Slashdot Mirror


Dodging Russian Spies, Customers Are Ripping Out Kaspersky (thedailybeast.com)

From a report: Multiple U.S. security consultants and other industry sources tell The Daily Beast customers are dropping their use of Kaspersky software all together, particularly in the financial sector, likely concerned that Russian spies can rummage through their files. Some security companies are being told to only provide U.S. products. And former Kaspersky employees describe the firm as reeling, with department closures and anticipation that researchers will jump ship soon. "We are under great pressure to only use American products no matter the technical or performance consequences," said a source in a cybersecurity firm which uses Kaspersky's anti-virus engine in its own services. The Daily Beast granted anonymity to some of the industry sources to discuss internal deliberations, as well as the former Kaspersky employees to talk candidly about recent events.

48 of 366 comments (clear)

  1. All together? by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Funny

    customers are dropping their use of Kaspersky software all together

    All of them simultaneously and at the same place?

    1. Re:All together? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Some security companies are being told to only provide U.S. products

      Given the choice between Kaspersky and the FSB vs Symantec Endpoint Security, I'd feel better protected by Kaspersky + FSB.

    2. Re:All together? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2, Funny

      Social uninstalling, the new fad...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:All together? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Exactly. Given the choice, I'd rather be spied on by a government that has no power over me than by the government-friendly US based companies.

      It's sad that threat modeling has to be done with something as mundane as AV software, but it's rather true. If you're someone with unpopular opinions, the last thing you want is your own government seeing what you're up to. If you're doing R&D work that some cheap third world country is going to copy and sell here thanks to crappy treasonous trade deals then it's best to not be spied on by foreigners because industrial espionage is a very real thing.

      BTW, industrial espionage is also a reason to avoid "cloud computing" at all costs for any data you actually care about, especially business plans and product research, unless it's encrypted with a key only you control and that key has never seen a Windows 10 machine.

    4. Re: All together? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not just govt. unfriendly opinions/activities. A lot of US intelligence agencies are private companies that also do work for the corporate sector. If you're being spied on by the NSA and/or CIA, the chances are that the same intel may be available to corporate competitors/hostile corporations. Also, a lot of active CIA employees moonlight for corporations. You're much better off with a non US affiliated software security company.

    5. Re:All together? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Some security companies are being told to only provide U.S. products

      Given the choice between Kaspersky and the FSB vs Symantec Endpoint Security, I'd feel better protected by Kaspersky + FSB.

      True, I was really pissed when Arris and Symantec activated SEP without my permission, and wouldn't allow me access to the internet unless I clicked to allow them access to the kingdom.

      Took a few phone calls to both to clear that up.

      But protection isn't the issue here with Kaspersky.

      So what we have is the idea that Kaspersky is great, and all of the concerns about it are lies. That Israel is lying, the USA is lying, that the owner who is/was KGB and other executives who are FSB at Kaspersky are an exception to the rule that once you are in that world, you never leave that world, and that when you give a program where you give the providers of the program the keys to the kingdom, that given the background of th eactors, that they won't exploit what you gave them permission to exploit? https://www.extremetech.com/in...

      It all boils down to a matter of trust. I take it that you trust the Russians and the FSB/KGB much more than you trust anyone in the USA? I surely don't, and the concerns about Kaspersky have been around a lot longer than Hillary's emails.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:All together? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For Chriissakes the ACs are Russians

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    7. Re:All together? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It just astonishes me how many places these Russian troll farms end up. I've been on some pretty obscure forums of late, and when the topic of Russia comes up, all of a sudden you have these streams of messages about how bad the US is, or how Russia isn't a threat to anyone. I think back over the last five or six years about all the posters I just sort of disregarded at the time as being nutty conspiracy theorists ranting on about the evils of the US government, and now I wonder if at least some portion of those posters really are just Russian trolls. They've pulled off some pretty interesting, if odd stunts, like duping Texan secessionists.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:All together? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      And that explains how these ACs can cool our homes in the summer. It's very cold in Russia!

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    9. Re:All together? by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      The real trust problem is the need to trust a closed-source application for security.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    10. Re: All together? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Much obliged, Comrade Wang.

    11. Re:All together? by bigfinger76 · · Score: 2

      I created a message board last spring for use by members of my family. No one ever used it - the only new users to sign up were Russian.

