been impressed with the rash of security holes in the past as well as recently. It's going to take a lot of effort to convince me to switch back to using IE again. And I believe there are many people that probably feel the same way. In addition, there are other issues with CSS, but I think that's been covered many times before.
It is nice to see this blog and the efforts to communicate to the masses. I don't think you guys have an easy task ahead of you, but my hats off to you for the uphill battle.
"...the IE team thrives on exactly this sort of challenge. And, we're not afraid to move the bar in a thoughtful way when it's in the best interest of our customers."
Well, perhaps this blog is the first step then. I hope you're taking notes of the customer feedback here.
Good luck.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
On the subject on W2K (well JP mentioned it), are any of the changes made to IE for SP2 likely to make it back into older versions of Windows, as surely the security issues still apply to W2K?
Thanks.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Your mark-up in this post is ... interesting. Are you sure you wanted the page to look like this (in normal browsers)?
http://www.monkeyfood.com/thestuff/food/Screenshots/IEBlogLayout.pngAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I like the new ActiveX options in XP Service Pack 2 (go away and never bother me again rocks!). However, I am dismayed that you are currently only targetting XP - you've done a good job with some of the enhancements, and other Windows OS versions deserve them too.
What I wouldn't mind seeing here is a list of all the new XP Service Pack 2 features, and then let people rate them on how good they are. You might see a trend towards Security/UI/Addons or Addons/Security/UI - i.e. what is important to most.
Although security should be a bit more inherent than it has been though...
Oh yeah, please add Printing to your todo list!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Was something done differently with this post as opposed to the others?
I read via the RSS syndicated feed, and the page on which I do the reading defaults to white text on a black background - previous posts have shown up with no problems, but this post came through black-on-black ...Anonymous
January 01, 2003
FYI.
There were some issues with the layout of this post that I have made an effort to correct. It should look better now.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
What about all the Win2K/9x users. Do their secuirty holes stay open?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Yup, would seem like it. IE only gets updated in XP SP2, so I'm guessing the overall politic on this issue is basically to force people to upgrade to XP, thus raking in more cash. Of course, this is obvious enough to have been written about in various places ;-).Anonymous
January 01, 2003
how ironic is that - a browser manufacturer that can't even produce nice markup ;) even geeks don't seem to be able to use wysiwyg tools.
"I’m talking about the malicious hackers who lurk in the seedy corners of the Internet. These hackers have learned to turn our own creation against us, and most importantly, they are using this knowledge to do real harm to our users. This is why my team and I take this challenge very personally"
only hackers? sorry? whole companies have. and don't take it personally, that looks like they think they want to harm you and not do anything else.
you shouldn't take it personally, be sorry. i'm serious. people have been tricked to spend money (sometimes without noticing) on services they don't want, because of the bad code that the ie team produced. (bad code as in "if it's good it doesn't do anything bad")Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Atn: markup hawks - give it up already! I've had my fill of hand-coding HTML for blog entries (that being the only option if you use Blogger's web-based posting form), and it's more important that the information is communicated than the exact markup of that information.
These days, I use BlogJet, which appears to be written in Delphi - and uses IE for its editor window. This leads to a few more  s than strictly necessary, but you know what? I can't be bothered to fix it.
John's post was apparently written with Word as the HTML editor which as we all know is oriented towards hacking HTML to work as a good round-trip format for Word primarily and as a down-level viewing format a very poor second.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Ironically, when you posted this:
"Today, we've got a new kind of opponent who is leaner, faster and far more devious and ingenious than any we have encountered in the past."
I thought you meant firefox! And I'm not kidding... it's a shame when an independent organization puts out a better quality product than a company of this stature.
I used to be a print and web designer solely PC -- but it seems MS has ignored it's designers and I made my switch five years ago. I've not regretted it... but I have regretted having to write extra work to get my web designs to work on IE. I still find it ironic that this site wasn't even built with quality design or expert level coding.
How can you build a quality application when something as simple and lower on the food chain as XHTML/CSS can't even be served up properly? I just think it's an obvious expression of the MS community -- they care more about their company, than their users and their designers. You've shown me nothing else to think otherwise.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hey Mr Whatever... can you more specific about printing? A change to the defulat template? Are there options that aren't available that you think are necessary? Bad behavior in how some current options work? I can't tell....Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
JP: 'Do you guys meet with any other browser makers? Trade tips? Or is it kept very "Men in black--you won't remember this in 1 second"?'
Nah - Microsoft like to do things on their own, rather than work with other browser-makers. (e.g. http://www.mozilla.org/press/mozilla-2004-06-30.html)Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hi Dean,
Yes, of course.
