Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
BLACK FRIDAY DEAL: Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom--A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at $48 with coupon code "BFRIDAY20" ×
Government Security

Ask Slashdot: Should Users Uninstall Kaspersky's Antivirus Software? (slashdot.org) 313

First, here's the opinion of two former NSA cybersecurity analysts (via Consumer Reports): "It's a big deal," says Blake Darche, a former NSA cybersecurity analyst and the founder of the cybersecurity firm Area 1. "For any consumers or small businesses that are concerned about privacy or have sensitive information, I wouldn't recommend running Kaspersky." By its very nature antivirus software is an appealing tool for hackers who want to access remote computers, security experts say. Such software is designed to scan a computer comprehensively as it searches for malware, then send regular reports back to a company server. "One of the things people don't realize, by installing that tool you give [the software manufacturer] the right to pull any information that might be interesting," says Chris O'Rourke, another former NSA cybersecurity expert who is the CEO of cybersecurity firm Soteria.
But for that reason, Bloomberg View columnist Leonid Bershidsky suggests any anti-virus software will be targetted by nation-state actors, and argues that for most users, "non-state criminal threats are worse. That's why Interpol this week signed a new information-sharing agreement with Kaspersky despite all the revelations in the U.S. media: The international police cooperation organization deals mainly with non-state actors, including profit-seeking hackers, rather than with the warring intelligence services."

And long-time Slashdot reader freddieb is a loyal Kaspersky user who is wondering what to do, calling the software "very effective and non-intrusive." And in addition, "Numerous recent hacks have gotten my data (Equifax, and others) so I expect I have nothing else to fear except ransomware."

Share your own informed opinions in the comments. Should users uninstall Kaspersky's antivirus software?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Slashdot: Should Users Uninstall Kaspersky's Antivirus Software?

Comments Filter:
  • ANY antivirus (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Uninstall any such snakeoil crap.

    • Re:ANY antivirus (Score:5, Interesting)

      by plopez ( 54068 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @05:39AM (#55375989) Journal

      That assumes you can. If your apps are hosted remotely (aka "The Cloud") do YOU know what they are using? What about their subcontractors and sub-subcontractors? What about your bank? Let's keep going and ask about your health care provider. And so on. Do you know?

    • It just depends who you're dumb enough to believe.

  • by vityok ( 1040682 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @02:45AM (#55375625)

    Of course Kaspersky should be removed from your system.

    Or if you want to keep it, then don't complain when your files get reviewed by an invasive dictatorship. Of course, in 90% of cases they might not give a two shits about you, but if they do, then Kaspersky is one of their possible tools.

    Also, there is absolutely no doubt that Kaspersky and similar Russian-made products should be removed from government networks or any computers handling sensitive information.

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by sittingnut ( 88521 )

      says establishment tool nsa's slaves,
      willing to sacrifice money and blood(usually other americans' ) in wars, propagated by willfully false nsa and ilk, that further the interests of "allies" and exploiters willing to loot other country resources for their private profit,
      willing to applaud torture camps and and mass human rights violations, against american laws and constitution,
      willing to allow unaccountable mass surveillance by nsa, that dictators in russia can only dream about .
      etc etc.
      -
      kaspersky softwar

    • by helga the viking ( 4796617 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @03:11AM (#55375701)
      Absolute FUD.

      Kaspersky BENCHMARKS the shit out of Norton, McCrapee and most others reliably over longer periods of time.

      Show us the code, the detail and the proof it has a backdoor or exploit. An open availability of technical explanations proving there is an exploit makes it credible. We've got them for just about everything else so this one stands at odds as an outlier which should ring alarm bells that its political and not founded.

      There are two layers of logic to this:

      • You take the risk Kaspersky installs malware via some backdoor because Kremlin (no proof yet still waiting). Considers your desktop machine a valid target. Under this situation assuming everyone has a ticking time bomb installed on their computer for the Kremin to manipulate is not unprecedented. Welcome to the last 20+ years of insecure by design Adobe flash products.
      • You ARE ACTUALLY running something that is of state,corporate 'secret' level, controls a national grid, controls some real world system that could kill people, controls governmental sensitive emails. Then why is it running anything other than a hardened lunix BSD OS anyway?!?
      • by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @04:19AM (#55375837) Journal

        Absolute FUD.

        Kaspersky BENCHMARKS the shit out of Norton, McCrapee and most others reliably over longer periods of time.