    12. Re: All together? by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      Thanks Ivan.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    13. Re:All together? by scumdamn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I really hate it when I see a story about Russia on Slashdot because all the apologists come out and remind me what a dumpster fire Slashdot has become. I remember back when it was actually a tech site that mattered rather than two day old stories and comments that are basically "I can't hear you la la la la la!"

    14. Re:All together? by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      Including all your financial information when it's been shown the FSB has deep links and connections to the Russian Maffia?

    15. Re:All together? by Xenographic · · Score: 2

      Well, the problem here is that ALL the nation states are spying on us, including America. So the NSA/Israel hates Kaspersky because they've detected their Stuxnet-based malware. Kaspersky actually put out this paper describing just how hard it is to attribute anything to any specific actor. You can say that's Russian so you don't have to even listen (which is a bit silly in an article from the Daily Beast, especially if you know Chelsea Clinton's relationship with it) but that doesn't mean they're wrong.

      My personal opinion is that all of them are spying on us via whatever means they have and I don't like any of it, though I don't know how to stop any of them. It's reasonable to be outraged by all of it, NSA or FSB, and to take it into account when doing threat modelling. But, frankly, from what we've seen of the TAO catalog, if they want to own you they probably already have. They probably owned your router before it was even shipped to your doorstep. You cannot assume that they're exfiltrating data over any kind of link you could monitor and they may be leaking it via channels you didn't know the existence of.

      So in a way I'm glad for the outrage, I just don't see how to channel it to any productive ends. Ideally we'd stop or control this crazy mass spying by every major power on everyone, but the tech is so scary that I don't know just what sort of crazy security measures that would require.

  2. unintended consequence by goose-incarnated · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unintended consequences of the "wrong" candidate winning. The media's bitterness is not because the wrong candidate won, but because they were shown via the election results that they had less power than they thought they did.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    1. Re:unintended consequence by Antiocheian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, and thankfully their FUD doesn't work anymore.

      Kaspersky is popular because it wins at independent tests run by experts. The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and their parrots should either hire some real security experts, people who can understand low level code, or simply keep being laughable.

      If they believe that Kaspersky is trying to access sensitive information and send anything related to it through the Internet, they should prove it through its function, not because a spy told you so. Such as Kaspersky dealing with Stuxnet on a technical level instead of silly stories about espionage.

    2. Re:unintended consequence by lucm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and their parrots should either hire some real security experts, people who can understand low level code

      That would be a good idea if their agenda was to uncover the truth. Unfortunately, those organizations have made it clear that they're an unofficial branch of the Democratic party, so don't expect them to stray from the red scare narrative; they will ignore or twist facts shamelessly to serve their masters. They don't care if a good company with a good product is decimated in the process.

      Nowadays, there's probably more truth and unbiased articles in the newsletter of the Flat Earth Society than in the New York Times or Wall Street Journal. They have made themselves irrelevant at a time where their industry was already struggling. Bravo.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    3. Re:unintended consequence by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Yes, and thankfully their FUD doesn't work anymore.

      Kaspersky is popular because it wins at independent tests run by experts. The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and their parrots should either hire some real security experts, people who can understand low level code, or simply keep being laughable.

      If they believe that Kaspersky is trying to access sensitive information and send anything related to it through the Internet, they should prove it through its function, not because a spy told you so. Such as Kaspersky dealing with Stuxnet on a technical level instead of silly stories about espionage.

      Your virus software has to have root level access to every file on your system. If you want to access all the files on a computer clandestinely, providing AV software is a fine way to do it. Your AV software provider better be a friend. Now for your demands for a smoking gun, look up Harold Thomas Martin III.

      You're welcome, Boris.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:unintended consequence by XXongo · · Score: 2

      It's ironic Lucm, that Republicans and Democrats agree that Trump is a moron, and yet you still cannot accept that you made a mistake in voting for him.
      >...Perhaps its time to simply admit the mistake in voting for Trump.

      I'm not sure what "you" refers to here.

      In general, the people voting for Trump didn't like him (Really! Look at the numbers). They voted for Trump because they thought that it was more important to vote for a person with the expressed ideological position agreeing with them than it was to vote for somebody that they liked or thought was smart or competent.

      To a very very good approximation, they didn't vote for Trump; they voted against Clinton.

    5. Re:unintended consequence by CrashNBrn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Wall Street Journal, owned by Rupert Murdoch is an unofficial branch of the Democratic Party?

      Riiiight. The drugs are good over here.

