Original WIRED article looks like argumentum ad hominem attack on a technology company for its alleged links to Russian government.
It is sad that propaganda war between the US and Russia is spreading to 'technology' news media. We are better off discussing technology, not politics.
Discussing technology without politics is sticking your head in the sand. Technology has a political impact, and technological choices are politically influenced.
Half the topics on HN would be very different if you took away the political context. Unless you only want to discuss programming languages at an academic level, it's almost impossible to ignore the politics.
Is there really a propaganda war between the US and Russia (in the technology space)? I've worked with a few Russiana and they were all dedicated professionals. I've worked with a lot of Americans and a few of them were criminals. I suspect that if I worked with enough Russians, I'd eventually run into a small percentage who were criminals too.
Let's just agree that any population is going to have a few and stick to having technology discussions here.
A while ago I thought about what a perfect gateway Antivirus software would make to gain access to millions of machines. In order to stay up to date they are allowed to make regular calls home, are proprietary, and most often for end users even given away for free. Motivated by this post I just went through a list of the Worldwide Antivirus Vendor Market Share[1], looked up their country of origin, and I have to admit that I find the fragmentation of the industry and the internationalization quite remarkable. Of cause I have no datapoints for comparison, but I still find it interesting that so many nations are home to their very own Antivirus software provider.
Schachman alleges that Medvedev's visit to Kaspesky Lab and work for Russia's major government bank somehow means that Kaspersky has nefarious links to the government. This is baloney. It's like saying if Obama visits Facebook or Google headquarters these companies now are CIA outlets, or saying if the Fed hires Symantec to secure their networks Symantec is now linked to US government.
Of course Central bank of Russia would hire leading Russian security company to secure their network, who else they would hire? What's surprising in that? Of course leading politician may visit a company that is internationally known for its success, especially Medvedev who insisted on emphasizing the "modern hi-tech president" image. Cooperation between security researchers and cybercrime divisions of security services is also nothing new - what else security researchers would do with their findings? They can't prosecute computer criminals themselves...
And of course they would get licensed by Russian security services - how else one could get government contracts, which in every country are not negligible source of income for many companies?
Making it sound as if pretty standard business practices and realities - which apply both to such undeniably corrupt country as Russia and to the US and to many other developed countries - as a sign of some ominous secrets is a journalistic malpractice. It may sound to somebody uninformed as there's something shady there - but in fact there's nothing in all that stuff. There might be secrets hidden somewhere - but Schachman findings are extremely weak in that regard.
>And Kaspersky agreed to appear in a documentary that used his son’s abduction as a prime example of why social networks are dangerous. Those are facts that neither he nor I can avoid.
It's sinister that Kaspersky appears in a documentary talking about privacy concerns? Shachtman's really grasping at straws.
That was a quick rebuttal. It was also awful. The author fails to counter point by point Kapersky's detailed response. Shachtman comes off as arrogant and defensive.
C'mon people. How many "former" KGB agents do you know go completely legit and not have some ties to the Kremlin? Unfortunately, their track record with former spies is pretty well documented.
C'mon, you surely must know that the KGB outlet he graduated from was a math school on steroids, not the 007 training facility. The chances of him still being an agent because of that are well comparable to being simply hard-pressed into cooperation after his company acquired a momentum.
I have no doubt that Kaspersky has close ties to the FSB and Kremlin. Just as I have no doubt that U.S. security companies have close ties to the CIA/FBI. Pick your poison.
I hate to break it to him, but Indiana Jones is a fictional character and, were he a real person, would have been considered a terrible, terrible archeologist -- on par with 19th century "archeologists" who dynamited ruins and chiseled choice bits off monuments.
For the same reasons that I expect Kaspersky corp to be attached at the hip to the FSB, I expect Oracle and Facebook to be attached at the hip to the CIA.
I don't find it unusual. He's building rapport with a reader base by referencing american pop culture, and possibly knowing that many linkbait-y blogs will jump on this as a hook. Nothing too weird, but imo more of a way to bring publicity to his rebuttal than an actual argument point.
I don't see why using a fictional character to make this point is harmful. A much wider range of people know who Indiana Jones is than who (take your pick of experts consulted with by a government) is.
Because he chose a more widely known (albeit fictional) example, more people are able to better grasp the idea he is presenting. It's just good communication.
[+] [-] 1gor|13 years ago|reply
It is sad that propaganda war between the US and Russia is spreading to 'technology' news media. We are better off discussing technology, not politics.
[+] [-] rickmb|13 years ago|reply
Half the topics on HN would be very different if you took away the political context. Unless you only want to discuss programming languages at an academic level, it's almost impossible to ignore the politics.
[+] [-] smoyer|13 years ago|reply
Let's just agree that any population is going to have a few and stick to having technology discussions here.
[+] [-] aidenn0|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notatoad|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 1337biz|13 years ago|reply
Company Marketshare CountryOfOrigin
AVAST SOFTWARE 12.37% Czech Republic
AVG TECHNOLOGIES 12.37% Czech Republic
AVIRA GMBH 12.29% Germany
MICROSOFT CORP. 11.24% United States
ESET SOFTWARE 9.98% Slovakia
SYMANTEC CORP. 8.77% United States
KASPERSKY LABS 7.98% Russia
MCAFEE, INC. 4.50% United States
PANDA SECURITY 4.18% Spain
COMODO GROUP 2.79% United States
TREND MICRO, INC. 2.15% Japan
PC TOOLS SOFTWARE 2.00% Australia
EMSI SOFTWARE GMBH 1.16% Germany
SOFTWIN 1.11% Romania
F-SECURE CORP. 0.95% Finland
OTHERS 6.16%
[1] http://www.opswat.com/sites/default/files/OPSWAT-Market-Shar...
[+] [-] SoapSeller|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zht|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smsm42|13 years ago|reply
Of course Central bank of Russia would hire leading Russian security company to secure their network, who else they would hire? What's surprising in that? Of course leading politician may visit a company that is internationally known for its success, especially Medvedev who insisted on emphasizing the "modern hi-tech president" image. Cooperation between security researchers and cybercrime divisions of security services is also nothing new - what else security researchers would do with their findings? They can't prosecute computer criminals themselves... And of course they would get licensed by Russian security services - how else one could get government contracts, which in every country are not negligible source of income for many companies?
Making it sound as if pretty standard business practices and realities - which apply both to such undeniably corrupt country as Russia and to the US and to many other developed countries - as a sign of some ominous secrets is a journalistic malpractice. It may sound to somebody uninformed as there's something shady there - but in fact there's nothing in all that stuff. There might be secrets hidden somewhere - but Schachman findings are extremely weak in that regard.
[+] [-] mcantelon|13 years ago|reply
It's sinister that Kaspersky appears in a documentary talking about privacy concerns? Shachtman's really grasping at straws.
[+] [-] andrewfelix|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dgudkov|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] at-fates-hands|13 years ago|reply
Once an agent, always an agent.
[+] [-] jaylevitt|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] huhtenberg|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mlvljr|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duaneb|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TazeTSchnitzel|13 years ago|reply
Or too proud, of course.
[+] [-] kalleboo|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gori|13 years ago|reply
That's just bad. I really thought Wired were above that. I guess I was wrong.
[+] [-] lbcadden3|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Tloewald|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] huhtenberg|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ucee054|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tomasienrbc|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] nsns|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jcitme|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mischov|13 years ago|reply
Because he chose a more widely known (albeit fictional) example, more people are able to better grasp the idea he is presenting. It's just good communication.