        Show us the code, the detail and the proof it has a backdoor or exploit. An open availability of technical explanations proving there is an exploit makes it credible. We've got them for just about everything else so this one stands at odds as an outlier which should ring alarm bells that its political and not founded.

        There are two layers of logic to this:

        • You take the risk Kaspersky installs malware via some backdoor because Kremlin (no proof yet still waiting). Considers your desktop machine a valid target. Under this situation assuming everyone has a ticking time bomb installed on their computer for the Kremin to manipulate is not unprecedented. Welcome to the last 20+ years of insecure by design Adobe flash products.
        • You ARE ACTUALLY running something that is of state,corporate 'secret' level, controls a national grid, controls some real world system that could kill people, controls governmental sensitive emails. Then why is it running anything other than a hardened lunix BSD OS anyway?!?

        Here is the citation of proof of Kremlin involvement [cnbc.com]

      • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        There may not be any backdoor code or exploit. The software sends malware samples home, it tells you that much.

        What the NSA created really was malware and the product correctly identified that, and sent the sample.

        Now here is where it gets problematic. Any company of any size in Russia has its government minders. They are probably just sharing their data with Russian intelligence, because no doing so means they end up drinking sugar laced with heavy radioactive isotopes in their morning tea.

    • by ( 4475953 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @03:34AM (#55375731)

      People forget that Kaspersky's engine is used by many other security products, too.

      The reasonable stance is that if you have important trade secrets on your machines, you should choose your antivirus carefully - it's best to use one from your own country, including the engine. The same for journalists, dissidents, etc. Don't security products from the country you're criticizing.

      Any other people aka "ordinary citizens" should just choose the antivirus that performs best and suits them best. Kaspersky is top notch. If you're worried about viruses and maybe a bit about NSA mass surveillance, Kaspersky is one of the best choices. If you're primarily worried about Romanian mass surveillance, on the other hand, then you should avoid Bitdefender. And so on.

      It's kind of a no-brainer. On a side note, any machine, no matter how well-patched and which operating system it is running, will be broken and accessed in a targeted attack by any state actor. There are no secure PCs.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo&world3,net> on Monday October 16, 2017 @06:43AM (#55376151) Homepage Journal

        You shouldn't need anti-virus software at all.

        Limiting what applications can do and blocking malicious behaviour is the job of the operating system. If you need a second application with kernel level privileges just to replicate the functionality of the actual kernel, you have a deeper problem.

        • Let me paraphrase:

          You shouldn't need anti-virus software at all.

          Limiting what users can do and blocking malicious behaviour like installing software and the ability to send network traffic is the job of the operating system. If you need a second application with kernel level privileges just to replicate the functionality of the actual kernel, you have a deeper problem.

          Now user hostile system aside, there's a reason why anti-virus relies on matching the type of software, actual software lists, or attempting to determine what looks like malware rather than closing off the options for malware to exist: a) users will happily permit malware to install without a thought, b) most malware looks identical to any other application on the system in terms of how it interacts with the OS.

          So something as tunable and fungible as software that monitors and attempts to

      • The reasonable stance is that if you have important trade secrets on your machines, you should choose your antivirus carefully....

        The reasonable stance is that if you have important trade secrets on your machines, you shouldn't store them on anything accessible by Windows.

    • Or if you want to keep it, then don't complain when your files get reviewed by an invasive dictatorship.

      And also don't complain when a non-U.S. country reviews your files.

    • You mean NSA has cracked it too? "don't complain when your files get reviewed by an invasive dictatorship" That's here, and not just since Trump either. I kind of chuckled at the story that the Israelis had cracked it and told us they found the Russians there already. As if the Russians (gov) couldn't just watch the data going in and out on the fiber without leaving a trace at Kaspersky itself (as NSA does), and as if only the Israelis had any good crackers...
  • Are antivirus programs really worth the impact on your machine? They use a surprising amount of resources and many experts have voiced opinions that the threats are outrunning their capabilities.

    If you want to visit a site that might contain malware, just start a VM or boot a CD-based OS that doesn't use your drives.

    When was the last time your antivirus actually prevented an infection? If it did, it definitely told you because they do everything possible to keep your fear level up.

    • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

      If you want to visit a site that might contain malware, just start a VM or boot a CD-based OS that doesn't use your drives.

      You do realize that includes literally every single website, right? Including this one.

      • Block ads, update regularly, don't download shit if you don't know what it does. I have never had an antivirus program on my personal computer and I've never had problems.
        • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

          I have never had an antivirus program on my personal computer and I've never had problems.

