18 ms·

Our company uses the enterprise version of Kaspersky. But if we drop this over surveillance issues then it would be a pretty hypocritical to switch to AV softw

Our company uses the enterprise version of Kaspersky. But if we drop this over surveillance issues then it would be a pretty hypocritical to switch to AV software from the USA. Since they are proven to do the exact thing that Kaspersky is now suspected / blamed of doing. So, fellow Europeans, what now? Avast? Any other options? EDIT: Ok so I found a pretty useful Wiki list[1] with European made AV products. I haven't used them so I can't judge to their effectiveness, especially the enterprise versions. But here are some alternatives to US / RU anti virus suites. Czech Republic: AVAST, AVG, TrustPort Finland: F-Secure Germany: Avira, G-Data Iceland: FRISK (F-PROT) Romania: Bitdefender Slovakia: ESET Spain: PANDA security [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_antivirus_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_antivirus_softwa...

nannal 9y ago
Hire a team from your native country to manually inspect each packet before it is passed on to the client machines. This kind of Biological neural network isn't always the fastest approach but you can be sure it isn't forwarding all your traffic to the government.
- someonewhocar3s 9y ago
  Your ridicule is misplaced. We truly cannot trust the computers we use, from the silicon up. To call that paranoia isn't naivity anymore, it's foolhardiness.
  - joshvm 9y ago
    Standard intelligence practice is to assume that your information is already compromised. All it takes is a mole, or a disgruntled employee and all the cybersecurity in the world is naught. You'd be foolish to think anything else.
    - WillReplyfFood 9y ago
      Standard Practice is to have honeypots, and watch carefully who puts his paws where..
- willstrafach 9y ago
  Network security monitoring is fairly common in competent enterprises.
theyregreat 9y ago
Filter on the benchmarks and then dig into ownership and reputation. Bigger vendors have more to lose and more resources to fight legal and cybersecurity issues. Too big / multinational vendors then get leaned-on by national security services with an “include this and give us customer information or we blacklist you” offer. https://www.av-comparatives.org/ https://www.av-comparatives.org/
dnh44 9y ago
Of those, all but Finland are NATO members.
- nl 9y ago
  NATO is a military alliance, not a intelligence sharing agreement. We know that five-eyes intel doesn't go to NATO, and it is pretty doubtful that eg Turkey and Germany share their intel.
  - someonewhocar3s 9y ago
    Five Eyes > NATO > non-NATO We actually have no insight into military secret services' infoflow.
  - pintxo 9y ago
    It's been shown somewhat recently[1], that German intelligence not just exchanged data with the US, but also collected data for the US services in Germany and worldwide. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/28/germany-curb-spy-agency-nsa-scandal-angela-merkel https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/28/germany-curb-s...
    - nl 9y ago
      Indeed. But this isn't some NATO thing, it's a US/German agreement.
ryanlol 9y ago
If you must use AV, better look for AV solutions with clear written policies on the information they collect https://www.f-secure.com/en/web/legal/privacy/security-cloud https://www.f-secure.com/en/web/legal/privacy/security-cloud
colejohnson66 9y ago
What’s wrong with Windows Defender?
- MertsA 9y ago
  This is the real answer here. For the only alternatives you're forced to trust yet another party and with something like AV that basically equates to the third party having full control over your machine should they decide to do so. At least with Windows Defender you aren't adding another adversary although it seems pretty hypocritical to avoid American AV while still using an OS that the NSA can push updates to. Get Windows Ten should have been an eye opener for everyone, vetting updates isn't anywhere close to good enough, if Microsoft is compelled to do so they can run whatever they want on your computer.
throwaway7767 9y ago
> Iceland: FRISK (F-PROT) FRISK was bought by Israeli company Commtouch several years ago. They wound down operations in Iceland to the point that I doubt any real technical work goes on there.
thewhitetulip 9y ago
Use Linux :) there is no other option
- aplummer 9y ago
  I think a Mac would work too, but that relies on trusting individuals.
  - MertsA 9y ago
    How would switching to macOS provide any protection against an APT? Against Malware in general yeah sure but against the NSA or FSB in a targeted attack I don't see how that benefits you at all. If the NSA can put the screws on Microsoft then Apple should be no different. Apple refusing the FBI is one thing but faced with a gag order and an NSL their only recourse is to appeal to a secret court that basically always sides with the government. Also as of late it seems like macOS has been nothing but security incident after security incident like the recent bug where encrypted disks had a password hint of the decryption password or when somebody found out that the system preferences app was basically using an undocumented API that had no authorization at all and gave root access. Or that keychain vulnerability that gave complete access to the entire keychain to anything running in a web browser! I think an APT would have a field day if their targets started using macOS.
    - luch 9y ago
      Everyone who think they are safe using macOS should see this presentation : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7VZtCUphgg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7VZtCUphgg Patrick Wardle has reversed the C2 com protocol and found it had "advanced" capabilities (remote exec, key and mouse sniffing, screenshot, etc.). The malware was found on several thousands Macs too (mostly in the US).
      - mafsedan 9y ago
        Apple pays people to "astroturf" that they're immune from Viruses and backdoors. IMHO, that makes them much worse than Microsoft.
partycoder 9y ago
That is assuming they're not infiltrated, hacked or voluntarily participating of some foreign surveillance/espionage program.
jdiaz5513 9y ago
This is purely anecdotal, but back when I was doing a lot of Windows sysadmin work (and when viruses were rampant) I wound up tearing through a lot of AV vendors in short order. Only a handful survived my tests, and now I see them all listed here as European AV vendors. Interesting. Symantec, by the way, was by far the worst. It got to the point where I would immediately uninstall their products on sight. My favorite was when one of their automatic updates started causing boot failures. That sure kept me busy!
zby 9y ago
Yeah - I agree EU software is the safest option: https://medium.com/@zby/the-safest-option-is-eu-software-abc694aa1a1d https://medium.com/@zby/the-safest-option-is-eu-software-abc...
lousken 9y ago
eset

nannal 9y ago

Hire a team from your native country to manually inspect each packet before it is passed on to the client machines. This kind of Biological neural network isn't always the fastest approach but you can be sure it isn't forwarding all your traffic to the government.