The default print settings always lead to the right hand edge of the page being cut off. If I chop the (left and right) margins down to zero, it fits the whole page on just fine - but I have to do this on a per site/page basis. If you want, I can post some screen grabs somewhere for you to look at. It would be excellent for the defaults to be different/configurable by policy, as this gets all of our users everytime.
btw, thanks for asking this question, says something very good about http://blogs.msdn.com/ieAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Hello;
This is my first comment here. I won't bother expressing my frustration and aggrevation in using Microsoft (I forgot to put a TM, am I gonna get sued?) Software, I'll stick to the overall topic of Internet Explorer.
My issues are concerning Internet Explorer not complying with the W3C web standards. The designers process:
* Design your site in a standards compliant browser
* Be happy that it views brilliantly in evert other standards compliant browser
* Spend 5 hours brutalising your (X)HTML and CSS so that it displays well in IE
...geez, this site doesn't even validate. Why bother giving it a DTD? Does this not show complete disregard/disrespect for the Standards put fourth by the W3C? On the very blog of the team that produces the world's most popular web browser?
Please guys, move forward. Web Standards are now being widely accepted, this isn't going to slack. IE is the designer's problem. Fix our problem.
Thank you.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Re printing issues and Mr Whatever: thanks! yes, if you can point to one or two specifics sites with screengrabs I'd appreciate it. I'm not sure whether I just haven't noticed the issue (e.g. cut off on the sites I choose to print aren't significant) or if there's something more subtle going on.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
opensourcing internet explorer will be a very successful move from microsoft. hope you are at least considering it.
love your workAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I, of course, am the best at every thing I do - including skiing, and everyone is a minion in comparision to my greatness.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
^^^haha, i wonder who posted that? I'm guessing Alex.
You must be pretty stupid, as my point is that people who brag about heli-skiing/boarding suffer from the exact same attitude that your trying to pass off as mine by posting as me... I didn't even imply that i did the above sport, or was good at it.
in other words... FCK YOU! fake realitybath poster.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Found this in the Opera forums today:
---
1. Have you recently switched from browsing with Internet Explorer to Opera?
2. Are you located in the US?
3. Interested in maybe being contacted by the New York Times?
If you said yes to ALL three questions.
Then let us know!
We are looking for people like you right now!
---
By the way, this Post Comment section does not display properly in Opera 7.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
realitybath, it is against the rules to post using another person's name here. The site owners can determine that easily. But since you seem to troll like snowknight and some other idiots, I have added you to the list below. Anybody who wants to omit slashdot idiots comments can do so using the following bookmarklet.
javascript:(function(){var l=document.getElementsByTagName('a');for (var x=l.length-1;x--;){if (l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('Thomas')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('Jim')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('realitybath')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('Debran')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('The Wolf')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('snowknight')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('Wise')!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf('I Hate It')!=-1 ) l[x].parentNode.parentNode.style.display='none'}})();
Some of the slashdotters, like snowknight, harass people in their own blogs by posting to their blogs if they don't like what they hear here. So be aware when you leave your site address here.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
It is good to know the IE team is investing a considerable amout of effect into improving it's security.
I do afraid however, that those who are sitting "at the big chair" are not providing you as much resources as you should have to fix important security holes on a timely manner.
The following mozilla security bug, rated by secunia as MC:
http://secunia.com/advisories/12160/
The FD occured 2 days ago, as of today, the bug is fixed on closed and fixed on CVS, and it will not be long before binary updates for both offical and unoffical builds appear.
On the other hand, a more serious bug(as rated by secunia) still remain unfixed for 15 days:
http://secunia.com/advisories/12048/
An additional bug is unfixed for almost a month(while fixed in recent mozilla releases, and backported by unoffical vendors)
http://secunia.com/advisories/11966/
It's really a shame your department seems to get less resources than the mozilla.org staff when it comes to security...:-(Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Starman,
The problem with opera can be worked around with a user stylesheet:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2004/07/23/193152.aspx#193388Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Thanks for the tip Jim. I'll just use IE or Firefox for posting here until someone fixes the blog code. I'm not sure I understand why the IE Team chose .Text when there are many good quality standard complaint blogging systems available with better features.
More bad news for IE: Sydney Morning Herald article recommends users drop IE and use Firefox.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/26/1090693888524.htm
Actual Frontpage (in PDF) http://www.smh.com.au/frontpage/2004/07/27/frontpage.pdfAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Security aside, W3C Standards are what it's all about...until IE (developed by Microsoft, which has the most resources on Earth and, I believe, is a member of that standards-development body) will accept that developers want standards for valid, everyday life reasons (and not just to bash Microsoft), then developers will indeed bash MS.
Adobe and Macromedia are just two examples of companies that have excellent relations with their customers: Photoshop artists are respected, Dreamweaver developers are courted, etc. - none of us outside of Microsoft need Bill Gates to come do our dishes for us (we're not asking MS to do everything), but the year-after-year, arrogant disregard for what actual CUSTOMERS want is beginning to reap its proper rewards.