          How do you know? Were you expecting popups and silly effects? Were you expecting the virus to inform you of it's wrongdoings in some way?

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I started doing that after the Snowden leaks showed that GCHQ was actively attacking users of this site.

    • In the last 10 years or so I have used a Windows PC with anti-virus software to visit an incredible number of web sites of extremely shoddy origin and appearance and I used various p2p software to download all sorts of content on almost weekly basis. As a result, the AV software caught positives may be two or three times in that whole time, and every time this was "there is a dangerous ClickMe.EXE in your torrent folder! do not touch!" (well, what sort of idiot would click that anyways?). Why haven't I run

  • Yes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @03:00AM (#55375669)
    And any other AV software. While it's doubtful Kaspersky or any other firm would bother spying on "low value" targets and the software behaves as intended it's still intrusive, destabilizing and slows down the system. And if Russia wanted to be malicious, e.g. shutdown computers in the runup to something, I'm sure the software's AV update mechanism would give them the means to do so.

    Of course if I were in Russia I would have my doubts about running US software for the same reason. As a rule of thumb, don't trust code produced by your main adversary.

    • Its not unprecedented in the IT world to have an entity push something through an 'update'/'backdoor' that stops a computer from working. Replace the word russian government with microsoft windows update There's your precedent.

      • by Zocalo ( 252965 )
        Even more specifically, there have been any number of incidents of AV vendors pushing bad updates too. Now, who's to say that at least *some* of those bad updates were not done deliberately to cause disruption to one or more of their recipients? It would be trivial for a vendor in the pocket of a state actor to work out when Target #4796617's next AV update is due and start pushing out a bad patch just before that scheduled update then pull the update once they know they've got a hit.
        • Even more specifically, there have been any number of incidents of AV vendors pushing bad updates too. Now, who's to say that at least *some* of those bad updates were not done deliberately to cause disruption to one or more of their recipients? It would be trivial for a vendor in the pocket of a state actor to work out when Target #4796617's next AV update is due and start pushing out a bad patch just before that scheduled update then pull the update once they know they've got a hit.

          Yeah, but the insidious problem with Kaspersky is the Russian government is so corrupted with the Russian Mafia who are tied to the criminal ramsonware and malware that you can't trust them especially! Even if you use an American one that the US has the private keys for you can be assured there is no Mafia or criminal gangs associated with them as well.

      • Not saying I agree with what you are saying but I would rather drink a poison of an American corporation (I am American) than the Russian government/hackers anyday. ... actually to give me a +mod 5 Linux would be the best way but even Ubuntu was caught doing telemetry. [fsf.org] Yes, I am using Chrome too typing this but no other good modern browser exists so what choice do I have?

        But in the real world I want a usable desktop and be able to edit my resume and work on spreadsheets that look the same on my bosses Wind

    • by Zocalo ( 252965 )
      Yes, you could say exactly the same thing about the equivalent tools make by companies based in the US/EU/China/wherever, depending on where you happen to live. Everyone spies on everyone, so we might as well assume that governments subvert popular software/hardware/services as well, right? So, assuming that you are a low value target to state actors, then the question becomes more about which of the following scenarios you prefer:
      1. A tool that has been backdoored by some third party country that likely do
    • by tero ( 39203 )

      > Of course if I were in Russia I would have my doubts about running US software for the same reason

      I think that applies to the rest of the world outside US and not just Russia. American government has been the nr 1 information collector for a long time.

      Actually it's been shown that American agencies even spy on US citizens. So you're not safe from government oppression even on US soil.

      Basically: If any government intrusion is part of your personal threat model... you need to proceed very very carefully.

    • AV slow down systems for a reason. Do you have evidence a regular windows 10 user can rely on "defender" to protect their computer, having no other AV?
  • Nyet.
    Obligatory russian hackers joke [littlefun.org].
  • All AV software should be treated as if compromised by it's country of origin. So, whether or not you should uninstall Kaspersky is who you are worried about.

    If the biggest threat to you is ordinary criminal malware? No.
    If the biggest threat to you is Russian intelligence? Yes.
    If the biggest threat to you is US intelligence? No.
  • by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @04:05AM (#55375789) Journal

    Israelis caught them being used to spy upon it's users which is why it is banned by the US government. In addition it replaces SSL certificates with their own doing MITM attacks and sniffing de-encrpyting your data.

    I noticed Google Chrome even hides certificates now in the address bar after AV software was caught doing this! Coincidence?

