Kaspersky Really Secure?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by tomdy2k, Sep 29, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tomdy2k

    tomdy2k Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Posts:
    174
  2. superssjdan

    superssjdan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Posts:
    148
    Location:
    USA
    I have heard these allegations and suggestions before and they are nothing new.Pure hogwash.Any ties,truthful or fictional,have absolutely nothing to do with the product and it's ability to perform it's job.I use KIS2013 on one of my machines and am beyond happy with it.Have one machine that uses KIS and 2 others that use the combo of WSA along with Privatefirewall and admuncher.I would definitely recommend Kaspersky products to quite a few people.I see nothing to fear in the least.
     
  3. Ibrad

    Ibrad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1,949
    Its so funny that everyone thinks security vendors are directly connect with governments. What are they going to access they most likely can not find online now? What are they going to gain by accessing some random users executable/pdf files?

    Everyone is so freely posting things on facebook/twitter/social media but then become extremely paranoid about their antimalware vendors cloud. Kaspersky has shown to be a leader in Antimalware tech why distrust them till we get a reason.
     
  4. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    I have yet to read something like Avira is tied to the "new" SS services :rolleyes:
     
  5. Ibrad

    Ibrad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1,949
    So far we have had the following Vendors being told they are connected to the government:

    Rising = China
    Kaspersky = Russia
    ZoneLabs/CheckPoint = Israel
    Symantec/McAfee = USA
     
  6. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    But a lot of folks here bash Symantec.o_O
    Jerry
     
  7. qakbot

    qakbot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Posts:
    380
    These are they guys still living in the 2005-era when Symantec's products were less than stellar. This is 2012, it might as well be a different company.
     
  8. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Norton has always operated fine on my systems. The only reason I am not using it now is its lack of a module such as Safe Money or SafeZone.

    I also admit that removal was also a result of Norton's lack of participation in AV-C tests.

    Jerry
     
  9. hamlet

    hamlet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Posts:
    201
    There is an interesting discussion of this type of issue in the thread below. It contains some links to the related issue of how anti-malware apps do or don't detect government malware.

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=319731

    I think anyone can have trust issues with software from other countries based on experience, upbringing, etc. I have my own biases or worries about security software from Russian and China. I probably have no good reason for this and no evidence to support it. I have even used (and loved) Kaspersky in the past. Some of Mr. Kaspersky's recent statements (maybe misquoted?) that touch on free speech and anti-government groups give me pause however. The way things work in Russia vis-a-vis speech and security is probably pretty different for most Americans. I prefer my government's (US) style of publically supporting free speech and openness while monitoring everyone in secret. That is much easier to live with. :D
     
  10. hamlet

    hamlet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Posts:
    201
    I used Norton Internet Security for a year in 2010 to 2011 and it was great. I am assuming that they are probably in bed with the US government, however. Hmmm, I think one cannot probably worry about that too much or you will twist yourself into knots worrying.
     
  11. thanhtai2009

    thanhtai2009 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Posts:
    205
    Location:
    Vietnam
    --ttp://eugene.kaspersky.com/2012/07/25/what-wired-is-not-telling-you-a-response-to-noah-shachtmans-article-in-wired-magazine/
     
  12. qakbot

    qakbot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Posts:
    380
    Don't fool yourself. Safe Money and SafeZone provide very little real-world protection on an infected machine. See https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=331122

    Norton pulled out of the AV-C test because they did not want to spend the resources on the static file scan test, which provides NO real world value. This is about as synthetic a test as you can get. Its MEANINGLESS!!! Because of this, AV-C refused to let Norton participate in the test that really matters which is the real-world test. AV-C has taken this position that "You must participate in our good as well as crappy tests, or you don't get to participate at all" and Norton doesn't want to play along.

    Ask yourself this question - "Does the test result of a 200K set of files on disk really tell you anything about how the product will perform in the real world" ? The Answer is "No". Then why does your product buying decisions rely on AV-C.

    Also, keep this in mind - AV-C has a reputation only because they are one of two games in town. Them and AV-Test. They have ZERO security training or credentials and IMO are not competent enough to hold the entire industry hostage by making up their own rules on what is and isn't a good test.

    Do your own testing!!
     
  13. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Quote: Don't fool yourself. Safe Money and SafeZone provide very little real-world protection on an infected machine. See https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=331122 END QUOTE

    I have never had an infected machine, and do not believe I will have unless I click on a bad site. Even then I am very confident that my security will do the job.
    The object is not to allow an infection. That is what my AV and Safe+++ plus MBAM Pro are about.
    Jerry
     
  14. tomdy2k

    tomdy2k Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Posts:
    174
    Even more responses than i was expecting....:D
     
  15. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,089
    I would suggest that anyone who has doubts about security vendors having ties to government agencies should try approaching the question from a different angle. Think about whether government agencies would want ties to security vendors. Do you think, just maybe, there might be some competent people working in government agencies? Who recognize the tremendous potential and real value of the information these security companies acquire both indirectly and directly from the systems run by individuals, corporations, other government agencies, and other entities? If you think there aren't ties you must also think that these people/agencies are either imbeciles or are incapable of making things happen. You would also have to be ignorant of countless historical events and patterns, many of which have been described publicly. I would point out that when it comes to "ties", it would be beneficial to consider the different ways in which Entity A might acquire information "from" and/or influence some control over Entity B.
     
  16. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    localhost
    Just one simple word... FUD ;)
     
  17. Amin

    Amin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    UK
    :thumb: :thumb:

    should change their minds people who think some security vendors are not tied to governments. i would say some of 'em are , actually! and also they can do a lot of nasty jobs which we can not even imagine or haven't seen yet. that's exactly why some of us think the security vendors relation with governments , is of no value. that's not correct.
    just know there are a lot of things happening in the background that we don't wanna hear...
     
  18. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    FUD, indeed...;)
     
  19. The Red Moon

    The Red Moon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2012
    Posts:
    3,872
    Ive been using kaspersky internet security for the past month now and im extremely happy with the program.I have absolutely no issues with it whatsoever.
    Even if mr kaspersky was tied in with the government.well so what.:blink: .
    Business is always tied with the government whether we like this or not.
    The government will always have an influence on business of any kind.Ive been a lifelong admirer of the soviet union and always will be.It seems to me to be just mere propaganda.

    Why single out kaspersky.?
    What about other vendors.do they not have ties with the government.?
    Where does the revenue come from to keep these businesses running if not from the government in some way.Politics control everyones lives to some degree.
    Some fools would like to believe they have true independence and do not need any government help.
    Every aspect of our lives has government ties.who issues our taxes.?
    Who sets our wages.?
    Mortgage rates etc?
    The list could go on and its a irrefutable fact that government rules our very existence and business is not and never will be an exception.:thumb:
     
  20. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    Is Kaspersky or the Russian government your adversary ?

    If not, then I wouldn't worry about that.

    But you might want to opt out of the Kaspersky cloud services and the whole matter of trusting software that has been certified by certain vendors. If you prefer.
     
  21. Nevis

    Nevis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Posts:
    786
    Location:
    255.255.255.255
    I dont think it would help much. If Kaspersky really wanted to spy, you never know what other ways they could be using.

    In short, dont worry abt some Govt. using AV companies to track you down, IMO
     
  22. Amin

    Amin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    UK
    i don't care if kaspersky is tied in with the government , it's natural. but the point is if we consider that they are tied in with one another ( which is very likely ) , why is Mr.Kaspersky ignoring this connection...:rolleyes:
     
  23. Syobon

    Syobon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    469
  24. Rompin Raider

    Rompin Raider Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Posts:
    1,228
    Location:
    North Texas
    I think I'd be more worried about the current batch of "boobs" in D.C. than Kaspersky!:D
     
  25. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    localhost
    Lol :thumb:
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.