Slashdot Mirror


Kaspersky Lab Has Been Working With Russian Intelligence (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Internal company emails obtained by Bloomberg Businessweek show that Kaspersky Lab has maintained a much closer working relationship with Russia's main intelligence agency, the FSB, than it has publicly admitted. It has developed security technology at the spy agency's behest and worked on joint projects the CEO knew would be embarrassing if made public. The previously unreported emails, from October 2009, are from a thread between Eugene Kaspersky and senior staff. In Russian, Kaspersky outlines a project undertaken in secret a year earlier "per a big request on the Lubyanka side," a reference to the FSB offices. Kaspersky Lab confirmed the emails are authentic.

The software that the CEO was referring to had the stated purpose of protecting clients, including the Russian government, from distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, but its scope went further. Kaspersky Lab would also cooperate with internet hosting companies to locate bad actors and block their attacks, while assisting with "active countermeasures," a capability so sensitive that Kaspersky advised his staff to keep it secret. In this case, Kaspersky may have been referring to something even more rare in the security world. A person familiar with the company's anti-DDoS system says it's made up of two parts. The first consists of traditional defensive techniques, including rerouting malicious traffic to servers that can harmlessly absorb it. The second part is more unusual: Kaspersky provides the FSB with real-time intelligence on the hackers' location and sends experts to accompany the FSB and Russian police when they conduct raids. That's what Kaspersky was referring to in the emails, says the person familiar with the system. They weren't just hacking the hackers; they were banging down the doors.
Kaspersky Lab has issued a statement in response to Bloomberg's report. It reads in part: "Regardless of how the facts are misconstrued to fit in with a hypothetical, false theory, Kaspersky Lab, and its executives, do not have inappropriate ties with any government. The company does regularly work with governments and law enforcement agencies around the world with the sole purpose of fighting cybercrime. In the internal communications referenced within the recent article, the facts are once again either being misinterpreted or manipulated to fit the agenda of certain individuals desperately wanting there to be inappropriate ties between the company, its CEO and the Russian government, but no matter what communication they claim to have, the facts clearly remain there is no evidence because no such inappropriate ties exist."

117 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Big Nothing by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    To be fair, Eugene Kaspersky did meet with Russian intelligence, but they only discussed adoption.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. At the risk of my oath of patriotism by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I mean, political influence is a two-way street.

    What nation with a powerful central government doesn't demand indelicate acts from its major corporations?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:At the risk of my oath of patriotism by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What nation with a powerful central government doesn't demand indelicate acts from its major corporations?

      It's more about scale of such acts, and these days Russia and the US are doing this to a ridiculous degree.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:At the risk of my oath of patriotism by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      What nation with a powerful central government doesn't demand indelicate acts from its major corporations?

      It's more about scale of such acts, and these days Russia and the US are doing this to a ridiculous degree.

      Right. If, as the evidence your claim implies, you are not from one of these two nations you mention, the chances your own country is free of this blight is on the order of the lottery... as likely to free of powerful influence in gov't & industry as you'd be having missionary sex with a polar bear and a regular bear, on the same day.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    3. Re:At the risk of my oath of patriotism by KiloByte · · Score: 2

      Actually, my country government can't find their asses with both hands. They're thoroughly busy firing any employee with a shred of competency and replacing them with 20 years old nephews of their party members. So even though they violate the Constitution at almost every step, they're so incompetent they're not a threat to anyone living abroad.

      The previous government had its flaws but neither gross incompetence nor illegal spying was seriously alleged.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    4. Re:At the risk of my oath of patriotism by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Funny

      a polar bear and a regular bear,

      I sexually identify as a polar bear and find this to be highly offensive. You think grizzly bears, brown bears, panda bears, water bears, etc are all "regular bears" but somehow polar bears are not "regular bears". I can't believe in this day and age that we have bigoted polar-arkoudaphobic people like you on the internet.

    5. Re:At the risk of my oath of patriotism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      > a polar bear and a regular bear

      A polar bear is a regular (rectangular) bear after a coordinate transform.

      captcha: teenage

  3. You don't say by slick7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine that, a Russian company working for/with the Russians. How quaint. Much like the Cripts and Bloods working for the CIA.

    --
    The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    1. Re:You don't say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Imagine that: a government hiring a cyber security company to assist with cyber security. Insane, right ?!?!

      It's precisely due to comments (and sentiments) such as yours that Kaspersky felt compelled to keep this secret. The anti-Russian hysteria pushed by western media was already a joke, and is fast approaching ludicrous.

