Slashdot Mirror
Kaspersky Lab Sues Trump Administration Over Software Ban (reuters.com)
Moscow-based anti-virus company Kaspersky Lab sued the Trump administration in U.S. federal court on Monday, arguing that the American government has deprived it of due process rights by banning its software from U.S. government agencies. From a report: The lawsuit is the latest effort by Kaspersky Lab to push back on allegations that the company is vulnerable to Kremlin influence. The Department of Homeland Security in September issued a directive to U.S. civilian agencies ordering them to remove Kaspersky Lab from their computer networks within 90 days. The order came amid mounting concern among U.S. officials that the software could enable Russian espionage and threaten national security. The ban was codified last week when President Donald Trump signed legislation banning Kasperky Lab from use across civilian and military agencies.
For banning Kaspersky software? You lost me there. Or did you miss telling us something?
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
he's ordering Americans not to welcome the enemy into their homes.
I pity the poor bastards who call government agencies "home".
Trump is only preventing Federal agencies from using Kaspersky Lab's offerings, he's not keeping them from selling to other US customers. You can still buy their products in the USA. I realize that this Federal ban does cut into their market share, but how will suing fix this?
How do they have a lawsuit? Can I now sue the Federal Government if they refuse to use *my* software product?
You cannot sue city hall, Kaspersky Lab's needs to file that suit in the circular file marked "trash" because it's going to be dumped by the courts eventually and turn into a waste of good money.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I'm not one to defend what the current administration/congress does but banning the use of software on government and government contractors' computers that is suspected to be under the control of a foreign government seems well within the scope of the law.
Frankly, if they banned Microsoft's shoddy products then you wouldn't need to bother with Kaspersky.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
But Trump works for Putin. why would Putin sue him?!
Why wouldn't he?
It's a lawsuit that's going nowhere anyway... Unless the government agrees to be sued, this will be dismissed.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
What the F are they smoking?
There is no right to have people buy your products...
This will have a cascade effect as Kaspersky is effectively dead in the USA, government agency or not.
Indeed. It would be the end of Kasperkey software if there was the slightest hint that they were colluding with the Russian state. As it would be for all of the American companies who obviously are compromised by the NSA. You jokers are all as bad as each other. Trump is a cretin.
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
It probably would have been better (for Trump) if Putin hadn't done that. However, as for providing the intel... I'd do it to, so long as there was a reasonable expectation that the favour might one day be returned.
You can be a competitor with someone - and so far as I know at present the USA and Russia aren't in any immediate danger of open hostilities breaking out - and still have some areas of cooperation due to common interest.
I'm not particularly well versed in international politics, but I suspect there are better ways of retaliating against Russia should the American government acknowledge Russian election meddling than standing by as a terrorist attack is carried out.
>However, as for providing the intel... I'd do it to, so long as there was a reasonable expectation that the favour might one day be returned.
Here's that 'o' I missed:
o
If any more letters of the alphabet are missing, please provide your own and I'll reimburse you at a later date.
Only Americans have rights to anything, due process included.
You are not correct in this assertion.
Only rights guaranteed to "the people" are exclusively applicable to American citizens.
Rights guaranteed to "persons" belong to everyone.
To make it clearer, would it be legal to hold a slave if that slave is not an American citizen?
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
>would it be legal to hold a slave if that slave is not an American citizen?
Only if they have a safeword.
place? Sheesh, let's see, our government uses closed source SECURITY software from a company located in a (hostile?) foreign country and everyone in the US doesn't automatically think it's a Bad Idea?
And yes I know there's a lot of software made outside of the US by non-US companies that are likely used in the US gov't, but security, especially closed-source, software should not be one of those.
You're just a retarded piece of shit, that's all. Muh Russian hackers were a very real influence in the 2016 election cycle and time is not going to be kind to your ignorant, vatnik comments here.
You went full retard, never go full retard. The Russians put a grand total of a few thousand dollars into Facebook advertising which didn't even get many views - they were probably just studying memes like everyone else. Meanwhile Hillary had backing from dozens of foreign state actors, AND she actually sold Uranium to the Russians, which is worse than anything anyone has even accused Trump of.
Answers in order:
NO.
NO.
NO.
Go back to sleep now.
