• @mansfield@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    659 months ago

    Kaspersky is just one piece of software to avoid. Others include:

    • Telegram
    • Avast AV
    • Anything from 360 Safe / Qihoo 360
    • Opera browser … now owned by above
    • Zoom
    • FileZilla / UTorrent / other PUA that bundles adware and acts essentially as a trojan
    • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      329 months ago

      Add in:

      • TikTok
      • Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp, and Threads
      • Reddit :)

      For antivirus, Microsoft’s built-in one is fine. Ideally use an OS that has better security and lower default permissions like popular Linux distros (at the very least, it’s a smaller target than Windows). I haven’t checked recently, but using Malware Bytes for occasional runs (not as active protection though) was good and is probably still good.

      But in general, use FOSS, at the very least they’ll probably not pull a Reddit and screw over their users.

      • @A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        139 months ago

        Seriously. Windows Defender is an excellent piece of software, and its all you need. Paying for anything else is kinda foolish.

        If you’re on windows, you dont need anything else except maybe to install malware bytes once a month, run the scan, and uninstall it.

    • Dark Arc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      This just feels like a random hit list; how did you come up with it?

      Why zoom? It’s based out of San Francisco.

      I also object to the Telegram inclusion. Unless you want to include Discord, and various other server side encrypted communication apps. The founders may be Russians by birth but they have Ukrainian roots, are no longer Russian citizens, had their first company stolen from them by the Kremlin, etc. Also I always like to note, Einstein was a German by birth but he was no Nazi.

      What’s the FileZilla connection? Tim Kosse (which as far as I can tell it’s still the primary author) is a German.

        • Dark Arc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          89 months ago

          I mean… That’s fair, I don’t recommend zoom, but those reasons have nothing to do with Russia and everything to do with a company that was willing to lie that they had E2EE and didn’t.

      • @mansfield@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -59 months ago

        This very partial list is based on my being in cyber security for 20 years and working a variety of incidents involving these apps. You all can do whatever you want with your computers.

        • @magnusrufus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          109 months ago

          That you didn’t give a helpful answer makes me doubt you where as before I was interested in what you had to say.

    • @istanbullu@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      129 months ago

      Telegram is better than WhatsApp. At least it has a decent Linux client, and all clients are open source. WhatsApp has neither.

      • @SpaceMan9000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        149 months ago

        Unless you’re constantly using secret chats all your data is stored in plain text… This is actually worse than WhatsApp

      • @Suffocate9920@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -19 months ago

        Maybe better client and more features. But Russians have full access to servers and messages. They could read whatever they want. It’s a fact that proved during war that Russia started in Ukraine.

      • @Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        29 months ago

        I don’t even use antivirus software anymore. Previously, every time I found a new one recommended by security experts I thought I could trust, about a year later, it turned to shit or was relieved to always having been shit. Now I just backup my stuff and vet any executable. I don’t do any serious work on my Windows install anyway, so nuking it isn’t a problem.

    • @Apalacrypto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Out of curiosity, why Telegram? (Im out of the loop on this one)

      As for uTorrent, I’ve got version 2.2.1 and have never allowed it to update in the last decade or however long it’s been. I think that was the last version that didn’t allow any ads or otherwise and was simply a solid p2p client at the time.

      • @rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49 months ago

        Because it’s less (because of history stored on server and use of OTR being problematic) secure than ICQ in year 2003, prone to phishing and, yes, made by people I wouldn’t trust.

        • @Apalacrypto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          29 months ago

          Never needed to or even thought about it. uTorrent never gave me any issues and was super lightweight. Additionally, there was a fansubbed anime site I was a member of for a long time that had a limited whitelist of p2p clients last they would allow their trackers to function on. uT 2.2.1 was one of those.

          That pc seldom gets used anymore nowadays anyway, as my main pc is running OpenSuse and ktorrent does all I need it to.

      • yeehaw
        link
        fedilink
        English
        09 months ago

        Because Russians started it I guess?

      • kingthrillgore
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 months ago

        Just don’t use it for secure comms and anything tangentially connected for what you consider “secure” matters. Simple as.

    • @sepulcher@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      There’s nothing really wrong with telegram.

      It’s just social media for people who aren’t indoctrinated by the west.

  • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    599 months ago

    Country in a trade war / cold war with another country decides to block imports of some product from said other country, citing fears of the product being poisoned. It’s barely news.

      • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yeah it is, and I’m happy about it being posted, it’s not that. I should be less sarcastic and more direct, I am just getting jaded. Thanks for pointing it out.

        I guess what I am saying is more that of course the US is going to try to limit Russian influence and trade, just as Russia does as much as it can. Same with China and Tiktok and whatever.

        It’s reasonable, it’s actually one of the more reasonable things the US does. There are a ton of people around here who cosplay as communists while rooting for fascist Putin who try to blow these things up as an attack on free trade or freedom of speech.

        It’s not like Putin’s people literally wrote and published a book about how they want to do election interference using stuff like this.

    • @orphiebaby@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It’s news. That’s all that matters.

      Also this is actually a pretty unique and interesting scenario. You ever seen a digital embargo of software from a single country imposed on citizens? Not to mention the dignity and rights violations on both sides…

      • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        29 months ago

        Yes, I’ve seen digital embargoes preventing companies in other countries doing business in mine, because their legal environment differs from ours.

        Google Analytics got banned in several European countries comes to mind. I remember some small blogs writing about that, not much else.

        • @orphiebaby@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I mean, regardless of semantics about whether it’s new to us or not, that’s still news.

    • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I’m not sure how that’s relevant. People should be free to use whatever they want. I’m not interested in Russian software, but that doesn’t mean banning it is okay. The same goes for Chinese software like TikTok (not touching that), Iranian software, or North Korean software, if that’s even a thing. I don’t care if literal Nazis made the software, people should be free to use what they want.

      The only areas the government should get involved are:

      • government owned devices
      • public advisories
      • prosecution of crimes where the software is involved

      The software I choose to use is not the government’s business. If I violate a law, charge me with a crime, but don’t preemptively ban stuff.

      • @Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        69 months ago

        What if said software is being used to manipulate national interests from a civilian level and its owned by an adverserial nation?

        • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          09 months ago

          That’s one of the costs of liberty. The government will need to find another way.

          The barrier to banning something in the interests of national security must be much higher than “this could be used by our enemies.” That’s the entire basis for the War on a Terror, the Patriot Act, and the NSA spying on Americans, and I won’t stand for it. It’s also the same idea as banning books, that’s just not how a free society works.

          You combat misinformation through integrity and transparency, not bans.

          • @RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            29 months ago

            That’s one of the costs of liberty. The government will need to find another way.

            No, that’s not liberty. If the average user would have any way of detecting when software is doing nefarious thighs, then sure, you’d be right, but the average user can’t possibly know that software is misbehaving just like they couldn’t have possibly known that asbestos or lead was bad for them. Software is opaque. As long as it remains opaque, consumers are unsuspecting victims and need help.

            • @Kedly@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              19 months ago

              Side tangent, but your oopsie of Nefarious Things to “Nefarious Thighs” fucking FLOORED me xD Wish I could detect nefarious thighs!

            • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              average user can’t possibly know

              Hence the information campaign to make people aware.

              Look at cigarettes, they are harmful and therefore have a strong information campaign to inform the public. I highly doubt you’ll find anyone today who isn’t aware of the dangers of smoking, but just 100 years ago, it was considered classy and largely innocuous. The difference was a big information campaign to counter the tobacco lobby’s attempts to spin smoking as somehow healthy.

              The government’s role should be to make opaque things transparent, not to bad things that could be harmful. At the same time, they can spy on other countries to get an idea of what types of control they can exert, which would help them better inform the public.

              But at the end of the day, it’s up to the individual what they choose to believe. Liberty is having the freedom to make poor choices, and to live with the consequences. The government’s role should be to earn our trust, but they violate it at every opportunity in the name of “security” (NSA, TSA, etc). Yes, a lot of people will ignore it, and that’s a part of having liberty.

              • @RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                5
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                Hence the information campaign to make people aware.

                There are still those who think the lunar landing didn’t happen so this is not a valid option for something that might pose an immediate danger to society.

                But at the end of the day, it’s up to the individual what they choose to believe. Liberty is having the freedom to make poor choices, and to live with the consequences.