    6. Re:unintended consequence by lucm · · Score: 2

      Well it's not a secret. On their own website there's even a timeline of the NYT endorsements of Democrats candidates:

      https://www.nytimes.com/intera...

      But the cozy relationship between the DNC and media goes far beyond that. Look at the leaked DNC emails.

      For instance, here's one email where the Clinton campaign members discuss the questions that CNN will ask Trump:

      From: Dillon, Lauren
      Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 12:00 PM
      To: Freundlich, Christina; Roberts, Kelly; Sarge, Matthew; Graham, Caroline; Walker, Eric; Bauer, Nick; Brinster, Jeremy
      Subject: RE: Trump Questions for CNN

      CNN said the interview was cancelled as of now but will keep the questions for the next one :(

      Good to have for others as well.

      Updated here:

      - Who helped you write the foreign policy speech you're giving tomorrow? Which advisors specifically did you talk to? What advice did they give you? Did they give you any advice that you chose not to take?

      -A number of Republicans and think tanks including the Heritage Foundation have suggested tying defense spending to GDP, most often suggesting defense should be funded at 4 percent GDP. Is that something you would do/we'll see in your plan?

      - You've said you look to Ambassador John Bolton for military advice and called him "terrific," but he was one of the architects of the Iraq war. How do you explain your praise for Bolton if you also claim the war was a mistake? What advice have you taken from him?

      [...]

      https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emai...

      Another example, a CNN analyst asking the DNC to approve her editorial points:

      From: Maria Cardona [mailto:Maria.Cardona@deweysquare.com]
      Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:21 AM
      To: Patrice Taylor; Miranda, Luis
      Subject: URGENT - DRAFT CNN OPED ON NV
      Importance: High

      I want to make sure it is not to heavy handed. Please let me know asap! Thanks!!

      https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emai...

      Here's an email from the New York Times:

      From:john.podesta@gmail.com
      To: nconfess@nytimes.com
      Date: 2015-02-11 14:54
      Subject: Re: good times

      Off the record. No, mostly about Brock's eccentricities shall we say.
      On Feb 10, 2015 1:36 PM, "Confessore, Nicholas"
      wrote:

      > Hi John,
      > I am sure you have lot and lots of downtime these days to talk to
      > reporters, and so this question no doubt is well-timed.
      > But can you offer any wisdom on whether this contretemps between Messina
      > and Brock tells us anything about the future of the other Obama alums who
      > have found places, or are seeking them, in Greater Clintonland?
      > To put the question more directly--is this blow up over Media Matters
      > going to make it harder for the Clinton folks to bring in and use
      > effectively the best of the Obama alums?
      > Seems you are among the few people widely respected in both camps. So your
      > opinion would count for a lot.
      > thank you,
      > Nick
      >
      >
      > --
      > Nicholas Confessore
      > The New York Times
      > W (212) 556-5911
      > C (917) 456 2446
      > gchat: @nconfessore
      >

      https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

      If you don't like those examples, no need to nitpick, there's a search engine on wikileaks, it's worth doing a bit of research to see for yourself. There's so much stuff in there that is damaging to the Democrats and mainstream media, no surprise they're all using the red scare to distract people from this.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  3. Sure is gunna be unfortunate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When it turns out that US AV companies do exaaactly the same shit, because all AV vendors do it.

    At least Kaspersky actually made decent detection products.

    Enjoy the farce that is Norton & McAfee

    1. Re:Sure is gunna be unfortunate by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe US AV companies do what you say. But that "you too" argument doesn't negate Kaspersky's actions or that people should leave this potential attack vector running on their computer.

    2. Re: Sure is gunna be unfortunate by orlanz · · Score: 2

      So what exactly is your point? Since the US does it, they should stay silent on the Russians doing them? A "I know you are spying on me, but that's OK because I spy on you too?"

    3. Re:Sure is gunna be unfortunate by DrXym · · Score: 2

      It's not about threat, it's about violation of trust.

  4. Re:How to make any antivirus software safer? by klingens · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You simply can not. Not Possible.

    AV software needs to have full kernel level access to be able to protect you. As soon as you make a "safe space" for yourself, it's another place where malware can and will hide. Either you give full access to the hardware, not just the OS, or there is no way to actually protect the system. That's what makes things like the Intel management engine which has full control of your hardware, but no oversight by the OS or the user is so dangerous. It's why the NSA made intel to implement switches so they can disable Intel ME on NSA computers.