    2. Re: You don't say by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Not 1785 the same because FSB is the domestic security service of Russia. The closest US equivalent would be FBI with the difference that FSB is also responsible for border and coast guard. They are literally the Russian feds.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    3. Re:You don't say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Google cia admission of drug dealing in LA. and look at the comments such as that. these are not my sentiments, but the sentiments of really greedy people.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    4. Re: You don't say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      There are criminals in the FBI, FSB, CIA, in all political arenas on this planet. Not all cockroaches scatter when the lights are turned on.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    5. Re: You don't say by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Obviously, but that was not my point. For some reason most people think that FSB spies in foreign countries which simply isn't the case. SVR does that, FSB is Russian FBI.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    6. Re: You don't say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      The FSB is the former KGB, and that organization was and imho is still active world-wide. The NAZI's are still active as well and that is my point. The same goes for any clandestine intelligence group.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    7. Re: You don't say by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      The FSB is not the former KGB, it is only a fairly small part of the former KGB (mainly second, sixth and seventh directorate, later also the border guard directorate and a part of the 16th directorate) and is not active world wide, that is the responsibility of SVR, which is far more the spiritual successor of KGB than FSB will ever be. Is that so difficult to comprehend?

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  4. Why is our media... by Rockoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is our media trying so hard to start a war between the U.S. and Russia?

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
    1. Re:Why is our media... by NuclearCat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because hysteria attract viewers, improve ratings
      More viewers = more money for ads
      Who cares that world may fall apart in nuclear tornado, media bosses pockets are more important.

    2. Re:Why is our media... by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      I've been wondering the same thing. It seems to me that the US and Russia should be natural allies. They have much more in common than they do differences. Maybe the globalists want to make sure the two most nationalistic countries never figure out that they could be friends.

    3. Re:Why is our media... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Clicks, views and ratings.
      Gov/mil contacts have free stuff to offer. Govs and mil always have lots of domestic and international stories to share.
      Also the money to investigate one story might have to go further and take less time.
      So more interviews are done to keep up with blogs, the 24 h news cycle.
      Also consider the role of news aggregation websites. Suddenly news is fast, accurate and from all over the USA and the world.
      News that was once published for and consumed inside the Beltway is now national or international.
      The USA has also changed its Smith–Mundt Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–Mundt_Act.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Why is our media... by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It seems to me that the US and Russia should be natural allies.

      We were. Putin visited the U.S. on more than a few occasions as a friend, and then Obama decided that Syria should be a target. I'm sure that had nothing to do with how much money our Secretary of State's "Foundation" got from the Saudi's after Syria refused to let them build a pipeline to Europe.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    5. Re:Why is our media... by decep · · Score: 1

      Rule of Acquisition #34: War is good for business.

    6. Re:Why is our media... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Syria as a target directly impacts Russia. Their only forward permanent military base is located there. Syria has been an ally of Russia for a long time. They're what Israel is to the US.

      It boggles the shit out of me how many "liberals" blindly supported Queen Spy Clinton during her campaign as she was banging the drums for a war with the most heavily nuclear weaponized nation in the world.

    7. Re:Why is our media... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do you guys have zero knowledge of what's been going on the past 100 years? The US and Russia/USSR have been adversaries far more often than they've been allies.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    8. Re:Why is our media... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you guys have zero knowledge of what's been going on the past 100 years?

      I only know what I read on the internet.
      Russia and USA were long-time allies until the democrats ruined the relationship!!!

    9. Re:Why is our media... by phayes · · Score: 2, Informative

      Assad's treatment of his internal opposition (gas/exterminate them all) and fomenting of Daesh to blacken his opponents directly leading to their seizing control of much or Iraq had more than a little to do with Syria becoming a target -- and yet, unlike Russia the U.S. has only targeted Daesh & not people trying just to unseat that maniac Assad.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    10. Re:Why is our media... by Phantom+of+the+Opera · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It might have something to do with the Russian human rights record. This is especially relevant to the subject of software security when dealing with a country where it is dangerous to be a journalist.

    11. Re:Why is our media... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      NATO involvement in Syria began in 2014, the same year as Ukraine's revolution. Destabilization in each country had begun much earlier.

      Russia has a naval base in Tartus, Syria.
      Russia has a naval base in Sevastopol, former Ukraine (Crimea).
      Those are Russia's only two warm-water ports on the Mediterranean or Atlantic.