                Government backed malicious software is not just dangerous to the user, it’s a societal level threat. And unlike smoking, which is banned wherever it poses a danger to more than just the smoker, there isn’t a way to restrict usage in a way in which it only affects the user.

                • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  29 months ago

                  immediate danger to society

                  But what exactly is the definition of that?

                  For example, which of these meet that definition:

                  • an antivirus that ignores viruses from the county of origin
                  • a social media app that collects data from a device and sends it home
                  • a social media app that likely promotes content with a specific political agenda the government doesn’t like
                  • an app that hides monetary transaction details, which is commonly used by terrorists and other criminals
                  • a social media app that doesn’t id users and allows criminals to use it to communicate

                  The first two are probably the initial targets, but a law enforcement agency could make a decent case for the rest. Where does it stop?

                  That’s why I think we need a hard limit on government authority here. It’s better for some bad stuff to propagate than for the scope of what’s blocked to expand and effectively limit freedoms of speech, association, press, etc.

                  Government have a lot of tools at their disposal, I honestly don’t think banning software needs to be one of them.

              • kingthrillgore
                link
                fedilink
                English
                19 months ago

                The cost of liberty and freedom is eternal vigilance from those who want to harm us, and those who claim to protect us.

          • @0xD@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            09 months ago

            Banning software is not the same as banning books, lol. Books are passive ideas, software is active and can be used for espionage. You’re creating a false equivalence here.

            • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              29 months ago

              They’re absolutely in the same category.

              If the government can ban things in the name of “national security” based on little more than “it’s potentially dangerous,” what’s stopping them from labeling any platform that doesn’t censor information the way they want as “dangerous” and subject to bans?

              The government doesn’t get to choose what I run on my computers, nor do they get to choose what books I read, what movies I watch, etc.

              • @0xD@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                18 months ago

                Oh yeah, the fallacious slippery slope again. How creative and intellectual!

                • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  18 months ago

                  If there’s anything it applies to, it’s government overreach. Look at how the TSA expanded its violation of personal privacy in the name of “security,” or how the NSA and FBI have expanded surveillance of individuals. Look at the militarization of police.

                  Once you let the government ban a handful of apps, it’s going to use that new power more frequently. That’s what bureaucrats do, when you give them a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

                  There are so many examples of government getting its foot in the door and steadily expanding its control. That’s what it does.

        • @ATDA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -19 months ago

          You do just as you did. Tell people and let them make up their minds. Posts like yours convinced me in the past and it will others in the future .

      • Kata1yst
        link
        fedilink
        49 months ago

        You found one video supporting your viewpoint. Kaspersky’s role in Russian intelligence has been an open secret since the mid 2010s. This is Facebook Anti-Vaxxer “research” methodology.

        • @Atlaty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          The guy ho made the video works as data analyst, plus Kaspersky works perfectly as antivirus. Can you gave me evidence supporting your claim?

        • @rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          19 months ago

          Not that it was a secret at any point. That company has that approach to advertising and PR reminiscent of hacker movies as normies, lamers and “Windows power users” perceive them. Usually when there’s bullshit in one part, you expect it to be there in other parts too.

          But - their “antivirus check tool” or something was very convenient for me to remove winlockers somewhere in 2007. I do remember the good things.

      • kingthrillgore
        link
        fedilink
        English
        29 months ago

        Kaspersky was actually good a long time ago, but there was a shakeup and the FSB started to get more involved in their operations somehow. Its not safe now, is what i’m saying.

    • @CluelessDude@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19 months ago

      You would think that but I have a Friend that bought the paid version and swears by it, he had more than enough problems with it blocking everything it wants, I don’t say anything anymore I just shake my head and move on.

  • @mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59 months ago

    FBI on its way to arrest me because I used MPC-BE to play dolby digital content without a license for the ac3 codec like 10 years ago lol

    • @spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      28 months ago

      They can pry MPC-BE from my warm cheeze curl stained hands! I’ve been using it to play 4K BluRays on an HTPC, and to decode all these new proprietary surround sound codecs so I don’t need to buy a new expensive ass AVR.

    • @gallopingsnail
      link
      English
      59 months ago

      If anyone cared about security, they would use free software.