8 ms·
Kaspersky Lab Has Been Working with Russian Intelligence
- DarkKomunalec 9y agoAs always, any implication that all closed-source software, regardless of company, suffers from similar issues, is conveniently absent. Just as it was during the VW emissions scandal - it's the cheating that was problematic, not that consumers are effectively in the dark about how most of their products operate, and deliberately prevented (successfully or not) from finding out (personally, or done on their behalf by others).
- hellbanner 9y agoDo you think because the implications of open-source software would threaten the economic model & world that the writer lives in? Or that it's just an oversight and they just want to earn clicks? I think it's the latter, even if it's in effect the former (unintentioally).
- DarkKomunalec 9y agoI don't think this writer omitted it intentionally. I think it's because journalists that are too at-odds with corporate (or other dominant narrative) just have a harder time in their career. No-one gets censored, except in rare cases - they just don't have their contract extended. See https://cartoonistsrights.org/u-s-cartoonist-fired-after-criticizing-monsanto-and-dupont/ https://cartoonistsrights.org/u-s-cartoonist-fired-after-cri... , but I imagine it's usually handled more subtly.
- hellbanner 9y ago"In a Facebook post following his firing, Friday wrote that the incident showed “how fragile our rights to free speech and free press really are in the country.”" Indeed.
- thephyber 9y agoI think the Bloomberg reporting goes beyond that. They claim lots of networking hardware comes pre-installed with Kaspersky software that the end-user may not even be aware of. I can't find specific products so I don't know whether this is just Dell-preinstalled crapware that can be wiped with an OS reinstall or some sort of embedded device where the end user has no interface to disable/uninstall it.
- m103forme 9y agoSeeing how horrible and intrusive their endpoint AV is, I can't imagine them "sneaking" any of their products into anything.
- codedokode 9y agoEven worse, in some countries disassembling proprietary software to analyse its behaviour can be prohibited (at least they write this in EULA). And modern OS have no protection against backdoors: desktop OS allow apps to do whatever they want, mobile OS like Android have privileges separation but don't allow user to control Internet traffic: you cannot run iptables or ban an app from accessing the network.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- gtirloni 9y agoThe article seems a bit hyperbolic to me. Expecting a major Russian cybersecurity company not to have any business with its own government is a bit naive. Not all government business is spying and unlawful activities. From what Bloomberg is sharing with us (I couldn't find those emails), Kaspersky is developing a software solution with defensive and offensive capabilities as well as providing consultancy services to the FSB in hunting down criminals (Bloomberg says Kaspersky is "banging down doors").
- muninn_ 9y agoRight. Why would anybody be surprised by this knowing full well that American companies do the same?
- ProAm 9y agoBecause the Russians are the bad guys. /s
- mwfunk 9y agoI didn't believe this as a child in the '80s, but in the last 10 years at least, Putin's Russia has been freaking horrifying to me. So yeah, they aren't the world's only bad guys, and they're probably not the worst, but it's not for lack of trying. Putin's vision of Russia doesn't even try to avoid looking comically sinister. I honestly don't see how anyone who isn't wrapped up in self-interested religious or ethnic nationalism could see it any other way.
- linkregister 9y agoThe problem with that viewpoint is to treat Russia as a monolithic entity. Despite military aggression and political and speech repression by the ruling junta, there is still a vibrant and mostly functional economy. Kaspersky providing services to the FSB (which is kind of like NIST, FTC, FCC, FBI, and DHS all in one) is little different to Cisco or IBM providing consulting services for the respective U.S. agencies. Political conflict has always been this way, it's just more apparent now that trade information is widely accessible. To compare, Japanese companies traded with the U.S. up until the 1941 invasion, despite significant political conflict between the two countries over Manchuria and the colonies in Southeast Asia.
- marcusjt 9y agoWhatever next? Have American AV companies been "Working with American Intelligence"? That would be just as shocking... ;)
- lostboys67 9y agoI suspect the penalties for not playing ball are more severe in Russia
- masmullin 9y agoIn soviet Russia, severe ball plays you!
- cat199 9y agoIn Putins Russia, westerners use antiquated soviet metaphors in to maintain a false sense of superiority and unipolar status quo disclaimer: I like soviet russia jokes
- lostboys67 9y agoTo be serous Putin's and old school Chekist
- lostboys67 9y agoAnd the rootless capitalist kulak falls out of the window accidently :-(
- pjc50 9y agoThanks to the wonders of the free market, you can choose which global intelligence service you want your software to be compromised to! (I'm not even sure if this is a joke)
- LarryPage 9y agoOr you can put off such decisions, and be compromised by all!
