Markets Wired - Page 1075 of 1422 - Global Financial Market News and Press Releases

HTC America Settles FTC Charges It Failed to Secure Millions of Mobile Devices Shipped to Consumers

Mobile device manufacturer HTC America has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the company failed to take reasonable steps to secure the software it developed for its smartphones and tablet computers, introducing security flaws that placed sensitive information about millions of consumers at risk.

The settlement requires HTC America to develop and release software patches to fix vulnerabilities found in millions of HTC devices. In addition, the settlement requires HTC America to establish a comprehensive security program designed to address security risks during the development of HTC devices and to undergo independent security assessments every other year for the next 20 years.

HTC America, Inc., a leading mobile device manufacturer in the United States, develops and manufactures mobile devices based on the Android, Windows Mobile, and Windows Phone operating systems. HTC America has customized the software on these devices in order to differentiate itself from competitors and to comply with the requirements of mobile network operators.

The Commission charged that HTC America failed to employ reasonable and appropriate security practices in the design and customization of the software on its mobile devices. Among other things, the complaint alleged that HTC America failed to provide its engineering staff with adequate security training, failed to review or test the software on its mobile devices for potential security vulnerabilities, failed to follow well-known and commonly accepted secure coding practices, and failed to establish a process for receiving and addressing vulnerability reports from third parties.

To illustrate the consequences of these alleged failures, the FTC’s complaint details several vulnerabilities found on HTC’s devices, including the insecure implementation of two logging applications – Carrier IQ and HTC Loggers – as well as programming flaws that would allow third-party applications to bypass Android’s permission-based security model.

Due to these vulnerabilities, the FTC charged, millions of HTC devices compromised sensitive device functionality, potentially permitting malicious applications to send text messages, record audio, and even install additional malware onto a consumer’s device, all without the user’s knowledge or consent. The FTC alleged that malware placed on consumers’ devices without their permission could be used to record and transmit information entered into or stored on the device, including, for example, financial account numbers and related access codes or medical information such as text messages received from healthcare providers and calendar entries concerning doctor’s appointments. In addition, malicious applications could exploit the vulnerabilities on HTC devices to gain unauthorized access to a variety of other sensitive information, such as the user’s geolocation information and the contents of the user’s text messages.

Moreover, the complaint alleged that the user manuals for HTC Android-based devices contained deceptive representations, and that the user interface for the company’s Tell HTC application was also deceptive. In both cases, the security vulnerabilities in HTC Android-based devices undermined consent mechanisms that would have otherwise prevented unauthorized access or transmission of sensitive information.

The settlement not only requires the establishment of a comprehensive security program, but also prohibits HTC America from making any false or misleading statements about the security and privacy of consumers’ data on HTC devices. HTC America and its network operator partners are also in the process of deploying the security patches required by the settlement to consumers’ devices. Many consumers have already received the required security updates. The FTC encourages consumers to apply the updates as soon as possible.

The settlement with HTC America is part of the FTC’s ongoing effort to ensure that companies secure the software and devices that they ship to consumers. Earlier this month, the FTC introduced Mobile App Developers: Start with Security, a new business guide that encourages app developers to aim for reasonable data security. In addition, on June 4, 2013, the Commission will host a public forum on malware and other mobile security threats in order to examine the security of existing and developing mobile technologies and the roles that various members of the mobile ecosystem can play in protecting consumers.

The Commission vote to accept the consent agreement package containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 3-0-2, with Chairman Jon Leibowitz not participating and Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen recused. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through March 22, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.

Twitter Chat
FTC staff will host a Twitter Chat today from 12-1 p.m. ET to answer questions about the HTC America settlement. Follow @FTC and tweet questions with the hashtag #FTCpriv.

NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the respondent has actually violated the law. A consent order is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that the law has been violated. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC to Host Public Forum on Threats to Mobile Devices on June 4

The Federal Trade Commission will host a one-day public forum on June 4, 2013 addressing malware, viruses and similar threats facing users of smartphones and other mobile technologies.

As the use of mobile technology increases at a rapid rate and consumers take advantage of the technology’s benefits in large numbers, it is important to address potential threats that exist today, as well as those that may emerge in the future. The forum will bring together stakeholders such as technology researchers, industry members and academics to explore these issues.