A Wish-List for IE?:
1 - FULL native support for CSS 1, 2, and as much of 3 as possible
2 - FULL native support for MathML (yes, real people actually do want, and need, this) - think scientists, mathematicians, researchers, statisticians, etc.
3 - FULL native support for PNG
4 - FULL native support for SVG
5 - FULL native support for XML and XHTML (delivered either as html or xml)
6 - Tabbed Browsing
7 - pop-up blocking (customizeable by site)
8 - NO ActiveX, Smart Tags integration or dependencies
9 - NO integration with the OS
10 - NO integration with other Office products
11 - SMALL Core Footprint, with the ability for plug-in/extension development to provide for more specific features
12 - DROP Alexa: it's spyware
13 - FIX IE's printing bug, where it prints something like "file://C:DOCUME~1(name)LOCALS`1TempNNL02KNO.htm" instead of simply printing a web page's actual URL
Until such time as IE sports some of these basic, necessary features, here are a few resources that are more useful than the way-out-of-date marketing...opps, sorry, technical, info provided by Microsoft:
http://www.google.com/search?q=IE%27s+shortcomings&sourceid=firefox&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CategoryBrowserBug
http://www.positioniseverything.net/index.php
http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/css/supportkey/syntax.htm
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html
http://westciv.com/style_master/academy/browser_support/index.html
http://nemesis1.f2o.org/bugs
http://www.stopdesign.com/log/2004/01/26/ie-factor.html
http://www.galaxygoo.org/blogs/archives/000528.html
http://geocities.com/csssite/index.xml
http://www.mozilla.org/start/1.0/guide/product.html#standards
http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/why/
http://texturizer.net/firefox/extensions/
Sorry, but you'll need Mozilla, Firefox, Netscape 7.1, or other Gecko-based browser to see some of these sites properly, since IE doesn't fully support standards such as MathML, SVG, PNG, CSS, etc.
PLEASE, listen to us...some of us actually DO like IE...but it has caused more trouble than any other single piece of software is many of our lives...and I'm not saying that to be mean or make you feel bad.
I would LOVE to see an IE with incredible standards support and tough-as-nails security...wouldn't happy developers constitute a small (or maybe not-so-small) army of marketers eager to tout the benefits of such an IE to all their customers, if they had a reliable browser from you?
That just seems like good business.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Have a look at Case Number SRQ040127600097, I already emailed you about it, the base behind the 'bug' will boost IE's security by many miles. Get back at me if you want to see a life working (and free) scenario.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
You can't rip out ActiveX - that would hurt alot of web (okay, intranet) applications.
Standards are cool - write once, run everywhere, but I think alot of the problems today have come from the fact that at one point, IE was far ahead of what the standards could supply.
Then development appeared to stop.
How's Internet Explorer for Longhorn shaping up like? How much of the IE teams' time is spent on it?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Item 1 :: I found this statement far too dramatic: "a new kind of opponent who is leaner, faster and far more devious and ingenious than any we have encountered in the past. I’m talking about the malicious hackers who lurk in the seedy corners of the Internet." Isn't that a little black and white? A bit over-dramatic? I prefer my blog entries to be informative without the hyperbole.
Item 2 :: Dean, you are seriously not aware that most pages print with their right sides lopped off in IE because it fails to reflow text to fit the page width rather than the set table width (intended for the screen)? I find that staggering. It's been a problem since....1997 at least. How can the IE team have not used IE often enough to not notice?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"Some of the slashdotters, like snowknight, harass people in their own blogs by posting to their blogs if they don't like what they hear here. So be aware when you leave your site address here."
Hold on a minute! Since when have I posted links to "my blog" (which doesn't exist btw). Unless there has been another "snowknight" pretending to be me, will you stop making baseless accusations?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hello John... fellow Jon here. :)
Fantastic weblog here. I myself used to live in Olympia and have fond memories of Ranier on the horizon from there. Truly a work of art.
I'm posting to inquire about the acronym RTM. Does this in fact refer to "Released to Market", or does it have more sinister meanings?
...
Obviously, I'm not at all serious in asking the above trivial question, however, doing so hints at an infamous problem in IE that is no doubt under development for Longhorn. You know what it is I'm refering to :)
As one of the hordes of standards proletariat designers (poor and desperate), I am currently in debate with myself on whether to use <abbr> on client's websites in hopes of future support by IE, or if I should simply use the less semantic <acronym> when marking up abbreviations? Not really a complaint, persay, but a sort of "future-proofing" that I can reference to let other designers know your stance on the situation. Acronyms are far more widespread and need defining 8 times more often than abbreviations, but a little addition would help in the long term.
