Kaspersky Suits Tossed, Fed Bans Will Continue

A Washington D.C. court has dismissed Kaspersky Lab's lawsuits against the U.S. government over two different rules banning Kaspersky products from federal systems. From a report: Both a federal law passed as part of last years National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA,) and a binding operational directive (BOD) issued by the Department of Homeland Security, prohibit federal agencies from using Kaspersky products. Both portrayed Kaspersky, a Moscow based company, as a national security risk. Kaspersky sued to prevent the two rules from coming into place, claiming the NDAA was a form of unlawful punishment against a specific company known as a bill of attainder. The judge reasoned that "The NDAA does not inflict 'punishment' on Kaspersky Lab. It eliminates a perceived risk to the Nation's cybersecurity and, in so doing, has the secondary effect of foreclosing one small source of revenue for a large multinational corporation." Because the NDAA ruling remains in effect, the judge ruled the BOD case was more or less a moot point. Further reading: Who's Afraid of Kaspersky?, and US Government Can't Get Controversial Kaspersky Lab Software Off Its Networks.

Re:

[DCFusor]

Not a Trumptard, but how about the more obvious reason the gov is pissed? Kaspersky detected US malware when no other AV did. And probably refused to "fix" that -
We can't have an AV with the integrity to call out the NSA/CIA spyware, now, can we?
Libtards forget the reporting so easily when it fits their cognitive bias. It's the only way to keep their heads from exploding.

Re:

[Bryansix]

It's not Trump's fault. This is the Deep State. To define that, it's a group of well entrenched government employees who think they know better than the current administration and so ignore it's wishes.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, amazing the power of 13 Twitter trolls paid a total of $100,000 against the billion dollar Democratic campaign.

Have you seen some of these posts? What is their magical power to sway entire populations? And why couldn't the Democrats use the same technology?

Re:

[bobbied]

Wait.. What?

Are you saying the Russians spent $100K to get Trump elected? Or that they managed to bribe a billionaire real-estate developer for $100K?

You do see how either of these ideas are just flat crazy right?

LOL

Re:

[bobbied]

Hmmm.. So Trump's turning over his $200K+ yearly salary for being president to various causes is just him being stupid because he really needs the money?

Yea, Not buying this idea that Trump is bankrupt. Evidence suggests otherwise. He my not be worth what he claims, being prone to exaggeration as he is, but the guy isn't destitute... Not by a long shot.

Re:

[DCFusor]

Seth Rich was his name.

Re:

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Russia and Trump don't even have to communicate anymore. It's a chess game where moves are obvious to both sides. Trump must survive because exposure leading to impeachment is horrible for Russia as the sanctions wi go exponential, especially against the elites.

Ergo appear anti-Russia, up to and including military action that might ding them in Syria.

Re:

[bobbied]

Donald's co-conspirators are already facing serious criminal charges

Hmmm.. Let me see... We have the following...

Defrauding the US Government (basically income tax evasion) and conspiracy to do this, a decade ago, for two people.

Lying to investigators, for two people..... (Like Scooter Libby did?) Oh yea, that's horrible....

13 + 3 foreign entities charged with trying to sway the election (for both candidates in turn) though $100K's worth of social media ads, but nothing coordinated with either campaign...

Shesh.... That's it? That's "serious criminal charges" ?

I got t

In mother Russia....

[bobbied]

You don't sue government for hurting your business...

The government just ends your business...

Re:

[PolygamousRanchKid]

The government just ends your business...

Now why would they want to end it if it is doing OK . . . ?

They will just end you instead . . . and take over the business themselves.

Re:

[Aighearach]

In Soviet Russia, government petitions YOU!

Okay, I get this, but....

[mark-t]

FTA:

The perceived threat:Lawmakers and DHS have publicly said the national security threat from Kaspersky products stems from Russian law. Antivirus programs and other security programs often upload files to a security firm's server in the course of analyzing them for threats. By law, Kaspersky would have to honor Russian official requests for the data.