The forum will focus on the security of existing and developing mobile technologies and the roles various members of the mobile ecosystem can play in protecting consumers from these types of security threats. The forum will serve to inform the Commission about the current mobile security environment and facilitate an exploration of potential challenges that may arise as consumer use of mobile technology continues to grow.

The Commission invites technology researchers and other interested parties to recommend topics for discussion and to submit requests to serve as panelists on a wide variety of topics affecting U.S. consumers. These could include emerging mobile security threats and trends, security challenges in the mobile environment and infrastructure, potential solutions to mobile threats, password and authentication strategies for lost or stolen devices, industry best practices for preventing or reducing risks associated with mobile devices and next generation products and services.

Recommendations for topics for discussion and requests to serve as panelists should be submitted electronically to [email protected] by March 28, 2013, and should include information about the parties’ expertise on the issues they propose to address, and complete contact information. The Commission will select panelists based on expertise and the need to represent a range of views about the issues. Panelists selected to participate will be notified by April 23, 2013. For questions, contact Emily Cope Burton at 202-326-2728 or Colleen Robbins at 202-326-2548. The FTC also invites those interested to submit written comments to [email protected] on any of the topics mentioned above.

The event is free and open to the public. The forum will be held at the FTC’s satellite building conference center, located at 601 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.

FTC Seeks Public Comments on Proposed Freedom of Information Act Fee Changes; Also Publishes Final Rule Making the FOIA Process More Transparent to the Public

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a Federal Register notice seeking public comment on proposed amendments to the agency’s fee rule and accompanying fee schedule for Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The proposed changes would also apply to fees for producing Commission information and records to members of the public through the Consumer Response Center and the Library.

The FTC also has issued a final rule updating the agency’s FOIA contact information and addressing a range of other FOIA-related technical amendments. The final rule implements the Open Government Act to more accurately reflect new FOIA services the agency provides and makes the process more transparent to the public.

In the first notice, the FTC seeks public comments on a range of proposed FOIA-related fee changes, including:

Prohibiting certain fees when agency responses are not timely;
Clarifying how duplication fees are determined;
Waiving all fees if the total chargeable amount is less than $25;
Updating the fees for microfiche and photocopying services;
Adding new fee categories for information provided on DVDs, CDs and videotapes;
Increasing the fees for the use of Express Mail to reflect actual agency costs;
Increasing the fees for providing formal certification services;
Adding descriptive information about the categories of FOIA requesters;
Clarifying that certain public materials are available for free; and
Updating information about how the agency can collect FOIA-related debts.

Public comments on the proposed changes are being accepted until March 29, 2013.

The second notice announcing a final rule adds a new category of materials to the FTC’s public record – public workshop transcripts and materials – and updates the FOIA rules to provide additional public information about the agency’s FOIA procedures. It also will help the FTC administer the FOIA program and keep it current with existing procedures. As the rule implementing the Open Government Act is final when published, there is no public comment period.

The Commission vote approving publication of the Federal Register notices was 4-0-1, with Chairman Jon Leibowitz not participating. (FTC File No. P072104; the staff contact is Richard Gold, Office of the General Counsel, 202-326-3355.)

FTC Action Halts Operation That Billed More Than $25 Million to Consumers’ Bank and Credit Card Accounts without Their Consent

At the Federal Trade Commission’s request, a federal court has temporarily halted an operation that allegedly used an intricate web of concealment to debit hundreds of thousands of consumers’ bank accounts and bill their credit cards more than $25 million without their consent. The court also froze the defendants’ assets and appointed a receiver to control the business pending trial.

According to the FTC’s complaint, the Ideal Financial Solutions defendants targeted financially vulnerable consumers who had never come in contact with them, and without authorization debited their bank accounts and charged their credit cards, usually for about $30. Those who disputed the charges were told they had purchased something, such as financial counseling or loan matching services, or assistance in completing a payday loan application. How the defendants got the consumers’ financial information is not known, but some consumers had recently applied for payday loans via the Internet, and entities that receive payday loan applications often sell the information to other parties.

The complaint alleged that, to avoid detection, the defendants created dozens of shell companies to open merchant accounts with payment processors that enable merchants to get customers’ money via electronic banking; the processors receive a fee for each transaction they handle. The defendants also allegedly registered more than 230 Internet domain names, often using identity-hiding services and auto-forward features.

As alleged in the complaint, debits and charges appeared on consumers’ bank and credit card statements with a telephone number and the name of one of more than 50 billing campaigns the defendants ran, each with multiple mail drops and addresses, including Debt2Wealth, Funding Assurance, and Avanix. Many consumers did not notice the debits and charges, which often caused them to incur bank penalty fees or overdraft charges due to insufficient funds. Others complained to their banks and often had the charges reversed, which was reflected in very high return rates – the rate of transactions rejected and returned by consumers or their banks.

Due to the high return rates, some payment processors terminated the defendants’ merchant accounts, and a Visa investigation led one payment processor to drop at least one merchant, according to the FTC. To avoid losing merchant accounts due to high return rates, the defendants allegedly took multiple unauthorized debits of a few pennies each, and then immediately refunded them before making a larger debit of about $30. By doing so, they inflated their total number of debits and reduced their return rate.

To handle the tens of thousands of complaints they received from consumers, the defendants set up a call center in St. George, Utah, and hired a company with call centers in the U.S., the Philippines, and El Salvador. When consumers asked how the defendants got their account numbers, call center agents were unable or unwilling to tell them. In one instance, an agent said, “l would like to make it clear that we do not have a copy of your application [for a payday loan or other services], but the IP (Internet Protocol) addresses and information that was submitted, in your name, as an application.”

The defendants named in the complaint are Ideal Financial Solutions Inc., Ascot Crossing LLC, Bracknell Shore Ltd., Chandon Group LLC, Avanix LLC, Fiscal Fitness LLC, Steven Sunyich, Michael Sunyich, Christopher Sunyich, Shawn Sunyich, Melissa Sunyich Gardner, and Kent Brown.

The Commission vote authorizing staff to file the complaint was 5-0. It was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. On February 14, 2013, the court halted the operation pending trial.

The FTC appreciates the assistance of the Utah Department of Commerce’s Division of Consumer Protection and the Arkansas Attorney General Office’s Consumer Protection Division in bringing this case.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook (link is external), follow us on Twitter (link is external), and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Settlement Bans Telemarketers from Selling Healthcare-Related Products

Telemarketers who allegedly tricked consumers into buying purported health insurance are permanently banned from selling healthcare-related products under a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission. The case is part of the FTC’s ongoing efforts to crack down on fraudsters who prey on vulnerable consumers seeking health insurance, including the uninsured, the unemployed, and those with pre-existing medical conditions.

In September 2012, the FTC charged Roy D. Hamilton and his wife, Judy M. Hamilton, and their companies, Health Service Providers, Inc., Magnolia Health Management Corporation, Magnolia Technologies Corporation, and Fav Marketing Inc. (HSP defendants), with fraudulently selling bogus health insurance for the Independent Association of Businesses (IAB). The HSP defendants allegedly called consumers who had submitted their contact information to websites that claimed to offer quotes for traditional health insurance or equivalent coverage. According to the FTC, after paying an initial fee ranging from $50 to several hundred dollars and a monthly fee ranging from $40 to $1,000, consumers eventually learned they had not purchased comprehensive health insurance, but were deceived into buying an IAB membership that supposedly provided discounts on services such as golf, travel, and some limited health related services and insured benefits.

In addition to the ban against selling healthcare-related products, the settlement order prohibits the HSP defendants from misrepresenting material facts about any goods or services, selling or otherwise benefiting from consumers’ personal information, and from violating the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule, including calling consumers on the Do Not Call Registry. The order also imposes an $11.8 million judgment that has been suspended following the HSP defendants’ surrender of assets to the FTC.

Litigation continues against the remaining defendants behind the allegedly fraudulent health insurance scheme: IAB Marketing Associates LP, Independent Association of Businesses, HealthCorp International Inc., JW Marketing Designs LLC, International Marketing Agencies, LP, International Marketing Management LLC, Wood LLC, James C. Wood, James J. Wood, Michael J. Wood, and Gary D. Wood. The FTC has also sought to amend its complaint against the remaining defendants in the case, adding two individuals as relief defendants who allegedly benefitted from the scheme but did not participate in it.

