Slashdot Mirror
Kaspersky Lab Says It Has Become Pawn in US-Russia Geopolitical Game (reuters.com)
Russian cyber security firm Kaspersky Lab, reacting to a U.S. government move restricting its activities, said on Wednesday it had fallen victim to U.S.-Russia global sparring while the Kremlin criticized the U.S. action as politically-motivated. From a report: The Trump administration on Tuesday removed the Moscow-based firm from two lists of approved vendors used by government agencies to purchase technology equipment, amid concerns its products could be used by the Kremlin to gain entry into U.S. networks. "By all appearances, Kaspersky Lab happened to be dragged into a geopolitical fight where each side is trying to use the company as a pawn in its game," RIA news agency quoted the company's press service as saying.
children with nuclear weapons.
Mongo have similar experience.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Kaspersky should realise that their word that they aren't acting on behalf of the Russian government isn't worth shit. Putin is all fucking powerful in Russia and there is no rule of law there. So when they say they aren't at the behest of Russian intelligence, nobody fucking believes them.
Grow some balls and take back your kleptocracy from Dear Leader Putin and then maybe someone will believe you when you say you aren't a vehicle for Russian government malware.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Is there any American company that can prove their independence from the U.S. government?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Russia reverted to an illiberal criminal-syndicate state.
Not something the West has had much luck working with.
Hans plays with Lotte, Lotte plays with Jane
Jane plays with Willi, Willi is happy again
Suki plays with Leo, Sacha plays with Britt
Adolf builts a bonfire, Enrico plays with it
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Just a few examples:
1) Both are actively fighting radical Islamic terrorist threats
2) Both are pretty conservative (in opposition to the ultra-liberal European norm)
3) Both are very religious and very Christian (in opposition to the increasingly atheist/agnostic European norm)
4) Both are very patriotic (in opposition to the cynical European norm)
5) Both are taking a fairly hard-line approach to immigration (as opposed to other European countries who seem to just be throwing their doors open to any middle-aged African claiming to be a sixteen-year-old Syrian refugee)
6) Both still have an active and functioning space program
7) Both are very pro-military--in spirit, funding, and practice.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The Cold War should have ended 25 years ago. But we just can't let it go.
Who is WE you are talking about?
Since the fall of the Berlin wall and Glasnost in Russia, who has been the aggressor and why?
The cold war WAS over until the Russians under Putin decided that they'd revive it for geopolitical reasons. Putin is doing all this in order to keep looking powerful and getting elected, but at this point it's all just show. Putin knows that a full frontal conflict with the USA would be a disaster for him, but he certainly is willing to take the risk of starting something he cannot finish in order to stay in power.
And what's the US's motivation? Generally we just want to engage in profitable trade and keep oil prices low/stable...With a bit of "keeping the terrorists at bay" thrown in of course.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I think you are asking the wrong question. Of course there does not exist a company that is completely free from the laws, regulations and requirements of the country in which it works (and that includes all countries in which they work for the multinationals).
What you are forgetting in your question is that, in the United States, CEOs are not murdered by the United States government if they oppose the chief executive, as has happened with Russians. You are forgetting that the United States is not an official kleptocracy (yet) where plutocratic friends of Vladimir Putin are free to steal from the country's resources at the expense of the taxpayers and that the government there is absolutely uninterested in transparency. You are forgetting that, in Russia, there are no checks and balances, the Judiciary is not independent of the central government, that the legislature (Duma) does not hold hearings to investigate the President or the Prime Minister and that the current President found a loophole in the country's constitution that allows him to hold onto power for much longer than his country's constitutional intent.
From this standpoint, a company that is located in the United States is unfettered by the politics of the day, as long as the company produces a valuable product and is a good corporate citizen. When our federal government asked for a "back door" (as a forinstance) into the Apple iPhone, Apple fought it. and, although the issue was declared moot, the government had to come up with a hack that would work on its own.
Were Apple's headquarters in Moscow or St. Petersburg, there would be no appeal to a court—they would have been forced to comply. And there might have been a sudden, unexplained death of the CEO were there any resistance.
So, my answer to your question is, yes. Companies are independent from our government here in the United States. They do not exist at the pleasure and tolerance of our Chief Executive as they do in Russia
Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
Moscow didn't do anything, and the only reason Russia rolled into Crimea was after Ukraine adapted a law making Ukrainian the sole official language, thereby making life potentially difficult for Russian speaking Ukrainians.
Didn't do anything? LOL.
Other than sending troops, weapons and equipment, passing a vote to annex... of course, nothing. Also, you might want to review your understanding of the time line.
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid, but probably the latter.
The first Chechen war started when Putin was just an aide to a mayor, when islamists rebelled in a province of Russia. But setting that aside, what you are basically saying is that supporting islamist separatists was a good thing because it was about countering the aggression of the government forces (a.k.a "the federals"). If that is the case, why exactly do you condemn Russia supporting separatists in the Ukraine? Do separatists need to be islamists for you to cheer for them? Do you support the islamic state as well?
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap