4 ms·
How else can you explain their obsessive occupation with The Equation Group, which they themselves claim to be a (US) state actor, targeting other (US-unfriendl
by dunpeal 9y ago
How else can you explain their obsessive occupation with The Equation Group, which they themselves claim to be a (US) state actor, targeting other (US-unfriendly) state actors?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_Group
An ordinary anti-virus company would never get involved in state-vs-state cyber warfare, let alone pour tons of money into researching it. How does that support their business model?
Do you think it's normal for a commercial company to spend so much time, money, and effort researching areas that have nothing to do with their core business, and will likely get them in trouble with their customers and antagonistic governments?
- mtgx 9y agoI could make the very same argument against CrowdStrike, which has been focusing on uncovering Russian cyber attacks. Also here's some "damning evidence", too: “There’s a Balkanization of cyberspace that’s occurring, and companies need to choose which side they’re on,” said Dmitri Alperovich, co-founder of U.S. security firm CrowdStrike. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-media-tech-summit-flame/some-flame-code-found-in-stuxnet-virus-experts-idUSBRE85A0TN20120612 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-media-tech-summit-flame/so... Sounds to me like they've "chosen a side", like you're implying Kaspersky has.
- lqdc13 9y agoAre you saying state sponsored malware should not be looked into? It seems like American companies tend to find Russian state-sponsored malware and Russian ones keep finding US/US allies-sponsored malware.
- frabbit 9y agoAnd in addition Israeli hackers keep on finding malware in locations they've hacked into..... hmmmmm