Selling Uranium is bad? To a nation that we have a reciprocal nuclear decommission treaty with? We sell nuclear materials to each other all the time. Selling Uranium to Russia is no worse than selling anything else to Russia. We both have nuclear stockpiles. We aren't empowering them by selling any more fissile material to them.
Stop trolling. You are making yourself look dumb.
Kaspersky anti-virus or Intel AMT?
No you idiot, she did not. She, like all of the other cabinet members, approved the sale of a Canadian company who owned uranium mining rights in the US to a Russian one. No Uranium actually left US soil... Hillary Clinton did not go dig it up and mail it to Russia and get a big fat check.
I'm sure if we cared to investigate, we could find evidence of British meddling, but no, we have to go with Russian.
IIRC, they just removed Kaspersky from the list of potential suppliers. That is, they actively forbid any future government contracts to Kaspersky, but that didn't mean Kaspersky had ever gotten any before.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
She, like all of the other cabinet members, approved the sale of a Canadian company
Actually, she wasn't even involved with the process as related by the person on the committee:
The Clinton campaign told the Times that generally these matters did not reach the secretary's level, so she may not have been involved at all. According to the Times, Jose Fernandez, a former assistant secretary of state, represented the department on the committee. He told the Times: "Mrs. Clinton never intervened with me on any C.F.I.U.S. matter."
But let's not let facts get in the way of a good rant by the con artist team.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
I didn't know the US is a hostile foreign country to the US. The things one learn...
I dunno.. i mean innocent people losing their lives is a bad thing regardless of the diplomatic relationship with the country. I'd rather not have people die due to a tit for tat mentality.
Please elaborate. I fail to see the relevancy to my post. Do you think Kaspersky is a US company?
Meanwhile Hillary had backing from dozens of foreign state actors, AND she actually sold Uranium to the Russians, which is worse than anything anyone has even accused Trump of.
Oh, FFS. How many times does this have to be explained? The US Government (at least 7 different agencies, not simply SecState) approved the sale of 30% of a Canadian uranium mining company to Rosatom. No uranium is being shipped from the mines to Russia. The only result of the deal is that Rosatom makes some money from the mining operations. You Trumptards just can't seem to get your facts straight.
... I suspect there are better ways of retaliating against Russia should the American government acknowledge Russian election meddling than standing by as a terrorist attack is carried out.
Helping an adversary when they're in trouble is called "taking the high road". It's a completely new concept for Trump and his administration, so it will feel strange to them -- and us -- for a while, especially if they try continuing down that road (but, I'm not holding my breath).
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
By "effective" you mean "Not true at all but let's act like it is and then make derivative outrageous indignation conclusions." Got it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft
"American multinational technology company with headquarters in Redmond, Washington"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaspersky_Lab
"a multinational cybersecurity and anti-virus provider headquartered in Moscow, Russia[1] and operated by a holding company in the United Kingdom"
And no, I choose not to take you seriously.
The more accurate statement is that rights only apply to entities within the jurisdiction of the United States. Kaspersky, being wholly Russian owned, does not qualify as a US entity, and since the company is not located in the United States, it is not under US jurisdiction.
It need not be a "US entity", merely a legal entity that's present in the US.
Incidentally, it would be legal for a non-US person to hold a non-US person as a slave outside of the United States.
So... You're taking the time to explain that US law only applies to places under the jurisdiction of the US. Yes, we all know this. The discussion was about what the US government is doing, within the jurisdiction of the USA.
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Lol coward is correct. Please never change they way you are, it's easier for us to identify and avoid your kind.
They sponsor Scuderia Ferrari. Seb Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen don't mind. Neither do I.
And then Hillary conveniently got several millions in a âoedonationâ from the same Russians that just bought the mine.
If you control the mine, you can control who gets the product. The fact that the entire administration cooperated should indicate something to you.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Been a reader on this site since the beginning and it don't seem to be going anywhere. In fact, appears to me they've improved things in the past couple of years, especially with content.
Most entertaining are the occasional random crazy trolls who choose to waste their time on sites they despise.
If you control the mine, you can control who gets the product. The fact that the entire administration cooperated should indicate something to you.
Not in the case of uranium. Uranium is a critical national resource, and by treaty with Canada cannot be sent anywhere but the US.
Actually, she wasn't even involved with the process as related by the person on the committee:
A) The Clintons and Soros control that fact check website you linked, you literally cited propaganda.
