4 ms·

Too bad the article doesn't mention that Kaspersky actually is very closely tied with the FSB (ie KGB) - most likely he works for them. That doesn't mean the or

by omonra 12y ago

Too bad the article doesn't mention that Kaspersky actually is very closely tied with the FSB (ie KGB) - most likely he works for them. That doesn't mean the original article is untrue - just that the 'research' really comes from Russian spies. Profile here: http://www.wired.com/2012/07/ff_kaspersky/all/ http://www.wired.com/2012/07/ff_kaspersky/all/ "Kaspersky’s rise is particularly notable—and to some, downright troubling—given his KGB-sponsored training, his tenure as a Soviet intelligence officer, his alliance with Vladimir Putin’s regime, and his deep and ongoing relationship with Russia’s Federal Security Service, or FSB."

thaumaturgy 12y ago
Kaspersky's son was kidnapped and held for a 3 million Euro ransom in 2011. I think that's about as relevant to this article.
zimbatm 12y ago
Is there an antivirus company with NSA ties to report on Russian viruses ?
- mschuster91 12y ago
  A dumpload of companies and media outlets immediately blaming NK for the Sony hacks. It's not Russia, but close enough.
- dsl 12y ago
  Here is the break down ordered by approximate market share descending and the "country of origin": * Microsoft - US * Avast - Czech Republic * AVG - Czech Republic * ESET - Slovakia * Symantec - US * Avira - Germany * Kaspersky - Russia * Malwarebytes - US * McAfee - US * COMODO - US * Bitdefender - Romania * Panda - Spain To be fair, Kaspersky does a pretty good job of reporting on even Russian originated banking trojans and the like.
  - agumonkey 12y ago
    And now I'm wondering, why isn't there an nation agnostic open-source antivirus ? Oh, I almost forgot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clam_AntiVirus#Effectiveness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clam_AntiVirus#Effectiveness But it's not famous enough...
  - Sami_Lehtinen 12y ago
    F-Secure - Finland - https://www.f-secure.com/weblog/ https://www.f-secure.com/weblog/
mkempe 12y ago
why is that "too bad"? How does talking about the messenger change the message?
- omonra 12y ago
  Because 'researchers' and 'russian spy agency' sounds very different. Former are motivated by desire to shed light on questionable behavior, the latter to inflict damage on their adversary (while engaging in worse practices themselves).
  - MisterWebz 12y ago
    What do you mean by worse practices? Are you saying Russian spy agencies have more sophisticated capabilities? Do they target more innocent people?
  - wongarsu 12y ago
    Competition is good for the public. If American and Russian spy agencies call each other out on bad behaviour, everyone profits.
    - dagw 12y ago
      Only if the behavior they call out actually happened. If they start fabricating evidence of bad behavior that never happened then that's not a good thing.
  - ProAm 12y ago
    Even if it was the KGB instead of Kaspersky that discovered this it doesn't change the fact we put spyware into hardware firmware.
  - zo1 12y ago
    Their motives are irrelevant if their findings are verified.
  - beedogs 12y ago
    I've got no problem with anyone inflicting damage on the NSA. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that.
wongarsu 12y ago
It should come as no surprise that a Russian anti virus vendor is the one reporting about all this NSA software. Kaspersky has less to loose and more to gain then their western counterparts and the Russian government would probably be happy to help even if Kaspersky didn't already have these ties. The question is: is Kaspersky going to abuse all that trust and good will they are gathering?
- cyphunk 12y ago
  hmm. even snowden lives in russia now. hmm. the sad side effect of the moral elite proving hollow is that those you may consider enemies might become allies. Despite everything there is little proof of malice at kaspersky while the same cant be said for many companies in the west. If the FSB is funding research that brings unwanted transparency to the NSA, allowing us to better understand and criticize the US corporations and agencies compliment with them, then I welcome it. I doubt it is the case but if your fantasy turns out to be correct they would also deserve some poli sci props.
  - mahranch 12y ago
    > Malice Have proof of actual malice being committed? Intelligence gathering in of itself isn't malicious. That's literally the very reason for the NSA's existence. It's like saying the FBI is malicious because they "investigate". That's what they do, that's their job. I'd be more pissed if they weren't doing this sort of thing. I'd wonder where the hell my tax dollars are going. The only thing that bothers me is when they spy on their own citizens, us. I have no problem with them spying or hacking Russia, China or Iran. Their job is to protect their country and their allies from foreign aggression and international criminal organizations. When you wake up in the morning, China, Russia, Iran, Etc... are all still going to try and hack U.S businesses, governmental services and try to gain access to classified information. Pretending like these acts don't happen doesn't make them go away.
    - simonh 12y ago
      American citizens have been involved in planning and executing terrorist attacks, identified as enemy combattants and even been targetted for drone strikes. If foreign terrorists operate in the US, the only way to find them is to search. That means looking at everyone's communications, citizen or not. I'm not an American, so it would be wrong of me to assert what you or your government should or should not do in this regard. However in general I think GCHQ and the NSA have a case for some of the kinds of monitoring they are doing, I just think it's lacking in legal basis and appropriate oversight. They have shown repeatedly that we can't trust them.
restalis 12y ago
The instances where a company does business with a government are not that uncommon. It is kind of stepping outside the pure commercial domain into being partly a public sector entity/institution. Considering the stakes of public information security (or even that of national defense), I come to think that this kind of deal should become one of governments' concerns in every country and should become an institutionalized part of their public service like police (or a government body like the information agency) and be funded openly by governments themselves.

