36 ms·
Kaspersky is declared a US national security threat and is banned by the FCC
- dghughes 5y agoAntivirus software manufacturers should jump at this and offer a free subscription to former Kaspersky users.
- themusicgod1 5y agoNo source code publicly available? Available on millions of US computers? That should automatically qualify it, and any other malware/proprietary software that's used by more than a handful of people, across a handful of US states as a national security threat.
- ddaalluu2 5y ago
- kozak 5y agoTelegram is next?
- kube-system 5y agoTelegram is free isn't it? I don't think there are any federal funds being used to buy telegram today. So, there's not much for the FCC to ban.
- sschueller 5y agoProbably not but McAfee should be added just because it sucks so much.
- _joel 5y ago<> Norton entered the chat
- orangepurple 5y agoMcAfee uninstallation instructions by John McAfee himself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQrAfQMpnZk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQrAfQMpnZk
- throw10920 5y agoUnironically, McAfee may be a greater threat to US national security than Kasperky. McAfee is actually used by the Department of Defense[1], and Kaspersky is not. Given how bad McAfee actually is, I think that that makes it worse. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_Based_Security_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_Based_Security_System
- ComradePhil 5y agoVery likely, being founded and run by Russians... and a good way to stop people from communicating freely about the world affairs.
- morganvachon 5y agoRussian citizens != Russian government. The Telegram development team is not on good terms with the Russian government last I read. With that said, it still operates within the borders so it's subject to government control (just as any US-based messaging service is subject to US government control). It's always a cat-and-mouse game between those who want free, unfettered, unmonitored communications and the governments that feel threatened by that kind of freedom.
- ComradePhil 5y agoYou are thinking from a completely different perspective. There's nothing for governments to allow people to communicate freely. Telegram is one of the few platforms that allows that... and this is a good opportunity for the US government to do that.
- older 5y agoLast I read Telegram is on very good terms with the Russian government. I have already posted link to the source in this thread.
- mohamez 5y agoIIRC Telegram is banned in Russia, and its CEO is not in good terms with the Russian government.
- ComradePhil 5y agoDefinitely not banned in Russia: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/19/last-apps-standing-telegram-whatsapp-duck-russia-bans https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/19/last-apps-standing-...
- thematrixturtle 5y agoThey tried in 2018, but couldn't pull it off. It's unclear what Telegram agreed to in 2020 to get officially unblocked though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia
- ramesh31 5y ago>It's unclear what Telegram agreed to in 2020 to get officially unblocked though. Most likely implementing FSB backdoors.
- paganel 5y agoNot sure why you're down-voted for stating out the facts as they are.
- FpUser 5y agoBecause some people do not like pesky facts when those interfere with the narrative?
- older 5y agoIt is not only not banned but "found a compromise" and agreed to co-operate with FSB according to Russian MP (google translated article from tjournal.ru): https://tjournal-ru.translate.goog/news/562296-durov-nashel-kompromiss-s-fsb-zachem-emu-sovershat-glupost-v-gosdume-ne-planiruyut-blokirovat-telegram?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://tjournal-ru.translate.goog/news/562296-durov-nashel-...
- throwmeariver1 5y agoI found it always fishy that telegram applauds itself for being a secure messenger but decided against encryption by default. With the flick of a switch every doubt would go away but alas.
- pantulis 5y agoI have also been amused by the number of technical people that prefer Telegram vs Whatsapp in terms of security.
- ramesh31 5y ago>I have also been amused by the number of technical people that prefer Telegram vs Whatsapp in terms of security. Tribalism is a helluva drug.
- spacemanmatt 5y agoI have also been amused by the number of technical people that prefer anything vs Signal in terms of security.
- saagarjha 5y agoI've been amused by the number of technical people that prefer Signal vs just not shutting up about the messaging app they use and not pretending like they're some sort of authority on the topic instead of someone who deals with SOC2 compliance daily. (This is actually independent of you or Signal, I just find it amusing that people throw their security brand™ behind some app and it's just them picking the one they like most of the time.)
- spacemanmatt 5y agoIt would be way weirder if people threw their brand support behind an app they didn't even like enough to use.
