• Random Dent@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      86
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s an older interview, but I like to bring this up whenever Kaspersky comes up as a topic:

      If you had the power to change up to three things in the world today that are related to IT security, what would they be?

      Internet design–that’s enough.

      That’s it? What’s wrong with the design of the Internet?

      There’s anonymity. Everyone should and must have an identification, or Internet passport. The Internet was designed not for public use, but for American scientists and the U.S. military. That was just a limited group of people–hundreds, or maybe thousands. Then it was introduced to the public and it was wrong…to introduce it in the same way.

        • Shadowedcross@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Yeah, I sure as shit wouldn’t use the internet if it wasn’t anonymous, seems like a weird thing to want when people are more concerned for their privacy than ever before.

  • Allero@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Kaspersky actually has a good track record of NOT being anything malicious (Except for old times when it seemed to flag pirate software quite often).

    However, if the tool is closed-source, this is naturally against Linux ethos and is generally something to avoid, given extensive permissions.

      • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        “ClamAV is bad so instead of improving it I’m going to cuck to proprietary standards instead”

        I never said ClamAV was good or bad, nor was that the point.

        • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          30
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m going to cuck to proprietary standards

          Open source will never compete with Kaspersky in security field. Security field requires extreme levels of meritocracy and a disposal of capital infrastructure as and when needed. The latter is beyond lacking in open source ecosystem, and will always be lacking. The former is also far from the level field at which Kaspersky plays.

          If you do not understand this, you have failed digital security already. Lying to yourself is never going to solve problems.

            • corsicanguppy
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Was that what got my comment removed?

              My entire career is one counterexample to this after another. It’s not that I’ve seen different; I’ve only seen different.

              Or that?

              Now go fud someone else if you want your weekly bonus, comrade.

              It reminds me of a joke that ends in “I don’t know, and I don’t care”, but the setup seems so much more relevant.

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            The latter is beyond lacking in open source ecosystem

            And yet software like Wazuh (https://github.com/wazuh) exist… Which are complete SIEM and XDR platform. Which does more than any antivirus could ever dream to do. But somehow OSS security is lacking? Sounds like you haven’t looked at the security field seriously in decades. Kaspersky doesn’t lead the pack in anything and it isn’t in a “level field”. Quite the contrary Antivirus as a concept has been commodified in IT. They’re all generally drop in replacements for each other and are not what is actually used to prove to security auditors that systems are secure. You may get %1 detection differences between platforms or maybe an update 30 minutes or an hour earlier. This is generally meaningless and the modern tools actually used to prove security go way deeper than an antivirus.

            Lying to yourself is never going to solve problems.

            Seems to work for you though?

            • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Lying to yourself is never going to solve problems.

              Seems to work for you though?

              The internet is a place full of removed projecting their insecurities to mask their interpersonal conflicts. You are no exception to that. The more I start to realise it, the more I start to realise that participation on internet with people like you is not just a worthless, but damage inflicting endeavour.

              If you knew anything about heuristics, virtualisation and endpoint security, you would realise security even without the cloud is critical to protecting systems, and that Kaspersky provides all of that better than basically anyone else on the market. Virtualising every single system endpoint is practically impossible, which Wazuh seems to rely on.

              I am not interested in a conversation with people like you who bear anti-meritocratic nationalist biases on matters like security. Maybe it is acceptable among your ilk to do that, but I give precisely zero fucks about them and about you.

              • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                you would realise security even without the cloud is critical to protecting systems

                Wazuh, the software I specifically called out. Is not “cloud”. They offer a cloud service, yes (that’s how they make money, on lazy admins or orgs that are too small to house their own infra). But it is self-hosted and designed to be run within the network.

                You clearly have no idea what the current security market looks like. Nor what half of the terms you use actually mean.

                Edit: Forgot to address this too

                Virtualising every single system endpoint is practically impossible, which Wazuh seems to rely on.

                No. The agent can be installed on ANY system. They recommend you install the orchestration/control node virtualized, which you don’t have to do. You can install it on a raw system though that would be a huge waste of resources. You seem to have missed that.

  • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is very cool! Is it FOSS though? Kaspersky is doing good stuff, but I Antivirus is also problematic, and has like all the privileges you can get