- technologia 9y agoNo shit. This isn't really news, as a few others point out that companies generally tend to work with their respective country's government. You won't see Kaspersky AV on a US government workstation and you won't see McAfee on any of their workstations for example.
- Bartweiss 9y agoThe real news here, the part that makes the US government care, is "As many as 200 million [people] may not know [they use Kaspersky]." Businessweek buried the lede (potentially-compromised firmware in devices you don't realize carry it) behind the blatantly-obvious (AV companies are not government-independent). Well, that and Kaspersky may have been lying about what connections they do have, but frankly that's not surprising either.
- projectramo 9y agoThank goodness we don't have to worry about the big tech companies working with intelligence services in the USA.
- captainmuon 9y agoBefore we entered The Darkest Timeline, NSA used to be known for helping American companies with their encryption and cybersecurity, and preventing corporate espionage. I'm one of the first when it comes to criticizing overreach of governments and intelligence agencies, but I do recognize that they do a lot of legitimate and positive work.
- 086421357909764 9y agoThey still do extensive work on mitigating and responding to corporate and nation-state espionage. Aurora is probably the most public taste of the work behind closed doors.
- the-dude 9y agoPreventing corporate espionage : priceless! "The paper said the agency "lifted all the faxes and phone-calls between Airbus, the Saudi national airline and the Saudi Government" to gain this information." Agency : NSA. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/820758.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/820758.stm
- captainmuon 9y agoWell, prevent espionage from other countries on US firms of course. And there is always the discrepancy between stated goals and reality.
- sebtoast 9y agoAnyone has the Reddit thread where Kaspersky posted? I'm curious to read it.
- thephyber 9y agoThe Kaspersky AMA thread from May of this year: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/6ajstf/im_eugene_kaspersky_cybersecurity_guy_and_ceo_of/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/6ajstf/im_eugene_kasp...
- ajarmst 9y agoIt's hardly odd for a computer security company to seek government contracts. The released emails don't seem point to anything nefarious (unless merely working with the FSB is considered nefarious). The remainder is a lot of "could" and "would be possible" speculation. Conspiracy mongering clickbait. Moving on.
- commenter98456 9y agoHe who smelt it dealt it? Crowdstrike, FireEye ,Cobaltstrike,symantec,etc... are they CIA fronts as well? As an american, why would I trust the CIA/NSA over the SVR/GRU? I wish I didn't have to ask that. but the fact is, and I'm sure some will agree - It is the CIA/NSA machine that can make my life here in America hell, not the SVR/GRU. I can understand the concern when it comes to critical infrastructure and government software. However in the private sector and for individuals - "A tyrant 3000 miles away" is less of a threat than "3000 tyrants a mile a way".
- adventured 9y ago> As an american, why would I trust the CIA/NSA over the SVR/GRU? Because one is tasked - in theory - with protecting you, the other is tasked solely with protecting Russians (at your expense as necessary). It's that simple. And if you're going to claim the NSA never does anything to keep Americans safe, it would degrade your credibility toward zero.
- zeep 9y agoIf you subtract the stuff that you don't want them to do from the stuff that you want them to do, are you still in the positive?
- commenter98456 9y agoThey do plenty to protect what they consider is worthy of protection. which often leaves me out. Protection in their sense includes depriving me of basic rights and freedoms (so long as I'm "Safe"). It's not their official duties that I find dubious but their historical and ongoing ignorance of them. If they simply did their job I wouldn't even need to ask that question. I'd probably ask the same of SVR/GRU if I lived in Russia. If the NSA/CIA were doing their job, they wouldn't spy on their own people and they certainly wouldn't make secret deals with security companies and inflitrate their ranks to have a strategic advantage. Letting security companies independently do their job would be "protecting America" backdoors, hoarding exploits, influencing weak crypto,etc... I'm sorry but the russians don't even have the ability to do some of that even if they have the will. GRU or NSA for both "ends justify means" , if you're on the "ends" side, pick software backdoored by your home country. if you're on the "means" side, pick the other guy. I suppose it's time to consider what "collateral damage" in the sense of geopolitical computer security is.
- Trickilozis 9y agoOf course they have. They are a business based in Moscow. I would be surprised if they hadn't. They are just too attractive a target for the Kremlin not to try to co-opt. No idea how any US corporate security team could justify working with them, quite honestly.
- lawnchair_larry 9y agoDo you also have no idea how any non-US security team can justify working with Microsoft?
- coldtea 9y agoUnlike US-based security companies?
- sigsergv 9y agoYes, US-based security companies don't work with FSB.