5 ms·

Interesting, but not all that surprising. At this point it's fair to assume most security research institutions are co-opted to some degree by intelligence agen

Interesting, but not all that surprising. At this point it's fair to assume most security research institutions are co-opted to some degree by intelligence agencies.

CiPHPerCoder 8y ago
Whether or not that's true will vary wildly depending on where the institutions are located and who their clients are.
JaimeThompson 8y ago
You are correct on most being co-opted but they don't yell from the rooftops like Kaspersky does that they are fully independent. I have loads of emails from Kaspersky explaining how they aren't yet their actions don't support their PR.
- Arnt 8y ago
  I'm curious. Can you be more specific? Describe some of these actions explicitly?
  - JaimeThompson 8y ago
    They, Kaspersky, have sent out lots of emails to partners and resellers saying how they are independent of Russian government melding which isn't exactly the most honest read of the situation. Comments like this, from Kaspersky PR, are interesting don't you think? "Kaspersky Lab has never helped, nor will help, any government in the world with its cyberespionage or offensive cyber efforts, and it's disconcerting that a private company can be treated as guilty merely due to geopolitical issues." This tells some of it but I would recommend you do some checking yourself. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/15/kaspersky_labs_announces_move_to_zurich_dutch_government_questions_firm/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/15/kaspersky_labs_anno...
    - Arnt 8y ago
      That part is about what Kaspersky says. That part is okay. The more curious part is the other part: What Kaspersky does, or does not. You, for example, do not say "here are links to Avast's web site for 2/5/10/20 Russian threats that Avast detects and Kaspersky doesn't". All you do is link to more innuendo and suspicion. In this age of databases that suspicion ought eventually to show up in database records.

Interesting, but not all that surprising. At this point it's fair to assume most security research institutions are co-opted to some degree by intelligence agencies.

CiPHPerCoder 8y ago

Whether or not that's true will vary wildly depending on where the institutions are located and who their clients are.

JaimeThompson 8y ago

You are correct on most being co-opted but they don't yell from the rooftops like Kaspersky does that they are fully independent. I have loads of emails from Kaspersky explaining how they aren't yet their actions don't support their PR.

Arnt 8y ago
I'm curious. Can you be more specific? Describe some of these actions explicitly?
- JaimeThompson 8y ago
  They, Kaspersky, have sent out lots of emails to partners and resellers saying how they are independent of Russian government melding which isn't exactly the most honest read of the situation. Comments like this, from Kaspersky PR, are interesting don't you think? "Kaspersky Lab has never helped, nor will help, any government in the world with its cyberespionage or offensive cyber efforts, and it's disconcerting that a private company can be treated as guilty merely due to geopolitical issues." This tells some of it but I would recommend you do some checking yourself. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/15/kaspersky_labs_announces_move_to_zurich_dutch_government_questions_firm/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/15/kaspersky_labs_anno...
  - Arnt 8y ago
    That part is about what Kaspersky says. That part is okay. The more curious part is the other part: What Kaspersky does, or does not. You, for example, do not say "here are links to Avast's web site for 2/5/10/20 Russian threats that Avast detects and Kaspersky doesn't". All you do is link to more innuendo and suspicion. In this age of databases that suspicion ought eventually to show up in database records.