    AV software need to phone home: to get virus definition updates and nowadays more importantly react fast to new networked threats by uploading possibly dangerous files. They have honeypots which do this all over the internet for years of course. However crowdsourcing new threats is much much more effective, since the really dangerous Malware, e.g. Stuxnet which was found by kaspersky, is targeted, not just spammed anymore.
    The actually new and "best" high end products from Silicon Valley make the uploading of files from customers their main selling point: they claim only this way they can protect their enterprise clients. Kaspersky comparatively is low end consumer AV for the unwashed masses. The most expensive products like carbon black simply don't work if you're not uploading all your private files to a US company which is in deep with the US government agencies. All of the other AV companies in the US are too: google Project CAMBERDADA which shows what AV companies need to be attacked to subvert by the NSA. All the US/UK AV companies are suspiciously absent since they don't need to be reverse engineered: like any other US/UK based company they are working hand in hand with the intelligence services.

    As a normal user in the West, I far more fear my own government's agencies, be it FBI, CIA, NSA, GCHQ, DGSE, BND, whatever, than a foreign agency far away: the domestic agency can actually directly harm me, fine me, incarcerate me, etc. than some agency in a country on another continent. And they have actually far more reason to do all that to me.

    The end result:
    AV software is a fundamentally flawed product due to all of this and simply shouldn't be used on any computer where you want to have a marginal expectation of privacy since you cannot protect yourself and use such a software.

  5. Now spying is a concern by evanh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    all of a sudden. What happened to "I've got nothing to hide."?

  6. Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Given Putin kills, imprisons, arrests people and businesses who oppose him, and given Russia's cyber attacks on the USA, you have to consider that Kaspersky may not have a choice in the matter. With so many KGB people involved there, it's probably better to be safe than sorry here and remove their software. There is actual evidence (see link below citing an Israeli hack into Kaspersky).

    I wonder how many of those voting machines in the USA have Kaspersky anti virus installed on them, how many computers dealing with election rolls, and absentee ballots and vote counting. Can you really risk Russian software on voting systems when you know Russia has attacked the elections?

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/11/israel-hack-uncovered-russian-spies-use-kaspersky-lab-2015-report-us-software-federal-government

    "While the Israeli spies were inside Kaspersky’s systems, they observed Russian spies in turn using the company’s tools to spy on American spies, the New York Times reports. That information, handed to the US, led to the decision in September to end the use of the company’s software across the federal government by December."

    "But it still leaves many further questions unanswered. Crucially for Kaspersky, the Israeli hack apparently failed to provide enough information to determine whether it was a willing, or even knowing, participant in the Russian espionage."

    "The Russian government exercises tight control over domestic and foreign high-tech industries operating within its borders. In June 2017, it began demanding the source code for certain software imported, ostensibly to search for “backdoors” inserted by foreign intelligence agencies. In practice, it’s widely believed that the Russian security agency scans the source code for undisclosed vulnerabilities it can use to improve its own hacking prowess."

    1. Re:Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by Boutzev · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is ridiculous. The whole world uses US software that provides full access to US three letter agencies, but now it is a big issue that Kaspersky happens to be a Russian company.

      The only proof I have seen is talk about a security vulnerability discovered by Israeli intelligence in Kaspersky, which they reported to the US government. There is absolutely no proof of it being intentionally put there. Considering that Kaspersky does provide their source code to US based agencies, it is not very likely they would place anything intentionally and risking loosing their business. It doesn't make sense.

      For common people in the US, it is probably safer to use Kaspersky rather than any US based software. Though it won't stop the three letter agencies from spying on you - they can do this through your OS, your smartphone, your TV set, through your ISP or your email provider ... Kaspersky won't help you much.

    2. Re:Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Using software from your main adversary is profoundly bad security. The same is true when Russia uses US software.

      Antivirus software is second only to the operating system in terms of privilege and therefore makes an ideal attack vector. I bet most AV software is more than capable of maliciously stealing files, keystrokes, or planting a trojan if they were so directed.

    3. Re: Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by orlanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is this ridiculous?!? A country believes they discovered another country's (adversarial one) spy vector. And YOU think it's perfectly sane to not say or do anything about it?

    4. Re:Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by TheCarp · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't consider Russia an adversary;

      Russia has never taken my money and lied to me about what it was being used for. Russia has never used my tax dollars to commit heinous acts of torture. Russia has never arrested my countrymen over what they choose to put in their own bodies.