      The Russians likely think that the US found pretexts for involving itself in Syria (including bombing Syrian facilities like the air base that Trump hit with cruise missiles a few weeks back) in order to deprive Russia of her only ports for projecting naval force toward Europe. Whether or not the Russians are right about that is another matter, but it must be difficult for them to avoid coming to that conclusion.

      From the Russian standpoint, the US continues to support terrorists in order to destabilize Assad and rob Russia of its naval base.

    12. Re:Why is our media... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      The Soviet Union was an evil empire. It was a legitimate superpower. Their Communist philosophy told them to conquer the whole world. They were a huge threat to the West, back when Europe and America had common ground together.

      Russia is just a country. It's not pledged to conquer the world. It has a huge, indefensible border and is ringed by NATO bases. They have a really shitty situation. Even the useless NATO allies alone, without the USA, outnumber Russia 3 to 1. Anyone telling you TEH ROOSHINS are a dire threat is pushing an agenda that smells suspiciously like the one used to justify Iraq. And we all know how well that turned out.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re: Why is our media... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And yet the Russians have taken Crimea and are working on Ukraine. I don't see NATO annexing parts of Russia.

    14. Re:Why is our media... by csmithers · · Score: 1

      I guess I am. What invasion ? According to international law it was illegal, but still, Crimea has always wanted to be part of Russia again. But Russia went about it the wrong way. Anyway, not a shot was fired when Russia "took" Crimea. I read that somebody fell and was killed but that was it. Afghanistan ? You mean when the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Russia is not the USSR.

    15. Re:Why is our media... by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, both the US and the Soviets were guilty about Afghanistan. What's worse, the current evil of Afghanistan, the Taliban, were groomed by the CIA.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    16. Re:Why is our media... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      You mean like China? Funny how there isn't that level of the media going on, and on, and on, and on about them.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    17. Re:Why is our media... by butzwonker · · Score: 1

      They have much more in common than they do differences.

      You mean both are racist, fairly restrictive authoritarian regimes under oligarchic rule by the 1% with an expressed disdain for basic human rights who also wage aggressive wars from time to time and spend a large amount of their tax payers' money on the military and an absurdly overblown intelligence community? You might have a point there...

    18. Re:Why is our media... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Did you forget Iraq? Oops, inconvenient truth there. The world's most invasion-y country sure ain't Russia.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    19. Re:Why is our media... by will_die · · Score: 1

      Revenge. Russia is just another one of those groups of people who instead of doing what they usually do and help the Democrat party decided to dump Hillary and go with trump.

    20. Re: Why is our media... by Jahoda · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, Mr.Revisionist shill. Russia "annexed" a sovereign nation and has since received the sanctions it justly deserves. They are a kleptocracy ruled by a murderous tyrant and are no friends of my nation. Go find somewhere else to peddle your sewage.

    21. Re:Why is our media... by schleimkeim · · Score: 1

      The conspiracy theorist in me says: Because that's what is planned.

    22. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Because Putin doesn't obey Netanyahu, or whoever the current sock-puppet may be.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    23. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      The Soviet Union was an evil empire. It was a legitimate superpower. Their Communist philosophy told them to conquer the whole world.

      And who asks the question *why Russia turned communistic?
      (Let me do it :)

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    24. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      May I point out that, based on your 'requirements', you wouldn't have trusted Singapore's governor Lee Kuan Yew's government either?

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    25. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      But then, you're only a foul mouthed anonymous coward, so who would take *you serious?

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    26. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      ...the defender of liberty and freedom, a bastion of democracy...

      That's only the narrative.
      Unfortunately, and without any exception, all American 'struggles' to 'bring freedom and democracy', have resulted in the total devastation, and immeasurable suffering by the people, of the countries 'liberated' from their 'cruel dictator' this way.
      You must be joking. It hasn't 'changed'... it never was.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    27. Re:Why is our media... by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      It's not us. It's Mr. Putin who is being a dick all across the world because he's butthurt that Russia is not playing with the big boys anymore.

      He wants to feel important and be feared and respected like your teenage neighbourhood bully. He hasn't gotten over the collapse of the Soviet Union which was of course the most glorious nation to ever have smiled upon the world.

    28. Re:Why is our media... by butzwonker · · Score: 1

      AC certainly doesn't express it in a politically correct way, but at least he has a point.