The Commission vote approving the consent order and authorizing the staff to file the amended complaint was 4-0-1, with Chairman Leibowitz not participating. The FTC filed its motion to amend the complaint on February 13, 2013, and the consent order was entered by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on February 19, 2013.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendant has actually violated the law. The consent order is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the defendant that the law has been violated. Consent orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

Robocaller Banned From Telemarketing in Settlement with FTC

The architect of an operation that allegedly distributed illegal robocalls offering credit card interest rate reduction programs, extended automobile warranties, and home security systems, is banned from telemarketing under a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission.

The FTC settlement against Roy M. Cox, Jr., is part of the FTC’s ongoing efforts to stop illegal robocalls. In December 2011, the FTC charged Cox and several related companies with illegally failing to transmit their name or their clients’ names on consumers’ caller ID displays when making their telemarketing calls, using generic names instead, such as “CARD SERVICES,” “CREDIT SERVICES,” or “PRIVATE OFFICE.” The FTC also alleged that they knew, or consciously avoided knowing, that they called phone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, and made pre-recorded sales calls to consumers without their written consent.

The settlement order bans Cox from telemarketing and imposes a $1.1 million civil penalty that will be suspended due to his inability to pay. The full penalty will become due immediately if he is found to have misrepresented his financial condition. The FTC and DOJ have asked the court to dismiss five of Cox’s co-defendants who could not be served or are defunct – Castle Rock Capital Management S.A., Capital Solutions Group S.A., Transfers Argentina S.A., Public Service, and Marketing Strategy Group – and will seek to have default entered against a sixth defendant.

The Commission vote to approve the proposed consent judgment was 3-0-2, with Commissioners Ohlhausen and Wright not participating. The Department of Justice filed the proposed consent judgment on behalf of the Commission in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The Court entered the consent judgment on January 31, 2013.

NOTE: This consent judgment is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the defendant that the law has been violated. Consent judgments have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

Statement of FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz on the U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of the Commission in the Phoebe Putney/Palmyra Park Hospital Case

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz issued the following statement concerning today’s unanimous ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on Phoebe Putney Health System’s acquisition of Palmyra Park Hospital in Albany, Georgia. The Court decided that the state action doctrine did not immunize the hospital acquisition from the federal antitrust laws.

“Today’s ruling is a big victory for consumers who want to see lower health care costs, and the Court’s opinion will ensure competition in a variety of other industries, as well.”

On April 20, 2011, the FTC filed a complaint in federal district court against Phoebe Putney’s acquisition of Palmyra, seeking to block the proposed combination of the only two hospitals in Albany. The Commission alleged that the deal would reduce competition significantly and allow the combined Phoebe/Palmyra to raise prices for general acute-care hospital services charged to commercial health plans, harming patients and local employers and employees. On June 27, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, Albany Division, dismissed the FTC’s complaint and denied its motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the deal from going forward.

The FTC appealed the district court decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which affirmed the judgment of the district court on December 9, 2011. On March 23, 2012, the Commission authorized the staff to request that the Solicitor General file a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, which subsequently agreed to hear the case.

The FTC currently has another case pending before the Supreme Court concerning an alleged anticompetitive pay-for-delay agreement involving the testosterone replacement drug AndroGel.

FTC Sends Refunds from Scheme That Allegedly Sold Bogus Plans to Lower Credit Card Interest Rate

The Federal Trade Commission mailed 330 refund checks to consumers who allegedly were duped by marketers using illegal robocalls to deceptively claim they could reduce consumers’ credit card interest rates. Under settlements entered by the court in 2011 as part of the FTC’s ongoing efforts to protect consumers in financial distress, the Dynamic Financial Group defendants were banned from selling debt relief services.

Nearly $350,000 is being returned to consumers; payments will be 100 percent of their loss. Consumers who receive the checks from the FTC’s refund administrator should cash them on or before April 16, 2013. The FTC never requires consumers to pay money or provide information before refund checks can be cashed. Those with questions should call the refund administrator, Gilardi & Co., LLC, at 1-888-211-7714, or visit www.FTC.gov/refunds.

FTC To Host Workshop Examining the Effects of Identity Theft on Older Americans

The Federal Trade Commission will host a one-day workshop on May 7, 2013, exploring how identity theft impacts older Americans. Seniors are particularly vulnerable to identity theft because they tend to have more assets and readily available cash than others. Identity thieves may also view seniors as attractive targets based on their belief that they may be more trusting or easier to exploit.