      Washington is our adversary.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    5. Re:Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by phayes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you truly don't care about Russian aggression and think that the grass is so green over there then you would _emigrate_ to Russia. You'd discover that Russia's treatment of it's drug users, lies to it's population and use of your tax rubles are far far worse than the USAs.

      But you wont do that because you prefer whining to acting on it and because deep down you know Russia is worse four it's citizens than the U.S for everyone who isn't in Putin's list of favorites.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    6. Re:Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by mr.mctibbs · · Score: 2

      Nothing you said is relevant to GP's point, which is that Russia is not his, or our, adversary. It might be a shitty place to live, in which case their government is an adversary of their people, but that doesn't make it *our* adversary. The only people who think Russia is a threat to the US are the people who think the US should be trying to control the whole damned world, and if you're one of them, then you're *my* adversary and I'm glad that you've been squirming since November.

    7. Re:Is Kaspersky Software on Voting machines? by phayes · · Score: 2

      Oh really? Russia's destabilization of eastern europe in their mission to retake their "zone of influence" _hasn't_ impacted my relatives there or defense spending here in western europe & the USA? Clearly, it has and your claims are false.

      Add to that Russia's military support of that murderous bastard Assad. That support _didn't_ allow the bastard to gas and bomb any and all that opposed him (but starting by massacring the moderates first) instead of pushing for or even just allowing for democratic changes? That russian support of Assad _didn't_ produce a refugee crisis dwarfing anything seen in Europe since the last days of WWII? That refugee crisis _hasn't caused a growth of hateful far-right parties throughout Europe?

      Russia _hasn't_ been looking to cause unrest in the west with their repeated meddling in our elections and support of hate groups?!?

      Putin _didn't_ organize the biggest war games in a a 1/4 century based on a scenario separating Poland from Lithuania and annexing a corridor to rejoin Kaliningrad to Belorussia? They _haven't_ been playing chicken with their bombers performing bombing runs on western nations like Norway, Denmark, Germany, The U.K & France?

      Russia _hasn't_ been protecting North Korea while they've been acquiring Nukes, Missiles and performing economic warfare over the Internet? They _didn't_ just give North Korea a second Internet access so that they can augment their hacking?

      Oh, but they _____HAVE_____ been doing that and more!

      The only people who think that Russia _isn't_ a threat to the USA & Europe are the ignorant and the Putin-bought trolls. Which one are you? Ignorant or bought?

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  7. Titling by cloud.pt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Dodging Russian Spies..." not only sounds like "Dodgy Russian Spies", but it also presents a reason before an actual fact on a news/article/post header. This is a perfect example of psychologically loaded news, more even so than clickbait but it actually also is clickbait as they go for the "cold-warish" juicy part of the topic first.

    Now seriously, stop doing titles like this, and don't enable them by allowing such stuff verbatim on slashdot from the original biased, flawed source.

  8. The current opensource by DrYak · · Score: 2

    The problem is that the current open source implementation,
    CalmAV,
    was bought by and is currently developed by... Cisco.

    Okay, it's opensource, so at least independent researcher can go and check whether it contains any underhanded code.
    But still, it's not an international cooperation of several vendors.

    Also, currently it's not the top performing of the pack.

    On the other hand, that doesn't prevent me from using it.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  9. Re:How to make any antivirus software safer? by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps anti-virus wouldn't be even necessary if there were less users infected with anti-intelligence.

    So tired of this bullshit argument.

    I've been working in infosec for 20 years.

    For about half of that time, I also said that "lusers" are the main problem.

    Then one day I grew up and realized that they are just being humans and that's a bullshit excuse for not doing my job properly by complaining that water is wet and gravity sucks.
    Guess what? We're paid good money for solving exactly these problems. If you can't bring a rocket to the moon because of gravity, you don't belong into rocket science. If you can't build a ship that floats because water is so difficult to work with, you don't belong into shipbuilding. And if you can't deal with people being people, you don't fucking belong into information security.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  10. Re:How to make any antivirus software safer? by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AV software is a fundamentally flawed product

    Actually, it's our OS fundamentals that are flawed. In a properly designed system, the AV would not need full access to everything. Of course I'm talking 1970s "properly designed" here, not 2000s "ship half-ready to customer, then patch" philosophy. Sorry, I think they re-branded it "Agile Development".

    AV is a workaround, a hack, for serious weaknesses in our fundamental systems design. That your e-mail system can access business secret documents when you open the wrong mail - that is the actual problem that needs solving. We have AV for the same reason we have condoms - there's a lot of STDs and for most of them we don't have good vaccinations.