      People who flat-out complain about the "media" tend to have a hidden political agenda - far right or far left or religious extremists, they all like to pick on the media in general for obvious reasons. They also consistently fail to name any alternative 'fringe news sources' that would be more reliable than comparing major news outlets. When you ask them, they either come up with nothing at all or with obviously ridiculous choices such as personal blogs, conspiracy sites, extremist radio hosts, etc. Yet they all have in common that they believe they are better informed than people who actually read newspapers. Don't support those lunatics!

    29. Re:Why is our media... by budsetr · · Score: 1

      Let's not forget the British.

    30. Re: Why is our media... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      The events, in order:

      The European Union was trying to get the financially struggling Ukrainians to join their Union and offered a tad under $1 billion in aid.
      The Russians said "We'll give you $15 billion if you don't"
      The democratically elected government of the Ukraine chose Russia's $15 billion over the E.U.'s $1 Billion.
      The U.S. then spent $5 billion overthrowing the democratically elected government of the Ukraine, installing what are essentially NAZI's into power.
      Russia then seized Crimea.

      So yes, NATO was annexing parts of Russia, by overthrowing democratically elected governments and installing fascists.

      But lets not let the facts get in the way of your fake dumbass ignorant news that doesnt know fucking shit about anything other than "Russia bad! Russia bad! Russia bad!"

      This is literally all the fucking Democrats doing. Our press, which loves the Democrats, has been and continues to cover for them.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    31. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Sometimes, people who 'flat out' support the media also may have a political agenda, the agenda of the status quo, neo-conservatives, current rule.
      I agree about the obvious reasons, but I would like to include as a valid reason that the media has betrayed them or misinformed them.
      So many stories like Iraq having WoMD, Iraqi soldiers ripping the babies out of incubators, omission of things that are important to know in order to get a full picture of the situation, CNN faking news on video, BBC reporters allegedly being snubbed by Putin etc. etc.
      I could point you to one site that is not 'main stream media', but would be able to inform you a whole lot more: globalresearch.ca for instance.
      There you can become much better informed about the geopolitical backgrounds of the current socio-political situations and wars than from the main stream media outlets.
      So yes, I do believe one can be better informed than people who not actually, but *only read newspapers and watch Fox, CNN, Al-Jazeera and what not.
      I certainly wouldn't call the more-informed people 'lunatic'.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    32. Re:Why is our media... by butzwonker · · Score: 1

      Your reply is not very satisfying or convincing to me. You come up with one site on the Internet for additional information - you could have just as well mentioned books or Wikipedia -, put a false dichotomy in my mouth and then mention a few cases which were either corrected by the very same media or are cases of deliberate and massive government-steered disinformation campaigns that are well-known, because they have been uncovered by the very same mass media you're criticizing.

      I also cannot recommend "globalresearch" as an information source, for even just a cursory glance reveals that it is extremely opinionated and primarily based on copying news rather than gathering them. Even if you personally like it, it's important to realize that news aggregation sites like "globalresearch" would be nothing without the media and news agencies who actually employ journalists and have networks of correspondents.

      Sometimes, people who 'flat out' support the media also may have a political agenda, the agenda of the status quo, neo-conservatives, current rule.

      Here we go again, You're implying that either (i) major news outlets are systematically lying in some huge world-wide conspiracy, or (ii) somehow the truth supports status quo neo-conservative views more than other political views. Many people would probably subscribe to (ii) but I think that both (i) and (ii) are completely lunatic.

    33. Re:Why is our media... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      As if the MSM is not 'exremely opinionated', or worse, flat out paid to either convey or leave out messages.
      You mention cases being 'corrected' by the same media, no, not the same, other.
      If Putin is reported snubbing a BBC reporter who asks him about the suffering of Syrian people by the Dutch media, a British subject posts the correction showing the whole video, where Putin actually talks for 20 minutes to the reporter.
      If CNN shows the daughter of the embassador of Quwait to the UN lying about being a nurse 'witnessing' the Iraqy soldiers ripping out the babies from the incubators, it's *not CNN who 'corrected' itself. These were alternative media.
      If CNN totally critiquelessly shows Colin Powell presenting his 'evidence' of WoMD, it wasn't CNN being the (first) one to correct the message. Instead they made a spectacle out of the criminal American destruction of Iraq.
      And one could go on and on..., but I won't.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    34. Re:Why is our media... by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Find your answer in who controls the media.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    35. Re:Why is our media... by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Amen brother!