B) The Clintons received over 100m in their personal accounts for that sale, but sure, it was "unrelated."
C) You're a shill.
It's interesting how you nuts got even nuttier after Trump beat your chosen sociopath.
It need not be a "US entity", merely a legal entity that's present in the US.
Corporations are government constructs, they aren't things save for a government calling them a thing and giving them some degree of personhood. The US is under zero obligation to recognize foreign entities, even if you want to try to say the US must recognize foreign persons (hint: you'd be wrong there as well.)
Not if the mine is surrounded by another country's police, customs officers & border control agents.
Perhaps they smuggle it out in the internal mail - hide a couple of pounds between the secret santa list and the football club newsletter?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
He is ordering Americans not to let him into their homes? Didn't anyone tell him there was no special need for that one?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
They literally don't know what a fact is, so you can't really expect them to keep them straight.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I very much doubt this, there will be trade agreements that US is obliged to keep. I don't know if it applies in this instance, but zero obligation doesn't seen feasible.
If it was the case the other countries could for example break US copyright or vice versa, since there is 0 obligation to do so why do it.
wth are you talking about? Go home commie, we don't want your software
Terrorism spreads like cancer. If you ignore it "over there" then it will eventually come after you.
Canada sells uranium to France.
place? Sheesh, let's see, our government uses closed source SECURITY software from a company located in a (hostile?) foreign country and everyone in the US doesn't automatically think it's a Bad Idea?
I agree with you, but let's not get distracted from the real issue here. First of all, any organization is free to audit the Kaspersky software. This was even true before this incident.
The real issue here is that an idiot NSA developer took his work home with him and put it on his personal laptop.
According to Kaspersky, its security package running on the PC detected Pho's copies of the NSA exploits as new malicious software, and uploaded the powerful spyware to its cloud for further analysis by its researchers.
[...]
Kaspersky Lab has denied any wrongdoing in the matter or illicit ties to Russian intelligence. The security vendor also pointed out Pho's machine was infected with loads of malware, meaning any miscreant could have stolen Uncle Sam's cyber-weapons.
source
In other words, the NSA seems incapable of keeping its top secret information secret. That employee should never have been able to download source code from the NSA.
He was a developer, not a system administrator. There is a reason you keep people's functions separated. It's because each position has its own set of incentives. As a developer, your job security depends on finishing projects. But as a sysadmin, your job security is based on securing the systems developers use.
Furthermore, if the NSA can't keep its own most important information secure, there is no way in hell that any other organization or government agency will be able to do the same with a large database of manufacturers' backdoors.
I very much doubt this, there will be trade agreements that US is obliged to keep. I don't know if it applies in this instance, but zero obligation doesn't seen feasible.
Trade agreements are irrelevant, the DoD has the final say in anything remotely defense related, which using foreign software most certainly is. If you remember back to the the satellite internet guys trying to take over the GPS band (possibly to spur interest in Galileo, though I'll disregard the conspiracy aspect of it for the moment,) it passed every fucking approval agency over the course of years, the senate, the house, the PoTUS, FCC, everything - a few weeks before they were about to switch over a general speaks up and says "you aren't doing this because it will break our GPS navigation system and we need that," and it was dead in the water, company went bankrupt, etc. When you get down to it the world still runs on the same concept it ever did: might makes right. There is no obligation to sacrifice security by accepting foreign dependencies.
They should - as soon as the story broke - have moved their servers outside Russia and the reach of Putin, just to eliminate any possibility of interference. They didn't do that, which could be interpreted as unwillingness or similar, possibly due to legal pressure within Russia, keeping the rumor of (forced?) surveillance intact.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Corporations are government constructs, they aren't things save for a government calling them a thing and giving them some degree of personhood.
Corporate personhood is the purpose of incorporation. Without corporate personhood, Eugene Kaspersky would just be a guy selling a product and then, as a person, Eugene Kaspersky would have the rights that belong to "persons" when operating under the jurisdiction of the USA.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
A) Kaspersky is a foreign actor. It doesn't matter if he's nice and aiming to do good or not, you don't put foreigners in charge of government systems because the entire purpose of government is protect citizens from foreign threats. An ally today could well be an enemy tomorrow.
B) Corporations don't have the rights of people, "personhood" refers to the ability of a corporation to absorb the blowback from debt and other potential legal concerns so it doesn't destroy a person's life.
