4 ms·
Wonder 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
by encryptluks2 5y ago
Wonder 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?
- elzbardico 5y agoThis is by design. All those companies are in bed with the feds, and no matter what administration. The State is not there to protect and serve you. Unless proven otherwise the State sees you as a potential enemy.