- codedokode 5y ago
- ibejoeb 5y agoThe White House campaign to explain its Russia policy on social media did so via Chinese properties Zoom and TikTok. I don't think we can rely only on domestic production right now.
- orangepurple 5y agoTelegram is run by a citizen of St Kitts and Nevis. He escaped Russia after they beat down his door.
- throwaway290 5y agoWho also promised to cooperate with russian government in exchange for lifting the ban on the app. And even if he didn't, if you run the most popular messenger app in Russia you can't simply hide behind "citizen of some other country". KGB is known for poisoning/shooting people abroad for much less, and especially if you have family or close relatives back in your country of birth you really have little leverage to speak of.
- stjohnswarts 5y agotelegram is mostly outside of russia now isn't it? I think they still have a programming team there but the "owners" are outside the country.
- encryptluks2 5y agoWonder if Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, etc will be added to this list. While US may consider them national security assets, it is usually the opposite that is true. Like building backdoors into encryption, these services build backdoors into peoples lives. Also note, it usually often only takes one rogue employee with superuser access to compromise a system.
- smoldesu 5y agoSo, we ban all MAANG products for federal use. Who supplies us software/hardware next? How do we trust them more than what we had before?
- encryptluks2 5y agoBy requiring that government services use regularly audited open source products.
- ComradePhil 5y agoBut then how can governments sneak in their targeted exploits?
- avbanks 5y agoVia a PR?
- lmkg 5y agoThey're US companies, which means the US has a variety of options to influence its operations. While there are a variety of risks that such companies present, Kaspersky is in the qualitatively different situation that a different nation-state has greater influence on its operations.
- DeWilde 5y agoWhy would the US declare companies that benefit them as security threats?
- asteroidp 5y agoGood! Although 20 years too late
- mc32 5y agoI think a lot of people have been saying this for years. However most people until recently thought it was unfounded hyperbola. We should at least be skeptical given the connections the founder has.
- buitreVirtual 5y agoJust like, until recently, Europe (and especially Germany) thought it was paranoia to treat Russian oil and gas dependence as a risk.
- dainiusse 5y agoExactly. These are very costly lessons, learnt on Ukrainian blood....
- mc32 5y agoGerman policy was out in la-la land. Politicians sold the public on green policies before the infrastructure was ready and heavily relied on imported non green energy to get there. They didn’t have to shut down their nuke plants, but ‘make happy’ led them down that path of dependence —just as most of the industrialized world is dependent on another questionable government for consumer goods and microelectronics. Offshoring is awesome for the ruling class until it isn’t.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- natch 5y ago> Kaspersky also maintains that it “doesn’t have any ties with any government, including Russia’s This take is either naive in the extreme, or disingenuous. For a security company trying to maintain a trusted reputation, neither of those two options is good. While possibly technically accurate, it is a dodge or a flub that overlooks the fact that their autonomy can be usurped by the governments where they are based and where they operate. To be fair, this is true of almost any company I can think of, although I wonder if a DAO could get around it.
- genocidicbunny 5y agoExactly. They're one OMON or FSB visit away from 'having ties to the Russian government.' Refusing to acknowledge that is just downright disingenuous.
- vkou 5y agoThe same can be said about any vendor in the world, though. Any of them is one NSL away from becoming a spy, wrecker or saboteur. If your threat model includes foreign governments, don't use foreign closed source software. If your threat model includes your government, don't use domestic closed source software. Or do, but either be ready to mitigate the harm, or be willing to live with it.
- InitialLastName 5y agoIn terms of TFA, I suspect the ship has sailed with respect to intervention by the US government in network installations regulated by the FCC.
- nanochad 5y agoWe have placed full sanctions on Russia. It's common sense not to rely on them too much.
- ElectricalUnion 5y ago> full sanctions [citation needed] Isn't oil, gas and food trade still allowed? That is not "full sanctions".
- flavius29663 5y agooil and gas were banned by the US
- the_snooze 5y agoIs there any point in using antivirus these days anyway? I'm open to being wrong here, but I'm under the impression that antivirus exists only to tick boxes in outdated security compliance checklists. How big of a threat are viruses compared to, say, rogue antivirus products themselves?