    In that sense, AV is not fundamentally flawed, because in a fundamentally non-flawed world, we wouldn't even have it. It's an at-least-this-works-most-of-the-time solution because we can't be arsed to tackle the real issues.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  11. Re:How to make any antivirus software safer? by Tom · · Score: 2

    2017, and the masses still haven't learned. I swear they'll click on anything. Yes, of course that Windows pop-up for a Kardashian baby-watch app was totally legit. I mean, why wouldn't Microsoft want you to know...

    Yes, why wouldn't Microsoft? It preloaded their home computer with a dozen application it deemed useful (ok, was paid for including, but users don't know that) and it serves them personally relevant information (sorry, paid-for ads, but that's not marked anywhere) wherever it can, say on Bing or whatever their current attempt at social networking is. It also made several attempts to put important announcements (advertisement) directly on the desktop of their computers.

    From a non-IT user, the scenario does not look all that much unbelievable. Maybe a bit unusual, but your facepalm is coming from a certain arrogance and insider frame. Some of those dumb users will laugh at you how you put that silly oil into your car, everyone knows it's synthetic shit and you should really use that bottle over there which isn't so heavily advertised. Or what you eat or how you do sports or whatever. You know more about IT than they do, which makes some things seem obvious to you. But you are just as oblivious about "basic facts that everyone knows" in many other areas of life.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  12. Sad In A Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Regardless of whether it's true that the FSB has some kind of backdoor access to Kaspersky products, the company is likely doomed. They might manage to eek out an existence primarily in Russia, but as a shell of the company in its glory days.

    While US spy agencies don't do themselves any favors by publicly saying they want to have a backdoor to any and all encryption methods, the US and Russia are very different places. Get on Putin's bad side and you could find yourself being thrown in jail for (no pun intended) trumped up charges, your company nationalized, and all of your assets seized by the government. When is the last time that happened in the US?

    1. Re:Sad In A Way by phayes · · Score: 2

      Until "the rest of the world" also decides that Putin cannot be trusted.

      Banks and public entities in Europe are also looking to remove Kaspersky products. I've seen it on a number of projects already.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  13. Re:How to make any antivirus software safer? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    The problem is that this level of sandboxing is incredibly anti-user and anti-developer. Basically any OS should do what the user wants and by extension the easiest way for malware to access the machine is to simply ask the dumb meathead sitting in the chair.

  14. Citations [Re: All together? by XXongo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Citation needed.

    http://time.com/4783932/inside-russia-social-media-war-america/
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/russia-facebook-twitter-election.html
    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/06/trump-putin-and-the-new-cold-war
    https://www.newsmax.com/Politics/james-clapper-absolutely-russia-interfered/2017/05/30/id/793102/
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448931/vladimir-putin-russian-election-interference-american-incompetence-weakness-helped-it

    I'd lay off the magic mushrooms.

    Yeah, I know-- don't bother saying it: you're not going to read any of these because "that's all fake news because the mainstream media lies". Yeah. When you dismiss everything that confronts your entrenched position, yes of course you will never change your mind.

  15. Don't be deliberately stupid by XXongo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Using software from your main adversary is profoundly bad security. The same is true when Russia uses US software.

    Antivirus software is second only to the operating system in terms of privilege and therefore makes an ideal attack vector. I bet most AV software is more than capable of maliciously stealing files, keystrokes, or planting a trojan if they were so directed.

    I don't consider Russia an adversary;

    Then you are stupid.

    I don't mind people being stupid-- people are stupid sometimes; it happens. I do mind people being deliberately stupid because being stupid is the only way that they can defend their ideology.

    If your idiotic ideology telling you "Washington is our enemy" and that means Russia is fine, you might consider changing your ideology to one that allows you to actually see the real world.

  16. Re:Trusting Third Parties by zilym · · Score: 2

    I agree, except at the point where you are willing to trust Microsoft... Windows 10 shows us that Microsoft does not hold our privacy sacrosanct in the least. The leaked NSA tools further prove that relying on Microsoft is not going to protect you from being spied upon, by our gov't AND foreign entities. Even this whole Kaspersky fiasco shows that further NSA tools are likely being stolen, AS THEY ARE BEING WRITTEN!

    At the very least, use Linux. Linux may have backdoors too, but at least it's open source, so you and others can at least attempt to identify and close those security holes. Closed source Microsoft products, forget about it. You're never going to be safe there.