someonewhocar3s 9y ago
Your ridicule is misplaced. We truly cannot trust the computers we use, from the silicon up. To call that paranoia isn't naivity anymore, it's foolhardiness.
- joshvm 9y ago
  Standard intelligence practice is to assume that your information is already compromised. All it takes is a mole, or a disgruntled employee and all the cybersecurity in the world is naught. You'd be foolish to think anything else.
  - WillReplyfFood 9y ago
    Standard Practice is to have honeypots, and watch carefully who puts his paws where..
willstrafach 9y ago
Network security monitoring is fairly common in competent enterprises.

theyregreat 9y ago

Filter on the benchmarks and then dig into ownership and reputation. Bigger vendors have more to lose and more resources to fight legal and cybersecurity issues. Too big / multinational vendors then get leaned-on by national security services with an “include this and give us customer information or we blacklist you” offer. https://www.av-comparatives.org/ https://www.av-comparatives.org/

dnh44 9y ago

Of those, all but Finland are NATO members.

nl 9y ago
NATO is a military alliance, not a intelligence sharing agreement. We know that five-eyes intel doesn't go to NATO, and it is pretty doubtful that eg Turkey and Germany share their intel.
- someonewhocar3s 9y ago
  Five Eyes > NATO > non-NATO We actually have no insight into military secret services' infoflow.
- pintxo 9y ago
  It's been shown somewhat recently[1], that German intelligence not just exchanged data with the US, but also collected data for the US services in Germany and worldwide. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/28/germany-curb-spy-agency-nsa-scandal-angela-merkel https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/28/germany-curb-s...
  - nl 9y ago
    Indeed. But this isn't some NATO thing, it's a US/German agreement.

ryanlol 9y ago

If you must use AV, better look for AV solutions with clear written policies on the information they collect https://www.f-secure.com/en/web/legal/privacy/security-cloud https://www.f-secure.com/en/web/legal/privacy/security-cloud

colejohnson66 9y ago

What’s wrong with Windows Defender?

MertsA 9y ago
This is the real answer here. For the only alternatives you're forced to trust yet another party and with something like AV that basically equates to the third party having full control over your machine should they decide to do so. At least with Windows Defender you aren't adding another adversary although it seems pretty hypocritical to avoid American AV while still using an OS that the NSA can push updates to. Get Windows Ten should have been an eye opener for everyone, vetting updates isn't anywhere close to good enough, if Microsoft is compelled to do so they can run whatever they want on your computer.

throwaway7767 9y ago

> Iceland: FRISK (F-PROT) FRISK was bought by Israeli company Commtouch several years ago. They wound down operations in Iceland to the point that I doubt any real technical work goes on there.

thewhitetulip 9y ago

Use Linux :) there is no other option

aplummer 9y ago
I think a Mac would work too, but that relies on trusting individuals.
- MertsA 9y ago
  How would switching to macOS provide any protection against an APT? Against Malware in general yeah sure but against the NSA or FSB in a targeted attack I don't see how that benefits you at all. If the NSA can put the screws on Microsoft then Apple should be no different. Apple refusing the FBI is one thing but faced with a gag order and an NSL their only recourse is to appeal to a secret court that basically always sides with the government. Also as of late it seems like macOS has been nothing but security incident after security incident like the recent bug where encrypted disks had a password hint of the decryption password or when somebody found out that the system preferences app was basically using an undocumented API that had no authorization at all and gave root access. Or that keychain vulnerability that gave complete access to the entire keychain to anything running in a web browser! I think an APT would have a field day if their targets started using macOS.
  - luch 9y ago
    Everyone who think they are safe using macOS should see this presentation : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7VZtCUphgg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7VZtCUphgg Patrick Wardle has reversed the C2 com protocol and found it had "advanced" capabilities (remote exec, key and mouse sniffing, screenshot, etc.). The malware was found on several thousands Macs too (mostly in the US).
    - mafsedan 9y ago
      Apple pays people to "astroturf" that they're immune from Viruses and backdoors. IMHO, that makes them much worse than Microsoft.

partycoder 9y ago

That is assuming they're not infiltrated, hacked or voluntarily participating of some foreign surveillance/espionage program.

jdiaz5513 9y ago

This is purely anecdotal, but back when I was doing a lot of Windows sysadmin work (and when viruses were rampant) I wound up tearing through a lot of AV vendors in short order. Only a handful survived my tests, and now I see them all listed here as European AV vendors. Interesting. Symantec, by the way, was by far the worst. It got to the point where I would immediately uninstall their products on sight. My favorite was when one of their automatic updates started causing boot failures. That sure kept me busy!

zby 9y ago

Yeah - I agree EU software is the safest option: https://medium.com/@zby/the-safest-option-is-eu-software-abc694aa1a1d https://medium.com/@zby/the-safest-option-is-eu-software-abc...

lousken 9y ago

eset