Given the serious and widespread harm caused by identity theft, the FTC has devoted significant resources towards combating the problem, acting on three main fronts: aggressively enforcing the law, serving as a clearinghouse for identity theft complaints, and educating consumers and businesses about identity theft.

The workshop, coinciding with Older Americans Month, will provide a forum for public-sector, private-sector, and consumer representatives to discuss and examine ways to inform and empower seniors and their caregivers on protecting personal information and resolving identity theft matters. The workshop is free and open to the public.
Topics may include:

A discussion of medical identity theft and why seniors are vulnerable on this front;
An analysis of how seniors might be impacted by tax and government benefits-related identity theft and how to safeguard their identity in light of the movement of government benefits away from paper;
An exploration of how older consumers are susceptible to identity theft in nursing home settings and assisted living situations, and how to minimize their exposure; and
Practical ideas for outreach to older consumers; examine how educational messages can best be conveyed, and who effective messengers might be.

Entities and organizations may submit requests to participate as panelists and may recommend topics for inclusion on the agenda. The requests and recommendations can be submitted electronically to [email protected]. Paper submissions should be mailed or delivered to: 600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Room H-113 (Annex B), Washington, DC 20580. Prospective panelists should submit a statement detailing their expertise on the issues to be addressed and contact information no later than April 5, 2013. Panelists will be selected based on expertise and the need to include a broad range of views.

The workshop will be held at the FTC’s satellite building conference center, 601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

FTC Staff Advises Oklahoma Physician Hospital Organization That it Will Not Recommend Antitrust Challenge to Proposed Formation of Clinically Integrated Multi-provider Network

The Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition has advised the Norman Physician Hospital Organization (Norman PHO) that staff has no present intention to recommend that the FTC challenge its proposed formation or operation of a clinically integrated health care network. Based on Norman PHO’s representations, staff concluded that the network’s proposed activities “appear unlikely to unreasonably restrain trade.”

Norman PHO requested the advisory opinion concerning its proposal to offer clinically integrated services as a way to achieve improved quality of care, reduced costs, and increased patient satisfaction. The network includes approximately 280 participating physicians and the hospitals in the Norman Regional Health System.

The proposal contemplates horizontal combinations or pricing agreements only in the provision of physician services. The network’s “operations will not involve horizontal agreements among competing providers of inpatient hospital services, or outpatient hospital and ambulatory care services, because Norman Regional Health System is the only provider of such services that will participate in the network.”

To implement its clinical integration program, Norman PHO has created a new organizational structure under which its participating physicians are actively engaged in a wide array of collaborative clinical activities, including developing clinical practice guidelines and physician performance measures, conducting peer review and corrective action processes, and designing and implementing quality improvement initiatives.

The staff opinion letter was signed by Markus H. Meier, Assistant Director in charge of the Health Care Division of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. It concludes that the “proposed clinical integration program offers the potential to create a high degree of interdependence and cooperation among its participating physicians and to generate significant efficiencies in the provision of physician services.” The letter also states that “Norman PHO’s proposed joint contracting appears to be subordinate to the network’s effort to improve efficiency and quality through the clinical integration of its participating physicians.” Therefore, FTC staff determined that the proposed joint pricing and contracting activities qualify for rule-of-reason analysis, rather than being subject to a per se bar under the antitrust laws.

Although a market analysis was not performed, the letter notes that Norman PHO appears to have the potential to exercise market power in the sale of its services. Concerns about market power, however, are mitigated by Norman PHO’s representations that it will not attempt to force payers to contract with it, and payers who do not want to contract with the network for any reason may bypass the network and contract individually with the participating providers, either directly or through other networks, and without interference from Norman PHO.

The letter concludes that Norman PHO’s proposed program “appears likely, on balance, to be pro-competitive or competitively neutral” and staff has no present intention to recommend an enforcement action. The letter, however, cautions that “staff’s current enforcement view likely would change to the extent that, for whatever reason, Norman PHO’s actual operations deviate substantially from its proposal . . . or otherwise prove to have anticompetitive effects.”

NOTE: The letter sets out the views of the staff of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, as authorized by the Commission’s Rules of Practice. It has not been reviewed or approved by the Commission. As the Commission’s Rules explain, the staff’s advice is rendered “without prejudice to the right of the Commission later to rescind the advice and, where appropriate, to commence an enforcement proceeding.”

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts: