Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 139 posts

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#101

Post by murjinsee »

collectively wrote: post #90
seppin wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazing that people don't see this still. Kaspersky insists that his company has an exception, and it "doesn't work like that", but it's hard to believe. And if you're part of the US IC, it'd be malpractice to believe him.

The nature of the relationship is unknown. Even if Kaspersky is bought by Putin in some way, it’s not clear what the terms and expectations are. It does seem unlikely that the commercial offering is straight up spyware for putin—why would anyone buy it? So it’s a little silly to talk about the relationship as if its existence is meaningful when the degree of ownership is the real question.

I am not sure I follow your line of reasoning. It is obvious that Kaspersky does not advertise itself in such a way, and the average consumer probably has no idea the company is even based out of Russia.

Who cares if Putin personally calls the shots to the leaders of the company? There are a thousand shades of grey, for instance: Kaspersky knowledgeably allowing backdoors about which they could later feign ignorance.

I don’t trust US, Chinese, or Russian software. Big companies with access to sensitive data invariably become targets, and are only allowed to exist peacefully with the blessing of their masters.

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#102

Post by walshemj »

Anderkent wrote: post #94
walshemj wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As it is currently written, the Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country by collecting or communicating information that would harm the national defense. It is also a crime to enter an installation or obtain a document connected to the national defense in order to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country. Knowingly receiving classified information that…

How is accidentally downloading a document and then deleting it immediately 'knowingly receiving classified information'?

they received it doesn't mater what you did after that an did take "deleted" with a pinch of salt

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#103

Post by rhizome »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #30
orf wrote: post #6

So an NSA contractor or employee takes confidential/highly sensitive code and documents home and leaves it on their machine. They then install a pirated version of Office, after disabling their antivirus software which is telling them it is infected with a virus and preventing the installation. Seems like massive incompetence from this user rather than Kaspersky doing anything malicious, and those files where destine…

This is the best part: "...found they contained malicious code from Equation Group..." "Equation Group" is Kaspersky's label for a malware group believed to be NSA. Kaspersky's software possibly then detected as malware the very confidential code the NSA contractor/employee illegally took home, ha!

So the hubbub about Kaspersky is really CYA from the NSA?

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#104

Post by Barrin92 »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #93
Barrin92 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What about the minor detail that the oligarchs existed not only before Putin, but before Yeltsin, his predecessor, as well (not that they didn't grow under Yeltsin, but still)? Nobody is doubting that. The country wasn't liberal or less oligarchic under Yeltsin, it was just as oligarchic under Soviet rule. Russia never meaningfully deviated from this course. And this doesn't just come from a 'westerner far removed f…

Not everyone would agree that things are good now, or perhaps not even anyone, but it seems like most agree that they have at least improved dramatically since Yeltsin. You're disagreeing with this and saying it has not meaningfully deviated? Also, why do you believe that the corruption you experienced was because of the leader, rather than despite the leader's efforts? I do not think anyone would even try to claim t…

>Also, why do you believe that the corruption you experienced was because of the leader, rather than despite the leader's efforts?

because of the programs he has put in place. Role of state owned entreprises has nearly doubled up to 70% of the economy, he has consciously put these close friends in place, he has cut down on any form of opposition and dissent within the country. It is the official course of his politics. The Russian government is not even hiding this, which makes the constant apologia from people not even affected by it seem only more baffling.

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#105

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

ajross wrote: post #96
jjawssd wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does selling influence in the state department count as "garden variety corruption you find in western countries"? Does delivering Uranium to The Enemy in exchange for cash donations to a slush fund count as "garden variety corruption you find in western countries"? Does employing El Salvadorian gangs in your nation's capital to intimidate and assassinate your political enemies count as "garden variety corruption you…

> delivering Uranium to The Enemy I have to admit, even in a subthread where I was sure we'd see conspiracy nuttery, this is not the conspiracy I would have expected. You realize this is a totally fabricated thing, right? The timing alone should tell you all you need to know about what the intent behind it was.

When I engage with conspiracy communities it's usually to debunk extreme claims, so I approach most claims with skepticism, but wouldn't this:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/225

Suggest that it's not fabricated?

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#106

Post by orf »

jjawssd wrote: post #92
nickbauman wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Condorcet's Secret aside, Russia is a Mafia State. This is where the state's military and paramilitary are deeply integrated with state-sponsored organized crime. So you have commandos and police both work systems of extortion, human and drug trafficking, money laundering, racketeering, war, espionage, etc. etc. It's a totally different thing than the garden variety corruption you find in western countries, ok?

Does selling influence in the state department count as "garden variety corruption you find in western countries"? Does delivering Uranium to The Enemy in exchange for cash donations to a slush fund count as "garden variety corruption you find in western countries"? Does employing El Salvadorian gangs in your nation's capital to intimidate and assassinate your political enemies count as "garden variety corruption you…

> Does delivering Uranium to The Enemy

You're of course referring to that exploratory deal involving no delivery of Uranium anywhere.

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#107

Post by ajross »

SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #105
ajross wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> delivering Uranium to The Enemy I have to admit, even in a subthread where I was sure we'd see conspiracy nuttery, this is not the conspiracy I would have expected. You realize this is a totally fabricated thing, right? The timing alone should tell you all you need to know about what the intent behind it was.

When I engage with conspiracy communities it's usually to debunk extreme claims, so I approach most claims with skepticism, but wouldn't this: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/225 Suggest that it's not fabricated?

The claim of a quid-pro-quo is fabricated (seriously: it requires collusion between like five governments and three branches of the USG, of which Clinton had control of only one -- there is zero evidence of any of that). Obviously the conspiracy nuttery exists, so yeah, it's "out there".

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#108

Post by codedokode »

golergka wrote: post #68
orf wrote: post #6

So an NSA contractor or employee takes confidential/highly sensitive code and documents home and leaves it on their machine. They then install a pirated version of Office, after disabling their antivirus software which is telling them it is infected with a virus and preventing the installation. Seems like massive incompetence from this user rather than Kaspersky doing anything malicious, and those files where destine…

> I don't buy the narrative that Kaspersky is some evil Russian cyber hoover I don't know about this particular story, but Kaspersky is certainly has strong ties with FSB, FSO and other official structures. I don't mean that it's their main business model — developing anti-virus software pays well enough not to be some cover story — but they're definitely _friendly_ on a deep personal level. Kaspersky himself was edu…

> Usually, in Moscow, there is a strong correlation between being a highly educated, well-paid IT professional and having a negative opinion about current Russian regime

Do you have sources for this? Well-paid professional might not care about politics at all or might be OK with current regime because it doesn't interfere with their life. Furthermore, some of them might be even proud for occupying Crimea.

But I can agree that there is relatively high percent of anti-Putin people in Moscow.

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#109

Post by orf »

SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #105
ajross wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> delivering Uranium to The Enemy I have to admit, even in a subthread where I was sure we'd see conspiracy nuttery, this is not the conspiracy I would have expected. You realize this is a totally fabricated thing, right? The timing alone should tell you all you need to know about what the intent behind it was.

When I engage with conspiracy communities it's usually to debunk extreme claims, so I approach most claims with skepticism, but wouldn't this: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/225 Suggest that it's not fabricated?

"It's out there" is the only bit of content. Anyone who reads that and says "well damn he clearly means watch out Hillary, they know about all your illegal doings. Shred everything!" rather than "fyi the right are spreading that nonsense talking point" is making a bit of a leap IMO.

Re: Kaspersky: Yes, we obtained NSA secrets. No, we didn’t help steal them

#110

Post by chiefalchemist »

paganel wrote: post #99
chiefalchemist wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the micro level there are certainly events that support your position. However, at the macro level the arc of history doesn't seem to bend in your favor. And even if there are those who oppose, there are also those who do not - and the do nots often get favors, inside info, etc. The opposers aren't really a concern.

> However, at the macro level the arc of history doesn't seem to bend in your favor. It doesn't get more macro than what happened to Khodorkovsky, who got his company (Russia's biggest at the time) stolen from him once Putin started consolidating his power (in the early 2000s). That's like the Democrats confiscating the Koch brothers' conglomerate business and putting them in prison, or like the Republicans doing the…

I believe the comment I was commenting on was about corruption and The West. Looks like I should have pulled a quote and spoke to that. Sorry?
Post reply on HN