Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Security United States

Kaspersky To Close Washington Office But Expand Non-State Sales (bloomberg.com) 65

An anonymous reader shares a report: A Russian software-maker, whose products are banned for use in federal information systems by the U.S. government, is seeking to remain in the North American market and prove its products have no hidden capabilities. Kaspersky Lab Inc. will close its Washington D.C. office that was selling to the government and will keep working with non-federal customers in the U.S. via its remaining offices in the country, vice-president Anton Shingarev said in an interview in Moscow. The company also committed in October to open its product's source code to an independent third-party review and plans to open new offices in Chicago, Los Angeles and Toronto next year. "This allows independent experts to verify that our software has no hidden functionality, that it doesn't send your files to third parties, doesn't spy on you and fully complies with the end-user agreement," Shingarev said. The U.S. banned government use of Kaspersky software in September, citing founder Eugene Kaspersky's alleged ties to Russian intelligence and the possibility its products could function as "malicious actors" to compromise federal information systems. The move caused concern about the company's products in other markets, including the U.K.

Kaspersky To Close Washington Office But Expand Non-State Sales

Comments Filter:
  • Why not? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Arzaboa ( 2804779 ) on Thursday December 07, 2017 @12:39PM (#55696331)

    I have yet to see a compelling argument as to why I wouldn't use their product as a regular citizen. They do nothing different than any other anti-virus product when it comes to handling files. The only thing different than most is that their home country is Russia. Its not like the U.S. government doesn't have the exact same powers to subpoena a U.S. companies data, that the Russian government doesn't have to do to their own companies.

    --
    "I didn't do it" - B. Simpson

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by phayes ( 202222 )

      Really? One supposes that you would also question whether Weinstein should be trusted with young actresses. After all, "there have yet to have been compelling" proven arguments that he isn't a predator, just like Putin's Russia is.

      You really want to trust someone who has explicitly declared himself an enemy of an open press and the west with auto-update privileges on your PC that he could use to perform attacks on the west? Ooops, sorry about that DDOS on critical infrastructure, it was just an innocent err

      • Re:Why not? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Arzaboa ( 2804779 ) on Thursday December 07, 2017 @02:09PM (#55697113)

        I had never seen or heard that Putin ran Kapersky Labs. Turn this around and why would the Chinese use a U.S. companies anti-virus? After all, the U.S. wants a free Tibet.

        And again, when it comes to my personal info, wouldn't it be better to have a foreign government see my dirty laundry than the one that could prosecute me? (For the lawyers.... this is all supposition)

        Thank you for your interesting point of view though, which is why I asked the question. Why not?

        --
        "I didn't do it" - B. Simpson

        • by phayes ( 202222 )

          When you live beneath a bridge it does tend to limit whet everyone else (besides the putin-bots) can see clearly.

          Putin controls anything and everything that he desires in Russia, either overtly or covertly. The day Putin decides that it is better to use this covert weapon of his (privileged access to all the files and data of those who use Kaspersky) _your_ bank accounts will mysteriously transferred elsewhere. Yeah, that's soooo much better...

    • by Immerial ( 1093103 ) on Thursday December 07, 2017 @02:52PM (#55697421) Homepage
      You make it sound like there are only two choices: compromise your machine for the Americans or the Russians. Um, how about neither! Plus it's the "it's okay to have my machine compromised" attitude that seems so shilly (if that's a thing).
    • The Russiagate narrative aims at distracting you away from assigning Hillary Clinton full responsibility for her own campaign, restarting a cold war with Russia, and it's all based on stories that fall flat on inspection. Kaspersky's software is part of the anti-Russia hysteria and is properly dismissed out of hand not for being from Russia but for being nonfree (proprietary, user-subjugating).

      Consider what they're telling you in the article: "This allows independent experts to verify that our software has

  • See? Here's some source code to review. And, here's a compiled binary that we promise, really, only contains that code. And all of our recurring updates will only be the same code you reviewed. Promise.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      See? Here's some source code to review. And, here's a compiled binary that we promise, really, only contains that code. And all of our recurring updates will only be the same code you reviewed. Promise.

      Said every company undergoing code review ever.

  • Fopreign or Domestic (Score:2, Informative)

    by r_naked ( 150044 )

    I can understand the government not wanting another government spying on them, but as an individual, if I am going to have a government spying on me, I would rather that it be a foreign one.

    • It is known the United States Government spies on its citizens illegally; the fact that our government is trying to paint Kaspersky as bad is laughable. Ditto for the UK government that is such a lackey and bitch of the U.S. one.

    • > if I am going to have a government spying on me, I would rather that it be a foreign one.

      Not only that, but one that is currently considered at least somewhat 'hostile'. The UK's foreign, but they share data with the USA faster than Trump leaks it.

    • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Yes given the past thinking around Magic Lantern (software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] and the US government wanting once trusted AV not to detect a FBI keystroke logger.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Everyone here probably already knows this but... Most software today is delivered AUTOMATICALLY in binary form. Most programs automatically download new binaries as soon as the developers make them available and happily installs and runs them, often without notifying you. Most people get all exited they are getting the "latest version" and generally consider this to be a good thing. The gigantic trust problem with automated binary software delivery is... even if you certify the software is A-OK today,

  • by GrBear ( 63712 ) on Thursday December 07, 2017 @02:38PM (#55697313)

    I went out of my way yesterday to buy Kaspersky AV since the US and EU decided to vilify them. Because screw 3 letter agencies.

    • The EU too? I didn't heard anything about it, if it's true, as an European citizen I'm very interested about it. Anyway, I have been using Kaspersky for years, and I just installed it on my uncle's computer...
  • by Junior Samples ( 550792 ) on Thursday December 07, 2017 @05:17PM (#55698327)

    I'm more concerned over the US government sanctioned Intel ME Backdoors contained in many of Intel's X86 processors.

Any given program, when running, is obsolete.

Working...