Couldn't Kaspersky sidestep this issue by *not* uploading any content? Or is this ban in effect because they could theoretically upload, even if they don't?

That being the case, wouldn't it stand to reason that they should simultaneously prohibit *ALL* software written by any agency outside of the US which might have similar laws with regards to data collection, and not just single out Kaspersky labs?

Re:

[war4peace]

Why "outside of the US"? Does "inside of the US" get a pass? If so, why?

Re:

[Bryansix]

Israel is a hostile country? In what definition of the word hostile?

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say a long history of industrial espionage counts as hostile, wouldn't you?

http://www.newsweek.com/2014/05/16/israel-wont-stop-spying-us-249757.html

Re:

[Bryansix]

You own article says that we spy on them, along with most of the EU. Pretty funny. It's also funny that I would be moderated down for asking a question.

Re:

[AHuxley]

A computer has new malware thats active, in the wild, working and an AV app is just to do nothing?
The idea is to get the new malware to the AV experts and then protect AV users globally from new malware. Quickly and on every detection of new malware.

Re:

[AHuxley]

AC should an AV company not detect malware in the wild?
Pass finds to internal experts and hold off on protection if the malware might test as a police or nation state skill level product in the wild?
Most people want an AV company that finds malware in the wild. Detects and passes on that new protection back to all the AV products users as quickly as possible.
A nations most advanced contractors should not be cooking new "other agency" malware on internet facing computers with malware running... and hav

This is why I see everyone install Kaspersky.

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't play ball with the US regime.

Of course in Russia, I might use something else.

Just like I use only Chinese phones in the EUSA and EUSA phones in China.

Re:

[atrex]

I switched to Kaspersky back in the late 2000s because it was consistently rated as one of the best performing AV suites available, and it didn't have the bloat of Norton or McAfee.

Having the NSA blackball it, the same way they complain about encryption schemes not having backdoors to which they have the keys to, is just another recommendation going for it.

Show me evidence of Kaspersky being used to steal identities and/or financial information, then I'd reconsider using it.

This is why you should use Kaspersky

[Anonymous Coward]

it's basically the U.S. government admitting that Kaspersky is too good, it keeps most of the U.S-made spyware out, and they refuse to let the government in when they ask while the other vendors are too afraid to have sanctions levied against them, so they just play ball.

Re:

[DCFusor]

I'll say it without being AC. So many with short attention spans forgot that this was the one that detected spyware when no one else did.

Re:

[thesupraman]

And of course this is why it is being targeted, because it won't play ball and give the US TLAs a free pass to infect its clients.

I'm sure this fuss is doing them nothing but good.outside. The US..

The thing to remember is that this also implies all the other security produces DO give the US agencies a free pass..

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

So many with short attention spans forgot that this was the one that detected spyware when no one else did.

Sigh. False. Kaspersky even explains it differently. They detected a zip file containing already known malware signatures and automatically retrieved it for analysis. It also happened it have a bunch of other previously unknown malware.

Kaspersky is no better than the other top AV vendors... but they certainly have an effective marketing campaign to promote themselves as better.

Re:

[AHuxley]

Yes the past protection helped computer users globally find, understand and protect against:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Stuxnet, Flame, Equation Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org].
That 60 government android cyber-espionage effort.

The internet users globally need the very best real time detection and protection against advanced emerging malware.

Kaspersky Suits Tossed

[Marlin Schwanke]

So is it back to the Warm-ups or perhaps Chinos and Polos?

TPP

[fox171171]

The TPP would have prevented this. It doesn't allow laws that interfere with profits. Captcha: greedily

Victim of the Military Industrial BS artists

[found404]

Both the US and Russians need to continue to funnel 100s of millions into their military, black ops, surveillance programs. Kaspersky is the unwitting poster child to help scare their respective citizens and help fill the stomach of the beast that - ironically - threatens our very freedoms.