Honestly, it's not as important an issue as some people have made it out to be, but an answer (or at least a subtle hinting) as to the future incorporation of the element without the need for "hackish" techniques would solve mine and others' relentless internal dialogues.
Thank you for your involvement in this aspect of development, and I hope to spend many more hours reading this blog.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
well look what i did there.
I got caught up in the mt. Rainer reference and posted the above comment in the wrong article/section.
I apologize that my above post has no relationship to anything at all having to do with security. Feel free, however, to address the comment if you see fit to.
Won't happen again... there's already too much "qustionable commenting" within this blog as is.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
starman
The suckerfish menus (link of article) are amazing. Thanks for the great link.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Jon Kennedy,
Make use of Dean Edwards IE7 script. It corrects for IE6's lack of <abbr> support.
http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I knew the IE Blog was going to be entertaining. Here's a recent post, with gives one some insight as to the mentality of the IE when it comes to security....Anonymous
January 01, 2003
RTM stands for "released to manufacturing". RC stands for "release candidate".
Many companies besides Microsoft use these terms.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The title of this post is wrong. The correct name is "Welcome to Internet Explorer inSecurity"Anonymous
January 01, 2003
can you fix exploits in 24 hours like firefox?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
internet explorer what?
security?
best joke this morning!
lol!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
omg, what are you doing all day John? I thought 'security' didn't appear in the MS dictionary.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
this site is a HOAXAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The big difference between IE and Mozilla is attitude...not only do they fix security problems fast, but they're VERY into making their browser REALLY secure, and have just implemented an idea that I suggested a few days ago to you guys: pay those who find security problems.
Check this out:
http://www.mozilla.org/press/mozilla-2004-08-02.htmlAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The truth is that Microsoft has a habit of producing bad software - probably due to being closed sourced and the limited minds can't produce anything else. It "looks" pretty on the outside, but, that's as far as the beauty goes.
Linux is a wonderful product, which is winning the OS war, by the way, despite what you want to believe, because practically the entire world is working on it in some way - it's open source. The source code for Microsoft products is kept secret and hidden, thus, severly limiting the amount of people who can work on it and, therefore, limiting its quality.
My suggestions is thus. Open ALL the source code for Microsoft products, thereby allowing more folks to improve it. Or keep it closed and continue to wane until such time as Microsoft products are no longer wanted by the public at all.
Microsoft Corp. is going to lose the revenue generated by it's Microsoft Windows OS's. Either by opening the source code to the public, or by the public demand for the products dying out. Revenue generated by MS Windows OS's is going to be lost, one way or another.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The truth is that Microsoft has a habit of producing bad software - probably due to being closed sourced and the limited minds can't produce anything else. It "looks" pretty on the outside, but, that's as far as the beauty goes.
Linux is a wonderful product, which is winning the OS war, by the way, despite what you want to believe, because practically the entire world is working on it in some way - it's open source. The source code for Microsoft products is kept secret and hidden, thus, severly limiting the amount of people who can work on it and, therefore, limiting its quality.
My suggestions is thus. Open ALL the source code for Microsoft products, thereby allowing more folks to improve it. Or keep it closed and continue to wane until such time as Microsoft products are no longer wanted by the public at all.
Microsoft Corp. is going to lose the revenue generated by it's Microsoft Windows OS's. Either by opening the source code to the public, or by the public demand for the products dying out. Revenue generated by MS Windows OS's is going to be lost, one way or another.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Ian, please stop spamming.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
No, he is spamming. He's copied and pasted the exact same comment onto most of the entries on this blog. I wasn't referring to the double comment.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
where abouts have you been diving? My fav is Sharm El SheikhAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
May 26, 2009
PingBack from http://backyardshed.info/story.php?title=ieblog-welcome-to-internet-explorer-securityAnonymous
May 29, 2009
PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=ieblog-welcome-to-internet-explorer-securityAnonymous
May 31, 2009
PingBack from http://outdoorceilingfansite.info/story.php?id=23529Anonymous
May 31, 2009
PingBack from http://outdoorceilingfansite.info/story.php?id=5893Anonymous
May 31, 2009
PingBack from http://woodtvstand.info/story.php?id=4067Anonymous
May 31, 2009
PingBack from http://hammockstandsite.info/story.php?id=691Anonymous
June 02, 2009
PingBack from http://woodtvstand.info/story.php?id=45255Anonymous
June 02, 2009
PingBack from http://hammockstandsite.info/story.php?id=8267Anonymous
June 09, 2009
PingBack from http://toenailfungusite.info/story.php?id=5984Anonymous
June 13, 2009
PingBack from http://hairgrowthproducts.info/story.php?id=1902
