DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction 1 Introduction A botnet is a network of compromised computers (called bots) that can be remotely controlled by an attacker through a predefined command and control (C&C) channel such as Internet Relay Chat (IRC), Peer-to-Peer (P2P) or Web-based protocols [1]. Botnets have been recognized as the biggest threat to the Internet because of the mag- nitude and potency of attacks afforded by their combined bandwidth and processing power. Attacks from botnets include DDoS attacks, spamming, traffic sniffing, key logging, identity theft and spreading malware [2]. These types of attacks used to happen before due to the appearance of computer viruses and worms, however, with the emergence of botnets, the scope, sophistication as well as damage of these attacks have been raised to a much higher level. For example, since 2006, email account holders have experienced an unprecedented growth of unsolicited 1 2 Introduction emails (also called spam). It is interesting to learn why spam has grown so quickly despite extensive efforts of the leading IT companies (such as Microsoft) that have produced a myriad of anti-spam software tools. One reason seems to be that spam is profitable. It is a cheap and efficient way of advertising and luring unexpected users to give out their private data and/or download malware. Even during the economic downtime in 2009, the group of Russian spammers behind most Viagra spam still raked in an average of $4000 a day [3]. Spam has gained a prominence because it is a crucial component in many cyber-crime activities. An interesting kind of spam is phishing. Phishing tries to coax naive users into giving up access to their bank accounts or credit card information. The stolen bank creden- tials are used to transfer money or withdraw money from victims' bank accounts while stolen credit card information is used to buy products online. Collections of stolen bank credentials are themselves products that are being sold online. In general, ac- cording to data presented in [4], a single phishing attack costs a US financial institution approximately $50,000, which gives the loss of more than $50 per account. The dramatic increase of spam is due to the distributed nature of botnets. A large collection of bots working independently (although co-ordinated by their botmasters) is able to produce billions of spam emails per day. At the same time, it is very diffi- cult to block the influx of spam. The designers of malware use different techniques to make the bots stealthy. Once a computer has been infected by a bot, it behaves in the same way as before the infection. This is quite different from an infection by a virus, when the performance of the infected machine deteriorates dramatically. To minimise a chance of detection, bots are active only when they perform necessary actions and most of the time are inactive. There is a well developed anti-spam technology that is based on content filters, black lists (blocks emails coming from addresses or IPs in the list), white lists (only ac- cept emails from addresses or IPs in the list) and challenge/response system (eg use 3 Captcha to verify if the sender is not a bot). Unfortunately, traditional anti-spam tools fail when spam is generated by botnets. Besides using different techniques to avoid content detection and break Captcha to pass challenge/response system, spam- mers now use thousands of other people's computers (botnet) to send spam without the knowledge of the owners. Many computers are only used to send spam once or once in a while [5] that makes it very hard to detect and shut down the spam sources. Since there are so many computers involved in sending spam now, there is no blacklist able to list them all. Even worse, anti-spam software with a high rate of false-positives create a lot of false alarms and block emails coming from legitimate sources. The designers of malware started to use botnets to launch distributed denial of service (DDoS). This is a variant of denial of service (DoS) attack that uses all bots within the botnet to flood an attacked server with requests [6,7]. Note that because bots are scattered over the Internet, it is very difficult to identify the source of the attack. The traffic in the Internet looks normal except in the neighbourhood of the server where all requests (generated by bots) converge. As a result, it takes a lot of effort and co- ordination among security managers of different network domains to identify the source of the attack. Clearly, identifying all bots is an option. A better option, however, is the identification of the botmaster and the person (cyber criminal) behind it. However, it is very hard to identify the bad guy controlling the DDoS attack because he/she uses other people's computers to execute the attack. How big is the security threat coming from botnets? The number of infected machines in the Internet is difficult to determine because it grows quite rapidly. In 2009, McAfree [8,9] estimates that 150 thousand machines get infected by bots every day, which is a three-fold increase compared to the rate reported by Symantec [10]. More recent works [8, 11] report that in 2010 the BredoLab botnet alone consists of more than 30 millions bots located on compromised machines. It is evident that the presence of bots alone poses a serious threat to the global Internet community. 4 Introduction In another research, Spamhaus.com [12] found that in 2010, botnets contributed 95% of the total spam. The king of spam was the Rustock botnet which produced 200 billion pieces of spam a day [13, 14]. According to Mailshine.com [15], estimation of global productivity cost of spam in 2010 was about $103 billion dollars. Loss of productivity was calculated based on: • the average time spent by the recipient per spam message was half a second • the average wage of the recipient is $10 per hour. Other malicious activities of botnets such as DDoS, identity theft and click fraud also cause a lot of financial losses. During the last decade, the production and dissemination of botnets has grown into a multibillion dollar business. In the last survey conducted by Ponmone [16] for 50 US campanies that were the victims of botnet attacks in 2011, the average annual loss was just below 6 million US dollars for each company. Accord- ing to Ponmone [16], damages caused by malware activities especially botnets together with the costs of preventive measures are likely to grow significantly in the coming years. Botnets are already a part of the Internet landscape and their impact on the Internet (in)security is difficult to estimate. Unfortunately, the development of security coun- termeasures against botnets drags behind the progress in the botnet technology. Some experts claim that we are losing the botnet war [2, 17{19]. There are, however, some successes in the war against botnets. Here we give three examples. • Honeynet project [20] is a leading international security research organization, devoted for investigating the latest attacks, developing open source security tools to improve Internet security and learning how malicious hackers behave. From a small group of members started in 1999, the project now expands into many chapters around the world. The valuable information collected by the project is not only useful for security research to analyze the latest attacks but also to educate the public about threats to information systems across the world. • BotHunter [21] is a free detection software created by SRI International to help system administrators detect botnet activity within their network. By monitoring 5 the two-way communication flows between hosts within the internal network and the Internet and basing on state-based infection sequence models, BotHunter has successfully detected many types of bots including P2P ones. • Rustock is a bot, whose main task is to distribute spam email. It is probably the most successful spam bot to date. It has infected more than one million PC machines [22]. However, the Rustock botnet was shut down by a group of companies led by Microsoft in 2011 [13]. The group was able to track the botnet C&C servers and identify their IP addresses. It turned out that the C&C servers were located on many servers of five major Internet service providers across the US. Outside the US, Microsoft worked with European law enforcement agencies to identify the C&C servers. Finally, all C&C servers were shutdown putting an end to Rustock activity. Despite many successes, it is clear that there is a lack of comprehensive countermea- sures to combat botnets. Such countermeasures have to be global covering the whole Internet. So apart from technical tools, there is a need for the co-ordination of coun- termeasures that are applied in different domains and countries. Botnets work so effectively because they are able to communicate with their botmasters. The communication channel (also called communication and control (C&C) channel) can be built in many different ways. The Internet Relay Chat (IRC) protocol was the first and most popular protocol that was used as a C&C channel. However, since the IRC channel has become too easy to detect, the number of IRC botnets is on the decline [23]. Therefore, designers of bots have shifted to web-based and P2P services to implement C&C channels. With the growing usage of social networks, it has been observed a shift in the design methodology. So, designers of bots start using Web 2.0 social networks as a vehicle for the botnet construction. Bots that are using Web 2.0 services are called Web 2.0 bots.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and Policy Issues for Congress
    Order Code RL32114 Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and Policy Issues for Congress Updated January 29, 2008 Clay Wilson Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and Policy Issues for Congress Summary Cybercrime is becoming more organized and established as a transnational business. High technology online skills are now available for rent to a variety of customers, possibly including nation states, or individuals and groups that could secretly represent terrorist groups. The increased use of automated attack tools by cybercriminals has overwhelmed some current methodologies used for tracking Internet cyberattacks, and vulnerabilities of the U.S. critical infrastructure, which are acknowledged openly in publications, could possibly attract cyberattacks to extort money, or damage the U.S. economy to affect national security. In April and May 2007, NATO and the United States sent computer security experts to Estonia to help that nation recover from cyberattacks directed against government computer systems, and to analyze the methods used and determine the source of the attacks.1 Some security experts suspect that political protestors may have rented the services of cybercriminals, possibly a large network of infected PCs, called a “botnet,” to help disrupt the computer systems of the Estonian government. DOD officials have also indicated that similar cyberattacks from individuals and countries targeting economic,
    [Show full text]
  • A the Hacker
    A The Hacker Madame Curie once said “En science, nous devons nous int´eresser aux choses, non aux personnes [In science, we should be interested in things, not in people].” Things, however, have since changed, and today we have to be interested not just in the facts of computer security and crime, but in the people who perpetrate these acts. Hence this discussion of hackers. Over the centuries, the term “hacker” has referred to various activities. We are familiar with usages such as “a carpenter hacking wood with an ax” and “a butcher hacking meat with a cleaver,” but it seems that the modern, computer-related form of this term originated in the many pranks and practi- cal jokes perpetrated by students at MIT in the 1960s. As an example of the many meanings assigned to this term, see [Schneier 04] which, among much other information, explains why Galileo was a hacker but Aristotle wasn’t. A hack is a person lacking talent or ability, as in a “hack writer.” Hack as a verb is used in contexts such as “hack the media,” “hack your brain,” and “hack your reputation.” Recently, it has also come to mean either a kludge, or the opposite of a kludge, as in a clever or elegant solution to a difficult problem. A hack also means a simple but often inelegant solution or technique. The following tentative definitions are quoted from the jargon file ([jargon 04], edited by Eric S. Raymond): 1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • The Botnet Chronicles a Journey to Infamy
    The Botnet Chronicles A Journey to Infamy Trend Micro, Incorporated Rik Ferguson Senior Security Advisor A Trend Micro White Paper I November 2010 The Botnet Chronicles A Journey to Infamy CONTENTS A Prelude to Evolution ....................................................................................................................4 The Botnet Saga Begins .................................................................................................................5 The Birth of Organized Crime .........................................................................................................7 The Security War Rages On ........................................................................................................... 8 Lost in the White Noise................................................................................................................. 10 Where Do We Go from Here? .......................................................................................................... 11 References ...................................................................................................................................... 12 2 WHITE PAPER I THE BOTNET CHRONICLES: A JOURNEY TO INFAMY The Botnet Chronicles A Journey to Infamy The botnet time line below shows a rundown of the botnets discussed in this white paper. Clicking each botnet’s name in blue will bring you to the page where it is described in more detail. To go back to the time line below from each page, click the ~ at the end of the section. 3 WHITE
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS in THIS ISSUE Fighting Malware and Spam
    MARCH 2008 Fighting malware and spam CONTENTS IN THIS ISSUE 2 COMMENT EVASIVE ACTION Home (page) renovations Pandex has attracted very little attention from the media and generated little 3 NEWS discussion between malware Botherders herded researchers and among the 29A folds general populace. Chandra Prakash and Adam Thomas provide an overview of the Pandex operation and take an in-depth look at VIRUS PREVALENCE TABLE 3 the underlying code that has allowed this malware to evade detection for so long. 4 MALWARE ANALYSIS page 4 Pandex: the botnet that could PACKING A PUNCH In the fi nal part of the series on exepacker 9 FEATURE blacklisting, Robert Neumann takes a look at how all the processing and analysis techniques are put Exepacker blacklisting part 3 into practice in a real-life situation. page 9 15 CONFERENCE REPORT AVG TURNS 8 Black Hat DC and CCC 24C3 John Hawes gets his hands on a preview version of the latest offering from AVG. 18 PRODUCT REVIEW page 18 AVG Internet Security 8 22 END NOTES & NEWS This month: anti-spam news and events, and Ken Simpson considers the implications of rising spam volume despite increasing accuracy of content fi lters. ISSN 1749-7027 COMMENT ‘It is hoped that within all sizes of business. It is hoped that the comment facility will promote discussion among visitors and that the comment facility in some cases the more knowledgeable of VB’s readers will promote will be able to guide and assist those less well versed in discussion among the complexities of anti-malware technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of the Asprox Botnet
    An Analysis of the Asprox Botnet Ravishankar Borgaonkar Technical University of Berlin Email: [email protected] Abstract—The presence of large pools of compromised com- motives. Exploitable vulnerabilities may exist in the Internet puters, also known as botnets, or zombie armies, represents a infrastructure, in the clients and servers, in the people, and in very serious threat to Internet security. This paper describes the way money is controlled and transferred from the Internet the architecture of a contemporary advanced bot commonly known as Asprox. Asprox is a type of malware that combines into traditional cash. Many security firms and researchers are the two threat vectors of forming a botnet and of generating working on developing new methods to fight botnets and to SQL injection attacks. The main features of the Asprox botnet mitigate against threats from botnets [7], [8], [9]. are the use of centralized command and control structure, HTTP based communication, use of advanced double fast-flux service Unfortunately, there are still many questions that need to networks, use of SQL injection attacks for recruiting new bots be addressed to find effective ways of protecting against the and social engineering tricks to spread malware binaries. The threats from botnets. In order to fight against botnets in future, objective of this paper is to contribute to a deeper understanding of Asprox in particular and a better understanding of modern it is not enough to study the botnets of past. Botnets are botnet designs in general. This knowledge can be used to develop constantly evolving, and we need to understand the design more effective methods for detecting botnets, and stopping the and structure of the emerging advanced botnets.
    [Show full text]
  • Detecting Botnets Using File System Indicators
    Detecting botnets using file system indicators Master's thesis University of Twente Author: Committee members: Peter Wagenaar Prof. Dr. Pieter H. Hartel Dr. Damiano Bolzoni Frank Bernaards LLM (NHTCU) December 12, 2012 Abstract Botnets, large groups of networked zombie computers under centralised control, are recognised as one of the major threats on the internet. There is a lot of research towards ways of detecting botnets, in particular towards detecting Command and Control servers. Most of the research is focused on trying to detect the commands that these servers send to the bots over the network. For this research, we have looked at botnets from a botmaster's perspective. First, we characterise several botnet enhancing techniques using three aspects: resilience, stealth and churn. We see that these enhancements are usually employed in the network communications between the C&C and the bots. This leads us to our second contribution: we propose a new botnet detection method based on the way C&C's are present on the file system. We define a set of file system based indicators and use them to search for C&C's in images of hard disks. We investigate how the aspects resilience, stealth and churn apply to each of the indicators and discuss countermeasures botmasters could take to evade detection. We validate our method by applying it to a test dataset of 94 disk images, 16 of which contain C&C installations, and show that low false positive and false negative ratio's can be achieved. Approaching the botnet detection problem from this angle is novel, which provides a basis for further research.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecology of Malware
    The Ecology of Malware Jedidiah R. Crandall Roya Ensafi Stephanie Forrest University of New Mexico University of New Mexico University of New Mexico Dept. of Computer Science Dept. of Computer Science Dept. of Computer Science Mail stop: MSC01 1130 Mail stop: MSC01 1130 Mail stop: MSC01 1130 1 University of New Mexico 1 University of New Mexico 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Joshua Ladau Bilal Shebaro Santa Fe Institute University of New Mexico 1399 Hyde Park Road Dept. of Computer Science Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 Mail stop: MSC01 1130 [email protected] 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 [email protected] ABSTRACT General Terms The fight against malicious software (or malware, which includes Security everything from worms to viruses to botnets) is often viewed as an “arms race.” Conventional wisdom is that we must continu- Keywords ally “raise the bar” for the malware creators. However, the mul- titude of malware has itself evolved into a complex environment, malware ecology, malware analysis, worms, viruses, botnets and properties not unlike those of ecological systems have begun to emerge. This may include competition between malware, fa- 1. INTRODUCTION cilitation, parasitism, predation, and density-dependent population regulation. Ecological principles will likely be useful for under- Modern malware defense involves a variety of activities and is standing the effects of these ecological interactions, for example, quickly becoming unsustainable. So many malware samples are carrying capacity, species-time and species-area relationships, the collected from the wild each day that triaging is necessary to deter- unified neutral theory of biodiversity, and the theory of island bio- mine which samples warrant further analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • How the Pursuit of Truth Led Me to Selling Viagra®
    How The Pursuit of Truth Led Me To Selling Viagra® Vern Paxson EECS Department, University of California International Computer Science Institute Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, California USA August 13, 2009 Outline: • This is a broad, retrospective talk about network security Data • Specifically, 2 decades’ worth of Internet measurement: What the data tells us about the lay of the land … what’s changed … and what in fact doesn’t change (“invariants”) • A personal (ivory tower research) view: From general network characterization ⇒ manual attacks ⇒ worms ⇒ bots ⇒ spam Why all this leads to selling Viagra First, some acknowledgments: • ICSI: Mark Allman, Christian Kreibich, Robin Sommer, Nicholas Weaver • LBL: Craig Leres, Jim Rothfuss, Dwayne Ramsey, Brian Tierney, et al • UC San Diego: Stefan Savage, Chris Kanich, Kirill Levchenko, Brandon Enright, Geoff Voelker Part I Pursuit of Truth + Phobia of Being Fooled = Thirst for Data Three Invariants: Growth, Explosive Onset, & Diversity • Sep 1988: I apply to grad school 56,000 Internet hosts (3.3 MB/day) • Sep 1990: I enroll in grad “special topics” course on networking & start measuring traffic at LBL 313,000 Internet hosts (9.5 MB/day) • Oct 21 1991: I join Prof. Ferrari’s Tenet group 617,000 Internet hosts (17.5 MB/day) • May 11, 1994: My paper Growth Trends in Wide Area TCP Connections accepted for publication ≈ 3,000,000 Internet hosts (130 MB/day) “Our data suggests a very recent explosion in commercial use of the Internet …” “… relatively new information-retrieval protocols such as Gopher and World-Wide Web exhibited explosive growth” Data courtesy of Rick Adams = 80% growth/year Data courtesy of Rick Adams & David C.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection of Botnets Using Combined Host- and Network-Level Information Yuanyuan Zeng, Xin Hu, Kang G
    Detection of Botnets Using Combined Host- and Network-Level Information Yuanyuan Zeng, Xin Hu, Kang G. Shin University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2121, USA {gracez, huxin, kgshin}@eecs.umich.edu 1. INTRODUCTION botnet at the network level and the malicious behavior Botnets have now become one of the most serious each bot exhibits at the host level, we propose a C&C security threats to Internet services and applications; protocol-independent detection framework that incor- they can mount Distributed-Denial-of-Service (DDoS) porates information collected at both the host and the attacks, spamming, phishing, identity theft, and other network levels. The two sources of information com- cyber crimes. plement each other in making detection decisions. Our To control a botnet, a botmaster needs to use a C&C framework first identifies suspicious hosts by discovering channel to issue commands and coordinate bots’ ac- similar behaviors among different hosts using network- tions. Although IRC- and HTTP-based C&C have been flow analysis, and validates the identified suspects to be adopted by many past and current botnets, both of malicious or not by scrutinizing their in-host behavior. them are vulnerable to a central-point-of-failure. That Since bots within the same botnet are likely to receive is, once the central IRC or HTTP server is identified the same input from the botmaster and take similar and removed, the entire botnet will be disabled. actions, whereas benign hosts rarely demonstrate such To counter this weakness, attackers have recently shifted correlated behavior, our framework looks for flows with toward a new generation of botnets utilizing decentral- similar patterns and labels them as triggering flows.
    [Show full text]
  • The Waledac Protocol: the How and Why
    The Waledac Protocol: The How and Why Greg Sinclair Chris Nunnery Brent ByungHoon Kang iDefense/ University of North University of North University of North Carolina at Charlotte Carolina at Charlotte Carolina at Charlotte [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Waledac communication allowing the defender community to better understand the Waledac command Peer to Peer (P2P) botnets are a growing structure. In addition to providing the necessary occurrence in the malware community. The Waledac information, we released a decryption tool on a private botnet represents a new, more challenging trend in the security list to aid defenders in their decryption tasks. P2P botnet evolution. The Waledac infrastructure has Antivirus vendors have used our research to understand evolved key aspects of the P2P architecture and the nature of Waledac [4]. devolved others. This evolution/devolution has resulted In this paper we will provide a concise description in a more formidable botnet. As a result, the Waledac of the Waledac architecture from a network topology botnet is harder to infiltrate and harder to enumerate. and communication perspective. The Waledac This paper explains the various aspects of the Waledac architecture refines the Storm botnet’s architecture to botnet infrastructures to give defenders a better simplify aspects of the topology in order to increase understanding of the botnet in order to protect efficiency and security. The revisions made by the themselves and others. Waledac infrastructure do contain vulnerabilities that defenders can exploit as we will explain. 1. Introduction The remaining sections of this paper explain how Waledac operates and defensive techniques which can Botnets continue to grow in their effectiveness and be deployed by defenders to protect their infrastructure robust architecture.
    [Show full text]
  • IBM X-Force Threat Insight Quarterly 2 X-Force Threat Insight Quarterly IBM Security Solutions
    IBM Security Solutions May 2011 IBM X-Force Threat Insight Quarterly 2 X-Force Threat Insight Quarterly IBM Security Solutions Contents About the report 2 About the Report The IBM X-Force® Threat Insight Quarterly is designed to highlight some of the most significant threats and challenges 3 Evolution: From Nuisance to Weapon facing security professionals today. This report is a product of IBM Managed Security Services and the IBM X-Force 8 Prolific and Impacting Issues of Q1 2011 research and development team. Each issue focuses on specific challenges and provides a recap of the most significant recent 16 References online threats. IBM Managed Security Services are designed to help an organization improve its information security, by outsourcing security operations or supplementing your existing security teams. The IBM protection on-demand platform helps deliver Managed Security Services and the expertise, knowledge and infrastructure an organization needs to secure its information assets from Internet attacks. The X-Force team provides the foundation for a preemptive approach to Internet security. The X-Force team is one of the best-known commercial security research groups in the world. This group of security experts researches and evaluates vulnerabilities and security issues, develops assessment and countermeasure technology for IBM security products, and educates the public about emerging Internet threats. We welcome your feedback. Questions or comments regarding the content of this report should be addressed to [email protected]. 3 X-Force Threat Insight Quarterly IBM Security Solutions Evolution: From Nuisance to Weapon One of the more notable examples here is Brain3, a boot sector infector which originated in Pakistan and released in 1986, was Creeper, Wabbit, Animal, Elk Cloner, Brain, Vienna, Lehigh, one of the first examples of malware that infected PC’s running Stoned, Jerusalem.
    [Show full text]
  • [Recognising Botnets in Organisations] Barry Weymes Number
    [Recognising Botnets in Organisations] Barry Weymes Number: 662 A thesis submitted to the faculty of Computer Science, Radboud University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Eric Verheul, Chair Erik Poll Sander Peters (Fox-IT) Department of Computer Science Radboud University August 2012 Copyright © 2012 Barry Weymes Number: 662 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT [Recognising Botnets in Organisations] Barry WeymesNumber: 662 Department of Computer Science Master of Science Dealing with the raise in botnets is fast becoming one of the major problems in IT. Their adaptable and dangerous nature makes detecting them difficult, if not impossible. In this thesis, we present how botnets function, how they are utilised and most importantly, how to limit their impact. DNS Dynamic Reputations Systems, among others, are an innovative new way to deal with this threat. By indexing individual DNS requests and responses together we can provide a fuller picture of what computer systems on a network are doing and can easily provide information about botnets within the organisation. The expertise and knowledge presented here comes from the IT security firm Fox-IT in Delft, the Netherlands. The author works full time as a security analyst there, and this rich environment of information in the field of IT security provides a deep insight into the current botnet environment. Keywords: [Botnets, Organisations, DNS, Honeypot, IDS] ACKNOWLEDGMENTS • I would like to thank my parents, whom made my time in the Netherlands possible. They paid my tuition, and giving me the privilege to follow my ambition of getting a Masters degree. • My dear friend Dave, always gets a mention in my thesis for asking the questions other dont ask.
    [Show full text]