Kaspersky Calls For Cyber Weapons Convention

judgecorp writes with a synopsis of talk given by Kaspersky at CeBit "Cyber weapons are so dangerous, they should be limited by a treaty like those restricting chemical and nuclear arms, Russian security expert Eugene Kaspersky has told a conference. He also warned that online voting was essential or democracy will die out in 20 years."

Comments

I'd just like to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because I buy Kaspersky's anti-virus doesn't mean I support what that man stands for.

Re:I'd just like to say...

[couchslug]

If you give people financial support it doesn't make a fuck what you think you do or do not support.

Your ACTION is support.

Online voting

[Anonymous Coward]

Online voting is a single biggest threat to democracy. If 20 years from now "manual" voting will become obsolete, and only online voting remains, no one will be able to tell, whether the results are authentic or not. The one who pays most to the guys administering the DB server is going to be the winner. And everything will look legit, without any proof and without anything that inspectors could do about it.

Re:Online voting

[Hatta]

And Kaspersky stands to earn a lot from security theatre should electronic voting be widely adopted.

Re:Online voting

[Opportunist]

I usually hold Eugene in some high esteem, but this time he is dangerously wrong. Considering just how insecure the average user is and how likely it is that his machine is infected, online voting is one of the biggest threats to real democracy that we face today, right after voting machines.

So far, infecting machines has only been a threat due to criminals wanting to infect those machines. Now, this by itself, is already dangerous. But it's minimal considering the possibilities for crooked regimes that like to put a democracy show on.

Governments are already creating "government trojans". For reference, search for the infamous "Bundestrojaner" the Germans tried to put into place. So far, AV makers "may" at least find criminal trojans, but can we assume they still may if the trojans are made by the government? Can we see a crooked government create a trojan and infect the machines of their subjects with the express intention to manipulate the way they vote? Can we even see them making those trojans mandatory in the name of "security" (of course, without the stated intention of manipulating votes, but just to have a government backdoor "for security reasons")?

And even if all of that is nothing but a crazy conspiracy theory, how likely would it be that some populist oppositions try to spin it and destabilize governments based on this "theory" and create doubt in the legitimacy of governments?

Please, Eugene, reconsider.

Re:Die out in 20 years?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that's what the US used to be. Now it's an oligarchic empire play-acting as a democratic republic.

I think they should adapt ATM machines for voting

[Marrow]

1. You get a print-out of your vote.
2. You can optionally get a print-out that says whatever you want in case you are under duress.
3. There is a picture record of who voted for your ID in case of a question of voter fraud.
4. The machines are already everywhere, wired and secure enough to handle money.
5. You dont have to congregate at a place away from your work.
6. Your vote is filed under a random number, so you can call your vote back up if you are concerned about tampering
Im sure threre are other good reasons

Re:I think they should adapt ATM machines for voti

[Ellis D. Tripp]

And of course, we can always trust the MANUFACTURERS of ATM machines to be free from any political influence, as well, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walden_O'Dell