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    36. Re:Why is our media... by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Everyone on this planet has the potential to be natural allies. The real question is who or what outside influence needs to be exposed to make this happen? Potus Trump is a real thorn in someone's side and they want him gone. Remember, cream rises to the top of milk, dross rises to the top of molten metal; cream is nothing but fat and dross is useless waste. Both of these need to be removed. The same goes for the power elite of this world who do not believe in world unity.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    37. Re:Why is our media... by phayes · · Score: 1

      Yeah yeah, it's all a plot against RUSSIAN interests. Because RUSSIAN interests are the important part, not that Assad and his father gencide all opposition like that which swept through much of the Arab world. Nor that the Ukraine after decades of Russian domination could look west and see a brighter future with the west than with Putins kleptocracy. Because RUSSIAN interests are so much more important than auto determination - except when it serves RUSSIAN interests - then it's OK.

      The thing about the RUSSIAN point of view is how it's always about RUSSIA with absolutely no thought to the rest of the world

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  5. I'd like to see more details... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    But I'm not really feeling the outrage here, at least with regard to what was reported.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:I'd like to see more details... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The second part is more unusual: Kaspersky provides the FSB with real-time intelligence on the hackers' location and sends experts to accompany the FSB and Russian police when they conduct raids.

      Hmm. I'm guessing that these raids are conducted in Russia? How is this any different from phone companies locating scammers or Microsoft helping the U.S. government shut down bot nets?

  6. Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by NuclearCat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I noticed last week or so "Russia this, Russia that" hysteria, rumours and manipulations appeared here, something strange, as they don't contain any credible information, even anything interesting for geek, just gossips - and it's trending in traditionally geeky website.
    Slashdot was safe harbor for me for more than a decade from filthy political news and "news for housewives".
    Seems its time to put dot and say bye bye?
    P.S. Yes i'm russian, and i hate politics and propaganda. Peace!

    1. Re:Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Slashdot's tagline from the beginning included the words "Stuff That Matters".
      Whether or not you feel your safe space has been invaded, this stuff MATTERS. The headlines that are political are usually clear, easy enough for you to avoid. It's not as if you see one that says something about quantum dots or M-theory and then turns out to be all about how Trump would love to suck Putin's dick.

    2. Re:Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I noticed last week or so "Russia this, Russia that" hysteria, rumours and manipulations appeared here, something strange, as they don't contain any credible information,

      Yes, its all fake news. Go back to sleep comrade. And whatever you do, don't read Fredo's twitter feed. Its all fake news.

    3. Re: Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      These stories are published because they attract attention. Any story about Russia, Syria or Ukraine or Trump or the EU or any topic where Russia might want to influence will attract comments from Putin's trolls as well as the "normal" crowd. It's not new, it's been happening here for at least three years.

      In the past month or so I've noticed an increase in the numbers here admitting to being Russian, or at least not disguising it, both of which are welcome. I wonder if that's anything to do with Putin's defensive admission that "It might have been Russians"?

      Of course we still have Putin's trolls, from the obvious like Rockoon and friends to those (presumably) indistinguishable from genuine comments.

    4. Re:Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      P.S. Yes i'm russian, and i hate politics and propaganda. Peace!

      Yes, as do most of your countrymen, and mine. That's why both of our governments are so spectacularly fucked up. We let other people run our governments for us.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Slashdot was safe harbor for me for more than a decade from filthy political news"

      Slashdot has always covered government and political news as it relates to the internet, censorship, cyberware, security, and tech firms. This relates to many of these, particularly given past news on Kaspersky wrt the US government, code, and suspicions.

      The weight and relevance of the report as it pertains to you is for you to judge, but for a site accumulator of news, /. is most certainly doing its job appropriately.

      "P.S. Yes i'm russian, "

      Of course you are. Of course you are.

    6. Re:Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by butzwonker · · Score: 1

      Boy, calm down, that's nothing in comparison to the past. You should have been alive when the Cold War was raging... all those pesky US fake news outlets going against Prawda!

    7. Re:Slashdot became political loudspeaker? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      fool

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  7. What is this world coming to? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Next thing you'll be telling me Facebook is a project of the CI%!*^#.NO CARRIER

    1. Re:What is this world coming to? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Facebook received 12 million in start-up money from ACCEL corporation, which has direct ties to In-Q-Tel which is the venture capital arm of the CIA.
      So although it's not a direct project of the CIA, I bet it's highly useful to them.
      It was only unforeseen that the ancestor of Cambridge Analytica would suck up so much information from the facebook likes that Trump could win the elections (and Farrage the Brexit vote).

