371–380 of 435 posts
That should automatically qualify it, and any other malware/proprietary software that's used by more than a handful of people, across a handful of US states as a national security threat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plenty of legit potential concerns.. Russian govt could "nationalize" Kaspersky at any moment and push rogue updates.
Shouldnt i have the same concerns with software from the US? You dont really have to nationalize to force devs to push malicious code (looking at you Australia)
I'm American. My country is the US. Yes, they're spying on me. Yes, they do naughty things. But I assume that at the end of the day, the US has my interests at heart more than China does. Or the UK, or Russia, or Turkey, or anyone else. I happen to live on the land that they'll protect even while filling their pockets.
My feedback to you would be to do the same. You don't have to trust your own government but assume your government will keep you around longer than any other government will.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plenty of legit potential concerns.. Russian govt could "nationalize" Kaspersky at any moment and push rogue updates.
Shouldnt i have the same concerns with software from the US? You dont really have to nationalize to force devs to push malicious code (looking at you Australia)
Ok, let's cut the crap. Is Kaspersky a dirtbag or not? I suspect not, but it is an unfortunate accident he was born in and runs his company from Russia, the government of which is a dirtbag, so, correct me if I am wrong, Kaspersky must be a dirtbag by association, but especially for discovering Stuxnet. Believable, but I think the real reasons Kaspersky is persona non grata is due to having discovered Stuxnet, and Ka…
Even if he is not a dirtbag, being in Russia means Putin has power to use Kaspersky technology in war.
Why do we accept the risk of intrusion from antivirus software at all? All antivirus software developers should open-source their traversal software and thus guarantee that no harm can be done. The scanning doesn't need write access and doesn't need network access.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> One could say that the same is true in the US, but I believe the degree matters. Although the US government and intelligence agencies will and do try to overreach, there is a strong legal and cultural tradition of exposing, resisting, and fighting these overreaches in the US. That point would be a lot stronger if the US government hadn't demonstrated shocking callousness and disregard for international law in their…
Hold up. Downed a plane is different from grounded a plane. I don't know the Belarusian case, but either you misused the word or they are very different.
IIRC they pretended there was a bomb threat or some other nonsense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> One could say that the same is true in the US, but I believe the degree matters. Although the US government and intelligence agencies will and do try to overreach, there is a strong legal and cultural tradition of exposing, resisting, and fighting these overreaches in the US. That point would be a lot stronger if the US government hadn't demonstrated shocking callousness and disregard for international law in their…
Hold up. Downed a plane is different from grounded a plane. I don't know the Belarusian case, but either you misused the word or they are very different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The class of risky employees should perhaps be limited to Chromebooks only.
The software we develop should have better interfaces too. A security expert should also review stuff created by UX. Back when “I love you” virus started, we had pointed out something simple as “open for read” vs “open as in run/execute” should not have had the same interface. All the new security enhancements we have today - don’t run as admin, alerts to request privileged access, sandboxing - all of them existed fo…
Even the script kiddies fall into that trap, my old school got infected by a .pdf.js.js ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It surprises me how much many posters on Hacker News seem to be against using any sort of AV software - not even the built in Defender solution in Windows, if you have to use the OS for whatever reason, but i often see the sentiment expressed that supposedly the entire class of software is useless. What happened to defense in depth with all of the layers you can introduce? Surely if you run a Linux server, you might…
For Windows one of the best things you can do, AV or not, is to NOT make your daily driver account an administrator. Create an admin account with a secure password and then another standard user account for yourself and use that standard user for everything. When installing something you will need to put in your admin password but it is really not a big deal to do so. Massively reduces your chance of ransomware and a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. You need to understand what you are comparing to. The question is comparing US and Russia. No. It’s not the same. But you turned this question into comparing US to perfection. Yes, you are right. US is not perfection. But there is a big difference between 70 to 10, even both are not 100. What Snowden revealed does not make 70 to 10. If you think that way, you don’t understand how bad an authoritarian regime is.
Putting a numeric value on this is silly. The fact is that the United States government can compel companies to aid in its surveillance (just recall when they forced Snowden's email provider to install a backdoor). Even if a company does not want to participate or is not compelled to do so, the US government has very significant capacity to break into and co-opt systems (all the way from targeted surveillance of indi…