Kaspersky sued the DHS, not the Executive Branch of government.
Another poster already pointed to an article that Uranium One was able to export US uranium by piggy-backing on another export license soon after the Russians started controlling it. Just because CNN says they didn't know or it didn't happen doesn't make it true.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
He's not a shill, you're a partisan hack. The uranium deal was a normal business deal that had to be approved by six people, including Secretary Clinton. It was non-controversial at the time. The Clintons did not accept money for the sale, the Secretary had only part of the deal, and Russia has plenty of uranium available to convert to plutonium-239 anyway.
Got any actual evidence for anything you wrote there?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Doesn't disprove my point. The police, boseder agents etc. could have stopped it if they'd wanted to and been competent.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I don't trust any AV vendor, or any government for that matter. I'm less worried about Russia getting my info than a branch of the US government getting my data. It's low risk in either case, but Russians are less likely to be interested in me than the US. This is most definitely not the case with sensitive US government computers.
Moreover, there has been more than the slightest hint that Kaspersky has to collude with the Russian government, and it hasn't crashed yet.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
In this matter, it doesn't matter if he's foreign or not. No one has the right to have their product bought by the government. I don't see any way for him to win this, outside of judicial activism. What he has the right to is due process of law and he has that because he's a person.
I didn't say that corporations have the rights of "people", they have the rights of "persons". In every day speech, there is no difference but in the context of the constitution, there is.
Personhood is what allows a corporation to own assets, engage in the practice of business and (arguably most importantly) pay taxes.
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
He's not a shill, you're a partisan hack. The uranium deal was a normal business deal that had to be approved by six people, including Secretary Clinton. It was non-controversial at the time.
So six corrupt traitors and it didn't get media attention because it was the Clintons taking the kickback? Shill harder.
McCarthyism all over again!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
Actually, I'm not a shill. I annoy people for free.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Actually, I'm not a shill. I annoy people for free.
You're literally defending treasonous corrupt sellouts. Not even a veil of incompetence can make you not be a shill.
A shill is someone paid to do something. As I said, I annoy people for free.
You might want to look at the Constitutional definition of treason, which doesn't support your claim. Of course, since you pay no attention to the facts, I suppose this is a vain hope.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
A shill is someone paid to do something. As I said, I annoy people for free.
You might want to look up that word. Unpaid morons haplessly defending the interests of a party who doesn't even know their name are also shills.
You might want to look at the Constitutional definition of treason, which doesn't support your claim.
A member of the US government sold materials used to make weapons of mass destruction to an adversarial nation for personal gain. The only reason she wasn't put in front of a firing squad is because her name is Clinton. Spies have done far less and gotten far worse.
Actually, Ollie North wasn't in it for personal gain, and I don't think the arms were actually WMDs.
At the time, Russia wasn't an adversarial nation. The US was trying to engage Russia in a friendly manner in the hope of avoiding too much hostility. It didn't work, but that doesn't retcon Russia in to an enemy. The deal was selling stock in a uranium company, not selling uranium. I've seen absolutely no evidence that Russia used this particular uranium, assuming they got some out of the deal, for WMD production. Heck, natural uranium is natural uranium, so if Russia got uranium from other sources it doesn't matter which was used.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Actually, Ollie North wasn't in it for personal gain, and I don't think the arms were actually WMDs.
At the time, Russia wasn't an adversarial nation. The US was trying to engage Russia in a friendly manner in the hope of avoiding too much hostility.
A) Hapless shills are irrelevant, the Clintons profited from it. Even if it were in our best interests, which it wasn't, they had no right to gain personally from it. Doing that in the civilian would would be outright embezzlement at the least, which is still a felony carrying decades in prison.
B) Selling other nations materials which can be used to make weapons of mass destruction is never in our best interests, so it's a flimsy excuse.
There were stories of a donation to the Clinton Foundation that were alleged to be connected to her agreeing with five other government officials that it was OK to go ahead with the sale. The Clinton Foundation is a bona fide charitable organization, so I don't see where the profit would come in.
Selling a company in another nation 20% share in a Canadian company doesn't violate our best interests, and that's what she and the others approved. She didn't approve any transfer of uranium to Russia. If Russia was able to get the uranium by owning a share of the company, they could have gotten it by buying it directly.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
There is no justification, just stop trying, you are a bad shill.