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  8. Big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In a move that literally doesn't surprise anybody... That's why you should trust anything made by foreign countries, especially China and Russia.

  9. Re:Russian Intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because we're not racist like you.

  10. This is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess everyone's forgotten all about RSA Security's cozy relationship with those friendly NSA folks. -PCP

    1. Re:This is news? by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

      So no dealings with McAfee products either then?

      --
      - Tjp

      I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

  11. I guess I am not seeing the issue here by charles05663 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, it is being claimed that Kaspersky's is trying to take down cyber-criminals? If they were accused of using their anti-virus software to spy that would be a different story.

  12. Re:Russian Intelligence by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    One of the most brilliant listening devices was designed by a Russian named Leon Theremin. Yeah the theremin guy invented this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  13. They want Trump out by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and Pence in. Trump is unpredictable. He's come out in favor and against single payer health care, restrictions on work visas, tariffs and a whole host of populist ideas that the folks that actually own the media aren't too keen on. Now, it's not that they expect Trump to actually _do_ any of that (he's still one of them after all) but they don't want folks to even know a progressive agenda is a possibility. So Trump's out, Pence is in and the mega-corp status quo is maintained. Maybe with a tad more religious furor but that doesn't affect them personally. Nothing much ever does...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  14. Slashdot is aging by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and older folks are worried about politics. We're getting old enough to worry about pensions, medicare, our kid's job prospects, etc, etc. Politics affects _everything_. Like the internet? Then you better pay attention to politics. Remember, it's not just news for nerds, it's also stuff that matters. The President getting impeached and replaced with a far right, intensely religious VP? Yeah. That Matters.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  15. Even if... by mhkohne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if Kaspersky doesn't want to do anything bad, I can't imagine that Russian intelligence doesn't have someone on the inside. Just as I can't imaging the CIA or NSA doesn't have someone inside MS and Google.

    I don't know why this is such a big deal - they are a Russian company, which means they are (whether they like it or not) somewhat under the influence of the Russian government. Just as (again) MS and Google are somewhat under the influence of the US government.

    Stop freaking out about it already, and if you consider their products just make sure you think about the ways this could be a problem for you or not.

    And frankly if Kaspersky is helping the intelligence guys kick down the doors of DOS script kiddies, more power to them. It's not like the guys who do DOS attacks are generally all that smart or useful, they're just damned annoying to the rest of us.

    --
    A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
    1. Re:Even if... by PPH · · Score: 1

      Just as (again) MS and Google are somewhat under the influence of the US government.

      This.

      How do you say 'National Security Letter' in Russian?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Even if... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Even if Kaspersky doesn't want to do anything bad, I can't imagine that Russian intelligence doesn't have someone on the inside. Just as I can't imaging the CIA or NSA doesn't have someone inside MS and Google.

      Hahaha, you're so naive...
      Why would the CIA *and* NSA not have 'someone' inside Kaspersky?

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    3. Re:Even if... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      It's NATO that right now puts soldiers on the doorsteps of Russia, not the other way around...

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    4. Re:Even if... by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      Hahaha, you're so naive...

      Why would the CIA *and* NSA not have 'someone' inside Kaspersky?

      You mean like Ruslan Stoyanov?

    5. Re:Even if... by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Not really, this looks more like an internal Russian affair. No ties with CIA/NSA are suggested.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  16. Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 3

    Somebody doesn't know what the first D in DDoS stands for evidently (No, Kapersky was not identifying the hacker's location. That is not even within the realm of possibility.)

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    1. Re:Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1
      Actually, it is.
      If

      Kaspersky Lab would also cooperate with internet hosting companies

      you can easily find the C&C server and from there you can try to find the man behind it.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    2. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

      How are you going to "easily find the c&c server when it is distributed? You don't really think the hacker logs into each node of the botnet do you? You would need to find a single session, most likely over HTTPS, somewhere on the planet. That isn't just trying to find a needle in a haystack, that is trying to find an invisible needle somewhere in one of the haystack on the planet.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    3. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      Intersect IP addresses originating from the botnet nodes that are not the target, duh.
      The hacker doesn't log into the nodes, the nodes check a C&C server in small intervals; this being easy to code and hard to detect locally is the primary reason that most botnets do it. and the ability to find them using a simple intersection is the reason that botnets either use a dictionary, a backup list or an algorithm to generate random domain names on demand.
      You and whoever upvoted you, go back to school.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    4. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      It doesn't work the way you think it does... duh.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    5. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you made a botnet?
      Code samples for the botnet client part and cisco/juniper traffic filtering, logging and aggregation commands are available online, and they work, I've seen it work.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    6. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Three words: Peer to Peer. Sure, there are stupidly designed botnets. A well designed one will not have nodes that contact a C&C. The C&C is distributed.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    7. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      See my other comment, but also even for the poorly designed botnet you describe you are only able to locate the C&C ... the hacker will still be elsewhere on the planet hiding behind several proxies.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    8. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      peer to peer botnets don't work behind a NAT without a UDP hole punch coordinator .