by omonra 12y ago

thaumaturgy 12y ago

Kaspersky's son was kidnapped and held for a 3 million Euro ransom in 2011. I think that's about as relevant to this article.

zimbatm 12y ago

Is there an antivirus company with NSA ties to report on Russian viruses ?

mschuster91 12y ago
A dumpload of companies and media outlets immediately blaming NK for the Sony hacks. It's not Russia, but close enough.
dsl 12y ago
Here is the break down ordered by approximate market share descending and the "country of origin": * Microsoft - US * Avast - Czech Republic * AVG - Czech Republic * ESET - Slovakia * Symantec - US * Avira - Germany * Kaspersky - Russia * Malwarebytes - US * McAfee - US * COMODO - US * Bitdefender - Romania * Panda - Spain To be fair, Kaspersky does a pretty good job of reporting on even Russian originated banking trojans and the like.
- agumonkey 12y ago
  And now I'm wondering, why isn't there an nation agnostic open-source antivirus ? Oh, I almost forgot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clam_AntiVirus#Effectiveness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clam_AntiVirus#Effectiveness But it's not famous enough...
- Sami_Lehtinen 12y ago
  F-Secure - Finland - https://www.f-secure.com/weblog/ https://www.f-secure.com/weblog/

mkempe 12y ago

why is that "too bad"? How does talking about the messenger change the message?

omonra 12y ago
Because 'researchers' and 'russian spy agency' sounds very different. Former are motivated by desire to shed light on questionable behavior, the latter to inflict damage on their adversary (while engaging in worse practices themselves).
- MisterWebz 12y ago
  What do you mean by worse practices? Are you saying Russian spy agencies have more sophisticated capabilities? Do they target more innocent people?
- wongarsu 12y ago
  Competition is good for the public. If American and Russian spy agencies call each other out on bad behaviour, everyone profits.
  - dagw 12y ago
    Only if the behavior they call out actually happened. If they start fabricating evidence of bad behavior that never happened then that's not a good thing.
- ProAm 12y ago
  Even if it was the KGB instead of Kaspersky that discovered this it doesn't change the fact we put spyware into hardware firmware.
- zo1 12y ago
  Their motives are irrelevant if their findings are verified.
- beedogs 12y ago
  I've got no problem with anyone inflicting damage on the NSA. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that.

wongarsu 12y ago

It should come as no surprise that a Russian anti virus vendor is the one reporting about all this NSA software. Kaspersky has less to loose and more to gain then their western counterparts and the Russian government would probably be happy to help even if Kaspersky didn't already have these ties. The question is: is Kaspersky going to abuse all that trust and good will they are gathering?

cyphunk 12y ago
hmm. even snowden lives in russia now. hmm. the sad side effect of the moral elite proving hollow is that those you may consider enemies might become allies. Despite everything there is little proof of malice at kaspersky while the same cant be said for many companies in the west. If the FSB is funding research that brings unwanted transparency to the NSA, allowing us to better understand and criticize the US corporations and agencies compliment with them, then I welcome it. I doubt it is the case but if your fantasy turns out to be correct they would also deserve some poli sci props.
- mahranch 12y ago
  > Malice Have proof of actual malice being committed? Intelligence gathering in of itself isn't malicious. That's literally the very reason for the NSA's existence. It's like saying the FBI is malicious because they "investigate". That's what they do, that's their job. I'd be more pissed if they weren't doing this sort of thing. I'd wonder where the hell my tax dollars are going. The only thing that bothers me is when they spy on their own citizens, us. I have no problem with them spying or hacking Russia, China or Iran. Their job is to protect their country and their allies from foreign aggression and international criminal organizations. When you wake up in the morning, China, Russia, Iran, Etc... are all still going to try and hack U.S businesses, governmental services and try to gain access to classified information. Pretending like these acts don't happen doesn't make them go away.
  - simonh 12y ago
    American citizens have been involved in planning and executing terrorist attacks, identified as enemy combattants and even been targetted for drone strikes. If foreign terrorists operate in the US, the only way to find them is to search. That means looking at everyone's communications, citizen or not. I'm not an American, so it would be wrong of me to assert what you or your government should or should not do in this regard. However in general I think GCHQ and the NSA have a case for some of the kinds of monitoring they are doing, I just think it's lacking in legal basis and appropriate oversight. They have shown repeatedly that we can't trust them.

restalis 12y ago

The instances where a company does business with a government are not that uncommon. It is kind of stepping outside the pure commercial domain into being partly a public sector entity/institution. Considering the stakes of public information security (or even that of national defense), I come to think that this kind of deal should become one of governments' concerns in every country and should become an institutionalized part of their public service like police (or a government body like the information agency) and be funded openly by governments themselves.