HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Mark Zuckerberg: Why is F... » Reply #28

Response to PatSeg (Reply #26)

Sun Oct 1, 2017, 07:00 PM

28. Whether you find it persuasive or not, I think it's an interesting read.

Kaspersky brings big, big bucks into Russia. Not much else does.

Putin's crazy like a fox, but I'm not sure he'd want to kill a cash cow like that. And anything he did that marred Kaspersky's reputation further would kill it. Eugene Kaspersky knows this himself, and has offered to make the software source code available for forensic examination, which should settle once and for all whether it's doing or capable of doing anything nefarious, and has offered to appear before Congress. Nobody in your government seems to be interested in taking him up on that offer.

Anyway, just because I found this recent article from The Hill while browsing around this issue tonight, I'll post it here:

The feds shouldn't blackball Kaspersky without public evidence

Over the past few months, the U.S. government has taken multiple steps to limit federal agencies from using information security products, solutions, and services from Kaspersky Lab, a security company headquartered in Moscow, over concerns that it has unethical ties to the Russian government. These actions would be completely justified if Kaspersky Lab is colluding with the Russian government to spy on Americans — but, at least so far, the U.S. government has not provided one bit of public evidence.

The U.S. government has taken swift action against the company. First, the General Services Administration (GSA) removed Kaspersky Lab from its pre-approved vendors list in July. Then the Department of Homeland Security issued a directive last week ordering all federal agencies to cease using Kaspersky products within 90 days. The final nail in the coffin came this week when the Senate passed legislation, sponsored by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), that bans the Department of Defense from using Kaspersky Lab.

But instead of providing reasons for these actions, government officials have only offered innuendo. For example, Shaheen justified her legislation by pointing to a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in May, where the heads of the CIA, NSA, and FBI all stated that they would not use Kaspersky Lab software on their own computers in response to a question from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). Interestingly enough, Rubio had received different answers when he asked that same question at a hearing in March. One of the witnesses, Thomas Rid, a professor in the Department of War Studies at King’s College in London, not only replied that he would indeed use Kaspersky Lab products, but he argued that “Kaspersky is not an arm of the Russian government,” pointing out that the company has published information on several Russian state-sponsored cyberattacks.

http://thehill.com/opinion/cybersecurity/351953-the-feds-shouldnt-blackball-kaspersky-without-public-evidence


It also contains this tidbit (my bold)!

Third, the U.S. government has made no move to penalize foreign firms actually proven to have faulty code. The Czech company Avast, for example, recently discovered that hackers had compromised its popular, free tool CCleaner, making the popular security software distribute malicious code. And yet, there are no calls by the U.S. government to limit software products from Avast or ban Czech software.



Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 42 replies Author Time Post
PatSeg Oct 2017 OP
BigmanPigman Oct 2017 #1
PatSeg Oct 2017 #12
WheelWalker Oct 2017 #2
Corvo Bianco Oct 2017 #3
PatSeg Oct 2017 #10
bullwinkle428 Oct 2017 #38
Corvo Bianco Oct 2017 #42
dalton99a Oct 2017 #4
PatSeg Oct 2017 #7
hedda_foil Oct 2017 #5
msongs Oct 2017 #6
PatSeg Oct 2017 #9
Adsos Letter Oct 2017 #16
PatSeg Oct 2017 #24
tymorial Oct 2017 #31
PatSeg Oct 2017 #33
tymorial Oct 2017 #36
PatSeg Oct 2017 #37
tymorial Oct 2017 #39
PatSeg Oct 2017 #41
Denzil_DC Oct 2017 #40
Adsos Letter Oct 2017 #34
PatSeg Oct 2017 #8
hedda_foil Oct 2017 #11
PatSeg Oct 2017 #13
Denzil_DC Oct 2017 #14
PatSeg Oct 2017 #15
Denzil_DC Oct 2017 #18
Denzil_DC Oct 2017 #21
PatSeg Oct 2017 #22
Denzil_DC Oct 2017 #25
PatSeg Oct 2017 #26
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Whether you find it persuasive or not, I think it's an interesting read.
Denzil_DC Oct 2017 #28
PatSeg Oct 2017 #29
bathroommonkey76 Oct 2017 #17
PatSeg Oct 2017 #20
WheelWalker Oct 2017 #19
PatSeg Oct 2017 #23
DK504 Oct 2017 #27
PatSeg Oct 2017 #30
jamzrockz Oct 2017 #32
PatSeg Oct 2017 #35
Please login to view edit histories.