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    9. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      And you read my first comment because that's 'Exactly' what I said.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    10. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      They work just fine behind a NAT as you just admitted. Of course, you are ignoring the other point I made elsewhere. What you should have responded with next is "Holy FUCK, I ... Behrooz Amoozad ... am an IDIOT! Of course the hacker himself will not be able to be located by finding the C&C! You are right Zero__Kelvin, he will be hiding behind multiple proxies! I know I looked like an idiot, but thanks for helping me so I won't continue to sound stupid when I say ridiculous shit like this in the future!. I accept your apology.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    11. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      a UDP hole punch coordinator == a server I NEVER said anything about finding the hacker. I said we can find the C&C as a first step... sir, The idiocy in you is baffling. Am done talking to you.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    12. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      My initial post said they can't find the hacker. The post you replied to saying it was easy dumbfuck. And you don't need a server to do UDP hole punches idiot. What the fuck do you think the point of being distributed is? Just admit you are incompetent and move on with your pathetic life.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    13. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      Guess what, imbecile, I said to find the C&C server, not the hacker. The whole definition of UDP hole punching revolves around having a server with a constant address, reachable by both clients, outside both NATs to coordinate the timing.
      Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/386/

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    14. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to be a server idiot. It just needs to be that one system has a static IP. You can use the 10000 systems with static IPs to do it in a distributed fashion. Seriously, you suck at computers.... become a janitor or something.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    15. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      it does, because timing and congestion.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    16. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      You are an idiot kid. You have no clue. You don't know how any of this shit works. There is no timing issue with a DDoS... You just need to tell a shitload of systemd a target IP and time to act. Good luck with your janitor job. I hear Clorox is nice!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    17. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      I'll make sure to try them when I open an office in the US. tnx

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    18. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      We have plenty of janitors here already.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    19. Re: Can we have a tech discussion for once? by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      I know, Am responding to one right now.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
  17. Re: Oh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pretty funny considering it's well known that nearly ALL top tech companies in the USA have cooperated extensively with multiple American intelligence and law enforcement agencies with details of actual incidents now in the public domain.

    Meanwhile we're supposed to give a fuck about vague insinuations with one Russian software company???

  18. OMG. That couldn't happen in the US! by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

    It isn't like the Intel McAfee division works with the CIA, NSA, and FBI amongst others on analysis of network traffic and features in their product... Which has been publicly discussed quite a bit. This is a Russian cybersecurity firm dealing with a Russian nation-state-level governmental security organization.

    Find an exploit put into their products to spy on the users that can be traced to the FSB, then its news.

    --
    - Tjp

    I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

  19. Re: Oh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really?

    Last time checked, Apple refused to decrypt an iPhone for the FBI. Google, and Amazon also force the government to subpoena them for information. It's bad business to give up your customer's data, and America is capatalist.

    When you protest in Russia, you get killed one way another, possibly by polonium laced water. What happens in America? At worst a civil infraction.

    To illustrate my point further: when was the last time you bribed a police officer? After all the stuff I've seen, I actually like police officers now.

    All of these Americans who have never visited Russia have no idea how good we have it. Obama as far as i know did not have a bank account in Panama, but both Putin and Poroshenko did.

    It's disappointing to see how we've lost faith in our own country, which has spread freedom across the world, for which other coubtries thank us for having done so. I never trusted Kaspersky, and now I have a reason to.

    Sure disagree with me. America sucks, right? Well when Putin surreptitiously takes over America in 2020 (next time via democratic candidate because no one is suspecting it, and that's what a troll does), I bet you'll be begging for old America: where people take pride in their jobs. Ambulances show up to your house in minutes, not hours, and you don't need to bribe people to get things you want.

