4 ms·
I'd find this very surprising, if true. When I worked for a company that was essentially developing malware, we were able to get ourselves whitelisted by most a
by Rudism 11y ago
I'd find this very surprising, if true. When I worked for a company that was essentially developing malware, we were able to get ourselves whitelisted by most anti-virus software (either by going through an automated submission process, or outright bribery). The only one who wouldn't budge on principal, no matter what we offered, was Kaspersky. All the others either auto-whitelisted us when we asked or after we paid them. I gained a lot of respect for Kaspersky for that (and lost a lot of respect for the majority of their competitors).
- nos4A2 11y agoThis is interesting, because I thought Symantec was the incorruptible AV co.
- SpikedCola 11y agoHave you ever used their product(s)? Given the way they used to slow PCs down to a halt, I didn't/wouldn't trust them to do a halfway-decent job.
- AmVess 11y agoTheir products haven't been system hogs for a long time now. I used Norton AV on a fairly reedy dual core Celeron (1.8 GHz)with a platter drive and it only slowed that thing down when it was running a scheduled scan.
- Zhenya 11y agoCan you tell us a bit more? This is absolutely fascinating.
- lawnchair_larry 11y agoIf that happened, it had nothing to do with bribery and corruption, but incompetence. Kaspersky's refusal isn't a sign of their integrity, but avoidance of an obvious trap. I'm not saying they don't have integrity, but even if they didn't, it would be very dumb to take that bribe, especially in a country very familiar with corporate blackmail.