- henryw 5y agoI'm wondering this too since Windows has built-in antivirus now. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/comprehensive-security https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/comprehensive-securi...
- teh_klev 5y agoWindows has had "Microsoft Security Essentials" built-in for longer than I can remember (10+ years?). It's not a terrible thing and keeps out of your way and doesn't seem to bog your machine down. Unlike the steaming pile of crap that my work computer runs (EndPoint) that consumes 60-80% CPU when doing its weekly full scan for over an hour right in the middle of the working day. MSE is really all I've used since binning AVG which turned into bloatware.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoTook me a while to figure out why my browsers always seem to randomly pause for about 30 seconds. It's that piece of crap McCaffee. I can watch it's process go to 100% when the browser (firefox and vivaldi) freeze. It's garbage and I wish I could turn it off and just use MS AV but the IT staff swear by McAffee so I live with it.
- teh_klev 5y ago> but the IT staff swear by McAffee I feel your pain. We have a load of other crap loaded such as Umbrella that is supposed to protect us from harmful websites. It does stuff like intercept DNS lookups etc. It's such a pile of shite and doesn't work properly when I need VPN into our cloud infrastructure. When it's configured so badly it feels really anti-work. But hey ho, "security reasons".
- CWuestefeld 5y agoI spent Sunday researching alternatives, then uninstalling KIS and trying to install BitDefender. From this I conclude that the current state of AV/Security apps is dismal. Researching alternatives is difficult, it falls directly into the cesspool that is web product recommendation in 2022. Trying to weed out the garbage articles, I find a handful of apps that are consistently rated that the top. I discarded the recommendation of McAfee. I'm forced to use that awful thing at work, and I won't deal with the performance penalty it exacts. I wound up deciding that BitDefender was the best choice. But setting up the new software has been an awful out-of-box experience. Configuring the tool was a serious chore. The tools (like for the firewall) were clunky and difficult to use, and once I finished on one machine there's no way to export the settings to apply to other devices. Going to their website to make suggestions, I found another post indicating that their tool is unable to restore from quarantine, files that belong in protected parts of the filesystem. The support analyst had replied "thanks for the interesting suggestion" - for something that seems like a Severity 1 bug! I'm not trying to advocate for Kaspersky - I can see that with security being its raison d'etre, they're a bridge too far. But come on, the rest of the industry really needs to get their act together. The KIS product is really head and shoulders above other products I've seen, and we should be competing on the merits, not just "the Russians are a*holes".
- legalcorrection 5y agoI'm curious, can you tell me why Windows Defender is inadequate? I also gather that Microsoft sells an enhanced version for businesses with needs beyond local machine antivirus.
- CWuestefeld 5y agoI guess that's a fair question, as it does seem to suffice for most people. I have a few reasons: * Extensive use of Chinese sites, which are quite a mess. I think the risks of visiting that part of the Internet are much greater than someone engaged in more typical usage. * Features like firewall are useful for things other than protecting against direct hacks, and I use it to ensure privacy and occasionally even to simulate failures when testing my code. I think that Defender has such a thing, but less sophisticated? * Probably just being more paranoid than most, having lived through an era when less protection was available, and having to un-hack family members. ETA: also, it's good to have a different sort of protection when the majority is all homogeneous. Windows Defender is the obvious high-value target for hackers. Same kind of weakness and monoculture.
- Maursault 5y agoOk, let's cut the crap. Is Kaspersky a dirtbag or not? I suspect not, but it is an unfortunate accident he was born in and runs his company from Russia, the government of which is a dirtbag, so, correct me if I am wrong, Kaspersky must be a dirtbag by association, but especially for discovering Stuxnet. Believable, but I think the real reasons Kaspersky is persona non grata is due to having discovered Stuxnet, and Kaspersky Lab suspected of uncovering secret US cyberweapons in the future. I am a patriot, but even I don't appreciate being lied to by my government. It would be good if the next best cyber security firm and software was half as good as Kaspersky's. But I suspect not.
- oh_sigh 5y agoYou think the US government waited 12 years to be able to turn the screws on Kaspersky because they uncovered Stuxnet?
- mrtnmcc 5y agoPlenty of legit potential concerns.. Russian govt could "nationalize" Kaspersky at any moment and push rogue updates.
- cf141q5325 5y agoShouldnt i have the same concerns with software from the US? You dont really have to nationalize to force devs to push malicious code (looking at you Australia)
- jcranberry 5y agoMaybe, if the US government thought they could get some useful information from you.
- ed25519FUUU 5y agoAs a US citizen you still have some semblance of rights under the constitution that dictate what the government can do.
- coliveira 5y agoSo, basically we are allowed to protect against any external security threat, except the ones created by US spy agencies.
- randomsilence 5y agoWhy do we accept the risk of intrusion from antivirus software at all? All antivirus software developers should open-source their traversal software and thus guarantee that no harm can be done. The scanning doesn't need write access and doesn't need network access.
- doodhwala 5y agoWhile I understand the intent behind your comment, the only thing that would achieve is to allow people to reverse engineer and discover more vulnerabilities
- T3RMINATED 5y ago
- ChrisArchitect 5y agoMore discussion 4 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30806181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30806181
- gjsman-1000 5y agoQuick question - where does the FCC derive this authority?
- kube-system 5y agoThe FCC has the authority to regulate how federal funding for telecommunication is used. Those who do not use federal telecom subsidy funds are not affected.
- mrkramer 5y agoKaspersky has a very good research team which uncovered a lot of APT hacking groups including Russian ones so I don't see a reason why would they be a threat. But on the other hand Russian state can force them to snoop files and traffic from their clients but I doubt that will happen because everyone would stop using them and they would go bankrupt. Imo US government should use domestic antivirus solutions.
- layer8 5y ago> I doubt that will happen because everyone would stop using them and they would go bankrupt. The Russian state might not care a lot about that possible consequence and still coerce them to include malware in the next update.
- mrkramer 5y agoEU, US and their allies can kick Kaspersky off the market. It would be a game over for Kaspersky meaning zero installs(licenses) and zero revenue. It is not worth to do it not even in the short term. Trust would be forever lost.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoTrust doesn't matter when you and your team know the alternative is 20 years in a Siberian gulag.
- tablespoon 5y ago>> The Russian state might not care a lot about that possible consequence and still coerce them to include malware in the next update. > EU, US and their allies can kick Kaspersky off the market. It would be a game over for Kaspersky meaning zero installs(licenses) and zero revenue. It is not worth to do it not even in the short term. Trust would be forever lost. Do you think Putin would shed even a single tear over Kaspersky, if what you describe was the consequence of him getting something he wanted?
- RadixDLT 5y ago
- orangepurple 5y agoThe only software most Windows PCs need out of the box is TinyWall (https://tinywall.pados.hu/ https://tinywall.pados.hu/)
- layer8 5y agoThe playful snow on the home page doesn’t inspire confidence.
- orangepurple 5y agoIt is an excellent piece of software. Other projects by the same developer: https://www.patreon.com/posts/other-projects-36886285 https://www.patreon.com/posts/other-projects-36886285
- stjohnswarts 5y agoWhy is this better than the built in windows firewall?
- orangepurple 5y agoMuch, much easier to configure and manage and denies almost everything by default. Extremely easy to quickly unblock software as necessary too. 10-100x faster workflow compared to the built in firewall, so you will actually bother to use it instead of get complacent or ignore it.
- jobigoud 5y agoHow does it compare to simplewall from Henry++? https://www.henrypp.org/product/simplewall https://www.henrypp.org/product/simplewall That's the one I use to catch outbound connections.
- MisterTea 5y agoAt work we are required to have EDR software by our accounting firm (accounts inserting themselves into IT is annoying). We were running Kaspersky as well until this happened though we were already unhappy with it so no loss. Anyway it made me think: is there a way to roll your own EDR for Windows/Linux/BSD? Basically, can we do EDR without the EDR software?