  20. Re: Oh no by mOzone · · Score: 1

    Apple only stands for freedom when fronting for american consumers.. apple has casued 100s maybe more to die or get jailed in china indoniesea etc etc. So Apple encryption cares is bullcrap

  21. It is all industrial scale eavesdropping by Max_W · · Score: 1

    All, absolutely all modern software and hardware, are based on eavesdropping. We read about entrepreneurs who built a global software empire via hard work and a talent overnight. But it just cannot be true. These all are projects which require enormous investments of several generations.

    I think it is time to start building computing from scratch, from the ground, with open hardware and software, with command line tools at first. With big transparent casings, so that we can actually trace wires and components.

  22. Re:Oh no by someone1234 · · Score: 1

    I see no problem with the FSB banging the door of a few Russian hackers. What did the Author of this crap expect, how should the number of Russian hackers dwindle? Sending in the FBI/CIA?

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  23. It's more PROPAGANDA now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Getting older? Bullshit. We've always been getting older.

    It's more PROPAGANDA now.

  24. Only complete morons are surprised by this by schleimkeim · · Score: 1

    Seriously, what the fuck did you expect? That's like expecting norton not to work with the CIA.

  25. Re: Oh no by schleimkeim · · Score: 1

    But they are cooperating with American intelligence and law enforcement to protect your freedom. Not unlike the bad guy Russia. Duh!

  26. Re: Oh no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It appears like the Russian propaganda machine is very effective at sowing distrust and animosity in the West.
    I've observed a similar thing happening here in Germany over the last decade. Basically whenever an online news outlet reports anything remotely critical about events in Russia, there's a huge circlejerking outrage in the comment section with a lot of people becoming apologists, establishing that Russia is the last bastion of good morals in Europe. In turn they're complaining about 'Gleichschaltung' of all western media. Because you know, when a lot of people say the same thing, then there must be a conspiracy behind it. Stating random things that happen in Germany or the US, which are 'a lot worse' than events in Russia. Usually referring to RT.com and asking why Western media doesn't cover these things. And yes, they like to bash the US for no good reason, even if it isn't mentioned in the article.
    Thankfully these are mostly things that happen on the internet. But as these platforms become more and more important when it comes to forming opinions the future doesn't look that bright.

  27. Re: Oh no by butzwonker · · Score: 1

    Well, it all depends on where you would prefer your data not to show up - in the hand of the GRU or FSB, or in the hand of the NSA or FBI? To be honest, judging from the past actions of the US and Russia, I would avoid antivirus software from those countries altogether. France and the UK are out of question, too, they have a long history of totalitarian surveillance measures. Maybe I'm wrong, but from all I've heard - endless discussions about the legality of government Trojans, etc. - I'd find it less likely that a German antivirus producer collude directly with government agencies. I'm sure there are even better choices if you care to look closely at the public discussion, laws, and the way intelligence agencies operate in other countries. Maybe some other European country?

    The real problem is that antivirus software tends to be fairly insecure in itself, though, to the extent that some people have started to question whether it actually heightens security. :/

  28. Re: Oh no by hord · · Score: 1

    The US has a long-standing tradition of allowing political dissent. You only get thrown in the gulag if you smoke pot or don't pay your fair share under duress. Yes, freedom all over the world. Especially in the middle east where I never voted to spend a single dollar of money. Russia sucks. But America does too.

  29. Re: Oh no by butzwonker · · Score: 1

    These are trolls, just ignore them. Russia has a special eye on Germany, not just for geostrategical reasons but also because due to his past Putin considers it somehow his home turf.

  30. Re: Oh no by Zemran · · Score: 1

    All this is talking about is the FSB wanting normal protection that any business would want. Somehow because they are Russian that is bad.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  31. Kaspersky Anti-Virus Software by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Virus Detected.
    Please Select Option:

    1) Quarantine
    2) Clean (Delete)
    3) Send FSB (Delete with Extreme Prejudice)

  32. Re: Oh no by slashrio · · Score: 1

    The company does regularly work with governments and law enforcement agencies around the world with the sole purpose of fighting cybercrime.

    And I don't see what's wrong with that.

    --
    "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  33. Dupe from 2015? by Hadley123456 · · Score: 1

    Same two authors wrote an article from 2015 with the same intent.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news...

    and a great retort from that 2015 article https://www.grahamcluley.com/k...

    I would like to see an actual evidence based reason before I put Kaspersky on my shit list (Russia is already on it). Working with a government to track down DDoS attackers is not a low point for a security company.

  34. If I were a paid troll... by slashrio · · Score: 1

    ...I would have posted as an Anonymous Coward.

    --
    "Trump!!", the new Godwin.