- sjmm1989 5y agoSo... let's say a person still wanted to use an Antivirus product anyways, despite not really trusting them due to reasons like this article here; or anything you can say about Norton, etc, etc. What would you all suggest? Aside from McAfee, Norton and of course Kaspersky. I'm all ears. Some helpful hints though might be: 1. I don't want it giving me pop-ups constantly to remind me of a sale they are having. 2. It can't interfere with legitimate programs more than once in a blue moon. 3. It has be capable of being run with other security software at the same time without incurring an infraction against #2. 4. It has to cost less than 100$ per year, if there has to be payment at all. I'm asking this because I need a reliable choice to use when suggesting to my potential customers out there. I have some go to's that I used to use, but with everything the way it is right now; I want some input.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoJust use what comes with microsoft. If you want another layer of scanning then install Malwarebytes. Those two should be plenty for anybody. Also set their DNS to use something that blocks known malware sites (quad 9 is what I use).
- sjmm1989 5y agoQuad 9 is useful, but I found some websites that should work ended up not working anymore or as well. Kind of annoying. But yeah, Malwarebytes is one I haven't thought about for a while. Last I saw one of their things on a computer I was fixing was also one of the last times I saw CCcleaner on a computer as well. But yeah, windows defender IS usually good enough.
- Hamuko 5y agoAt least the business version of F-Secure is not annoying the living daylights out of me, although I have the more onerous securities turned off (like the browser protection).
- sjmm1989 5y ago>OUTSIDE SURVEILLANCE ALLIANCES >Based outside Russia, China, USA and other 14 Eyes surveillance countries. Hmmm. Interesting. Thanks.
- holoduke 5y agoIn a way I get it. I also agree with it. Europe should also try to reduce dependancy on American tech products for the scenario when the US becomes hostile towards Europe. A bit unlikely now, but you never know.
- juanani 5y ago
- hall0ween 5y agoAgreed that Europe should reduce dependency on US tech product. Among the reasons is how the US govt has been caught spying on allies multiple times. Which is sad but a clear sense of ethics missing in the US govt (along with a long list of others). > A bit unlikely now, but you never know. On the timeline we exist, it's a possibility!
- qiskit 5y agoNot just europe. Europe makes the most sense because europe is the wealthiest region on earth and has the ability to fund its own tech industry. Europe did it for aerospace ( Airbus ), but why they aren't doing it for something far more important than planes is beyond me. But China, India, Japan, etc should all be developing their own tech spheres. I can't believe that any major country allows Windows, Facebook, Google, Apple, etc in their nation. At the very least ban it until they develop their own local competitors first. Not only would this be good for China, India, Japan, EU, etc, it would also be good for tech and the rest of the world since they will have more options. It's amazing how useless so much of the world's leadership are.
- wnevets 5y agoKaspersky was caught helping the Russian government back in 2017. Anyone still using their software in 2022 probably has much larger problems.
- zokula 5y ago
- usednet 5y agoNobody within the hacking scene actually believed that story. It’s remarkable that there’s been 0 evidence that Kaspersky has ever had a backdoor yet so many people believe it. The NSA’s own incompetence led them to run an antivirus on a computer with Equation Group spyware on it. Keep in mind that Kaspersky had been fighting Western intelligence services for years at that point. Israeli intelligence actually breached Kaspersky’s network in 2015, no doubt because Kaspersky is the only AV company that actually exposes US-created malware.
- wnevets 5y agoI'm getting deja vu to when I was told Russian's continued invasion of Ukraine was just propaganda by the West [1] https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1494006204896620548 https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1494006204896620548
- stjohnswarts 5y agokaspersky should have completely left russia decades ago if they wanted to free their reputation from FSB taint.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 5y agoLike all the US companies leaving the US in 2003? I only remember US companies trashing France around that time.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoWhat? I guess enjoy your strawman? I never mentioned the US and this isn't a comparable situation. I'm talking about a business decision to not be associated with the KGB in countries where you do the vast majority of your business (EU and North America)
- yywwbbn 5y agoMaybe because US still had free press and (to some extent, but in a much better state than Russia) the rule of law in 2003?
- perfecthjrjth 5y agoIn the long term, this will prove to be a good decision, as other countries figure out that US companies (Microsoft, Google, FB, Twitter, Master, Visa etc) are in bed with spy agencies of the US. Other countries are given more reasons to NOT depend so much on these companies.
- TheGuyWhoCodes 5y agoAll the enterprise businesses in the US I worked with, and had to go through security audits, already banned the use of Kaspersky. Even for suppliers. I guess this just makes it official.
- cm2187 5y agoDoesn't any foreign company contributing a device driver to Microsoft present the same risk profile (could be based in Russia, or infiltrated by russian agents, or hacked by russia)?
- LeoPanthera 5y agoI'd quite like to know whether AdGuard is safe, too. Founded in Moscow but incorporated in Cyprus.
- luckydata 5y agoInevitable and good. I'm relieved that we are at least stopping the pretension that we don't have an ongoing conflict with the "totalitarian east" of the world. China and Russia are absolutely a threat to modern democracies and we have let the economic interests of the few override those concerns for far too long, with terrible consequences for both us AND their own population, which we contribute to the oppression of by propping up those totalitarian regimes with a constant stream of cash. Globalization was a terrible idea the way it was done and I'm glad it's coming to a close.
- lizardactivist 5y agoI'm happy with what I consider to be the most competent AV suite available, made by a team of researchers that is second to none. If the U.S. accusations are ever proven to be true, I will reconsider. But I'm not holding my breath, since the U.S. has time and again been proven to be guilty themselves of the very thing they accuse others of, and refuse to provide any proof of.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- google234123 5y agoWhat would you consider "proof"? I feel like it's not far fetched to assume the Russian Government can compel Kaspersky to do things. This same government is so insecure that they order assassinations of minor political opposition leaders
- yololol 5y agoI'm surprised that everyone here thinks that Kaspersky makes only antivirus products. They have a ton of security products, including their own microkernel-based OS: https://os.kaspersky.com/technologies/microkernel/ https://os.kaspersky.com/technologies/microkernel/
- ASalazarMX 5y agoI guess NginX is hoping no one looks their way.
- tenebrisalietum 5y agoF5 owns Nginx now.
- AzzieElbab 5y agoAll antiviruses should be declared security threat regardless of vendor. Just hope FTC stays clear of jetbrains
- oversocialized 5y ago
- Dance_clubber 5y ago30/03/2022 my.kaspersky.com account got wiped, passwords saved in password manager are gone. account related to my licence on store.kaspersky.com remained. Their customer service were willing to argue that i had no account on my.kaspersky.com, this issue is unresolved until now. My email communication to their customer support is not rejected on their side.
- Dance_clubber 5y ago
- Dance_clubber 5y ago
- robomartin 5y agoSomeone needs to make a movie: Wargames 2 In the new version a super AI computer is ready to launch a massive automated cyber war. While trying to get the 16 digit “launch” code it runs thousands of simulated scenarios. As things look dire, the hero has the machine play tick-tac-toe with itself… Just before launching the attack it learns: The only way to win is not to play. Seriously. What the hell is the world devolving into? Here’s what I think an alien species watching earth from distant orbit would think: The people are OK. Their so-called leaders are insane. Every single war was started by their leaders. How odd.
- serko 5y agoIt is a bit puzzling that so many people think that Kaspersky is not connected to the siloviki. I can recommend reading an investigation by Russian journalists on the subject: "Inside The Fight For The Soul Of Kaspersky Lab" https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ilyazhegulev/russia-kaspersky-antivirus https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ilyazhegulev/russia-kas... The original Russian title of the investigation was "Orcs who defeated the techies: How the siloviki infiltrated Kaspersky Lab — and what it led to", you can check this story in Russian here: https://meduza.io/feature/2018/01/22/orki-pobedivshie-tehnarey https://meduza.io/feature/2018/01/22/orki-pobedivshie-tehnar...
- unixhero 5y agoI understand why this decision was made. However I want to put it out there, the Kaspersky antivirus and also the Kaspersky internet security suite helped save my business behind so many time back 15 years ago. Great product, the best I knew of in the Anti virus class.
- diedyesterday 5y agoTrusting a security firm is a chain of custody problem, which ultimately goes down to where are the premises and what is the legal and governmental environment. If this last stop cannot be trusted, then I guess it break the deal for some sensitive clients, understandably.