    Not only would I uninstall it. I would re-image too if you have to use Windows. You can't trust whatever backdoors or spyware Kaspersky could have changed in the Windows Registry or done to your system.

    • Israelis caught them being used to spy upon it's users which is why it is banned by the US government. In addition it replaces SSL certificates with their own doing MITM attacks and sniffing de-encrpyting your data.

      Care to show us how to scan the content of encrypted traffic for malware without? Me and the makers of a few proxies and firewalls would like to know (hint: They all do exactly that).

    • Why should we always trust what Israel's intelligence says without offering a tiny bit of evidence? And hasn't Israel itself hacked into other's computers and planted nasty time-bombs there? (stuxnet)

  • Yes. And ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Qbertino ( 265505 ) <moiraNO@SPAMmodparlor.com> on Monday October 16, 2017 @04:08AM (#55375805)

    ... you shouldn't use any operating system or computer work environment that needs to rely on anti-virus software to relyably function.

    Glad I could help.

  • by shanen ( 462549 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @04:16AM (#55375833) Homepage Journal

    Think about it for a minute.

    Would truly malicious software actually allow itself to be uninstalled? If the Kaspersky people are competent at what they do, and if they are doing it for Putin, then you are in a world of hurt. The question of "Should you uninstall?" is relatively trivial compared to the big questions of "Are you able to uninstall the software?" and "How can you be sure you really got rid of it?"

    The makers of the best anti-virus software (which might be Kaspersky for all I know) would know about every backdoor into your system and every way to hide bad code. If that company was evil or suborned for evil purposes, that same knowledge would make it impossible to remove their software unless they REALLY wanted to let you remove it.

    All things considered, especially things like how good Putin is at manipulating people, at this point I'd have very little trust in any computer that ever ran any software that originated in Russia. Or even software that was exposed to Russians who have family members still living in Russia.

    Technology remains morally neutral. Putin and his kleptocrats? Not so much.

    Before commenting, I searched this discussion for prior statements of this obvious reality. Didn't find any, but maybe I just hadn't thought of the right keywords yet. So I'll try another search now...

  • It's simple, Russia has gone out of its way to make itself an adversarial state to the US (of which I am a member). The Russian government has also been very heavy handed in dealing with its own private sector often dictating how they conduct business and very much muddling the lines between free enterprise and government controlled. This all equals, don't trust "security" provided by the Russians.

    Now one can go on with "Americans spy on everything" and yeah, I don't like that. But as a US citizen I like Ru

  • Do you want the Kremlin to have your data or just the NSA? The idea that the NSA regularly collects data from US citizens is well documented. The idea is tenuous that Kaspersky is colluding with the Russian government to export data from USA targets to Russian intelligence. Endpoint security relies on central services understanding what is going on in the world. This can be referred to as operation intelligence. Kaspersky sense data back into "unsecured channels" and may include data that DHS considers se
    • It's far less likely that an average citizen of the USA will find the KGB using data against them than their own government. As long as the Russians don't have an interest in you for intelligence gathering, you're going to be ignored and the data will go in a big Russian bit bucket.

      Now, anything the NSA gathers on you? That's held to use against you. You're in their backyard and as long as computer processing power keeps increasing, they will keep increasing their data collection and mining operations so

  • I'm not sure dumping a particular vendor because of their country they operate out of is all that useful when there's already been at least one major breach trough the antivirus software by tricking it into downloading malicious updates from the attacker's own servers. The perpetrator of this particular hack was North Korea, but we know that there's at least half a dozen other countries, on both sides of the old iron curtain (which seems to be going up again), so you're never going to be fully safe from bre
  • The thing we know is that the NSA and Israel do not have access to the code. We know that Russia tried to get into Kasperski and that means they do not work with them.
    We know that the NSA warns against them.

    To me all this tells me they are the safest bet for security of any of the anti-virus companies.

    My guess is that the NSA has back doors in the rest and if they have them, the rest has as well. So even IF the Russians have hacked them, they are still more secure than any other AV program who must be assum

    • by Zocalo ( 252965 )
      That's the big question though, isn't it - who had access to the code? Even if we assume (and I see no reason not to) that the Israeli's are telling the truth about the FSB using Kaspersky AV to commit espionage rather than just supporting some US FUD, we actually still have no idea whether they were using code that was deliberately placed there by Kaspersky at the behest/insistance of the FSB, or a coding error that the FSB exploited in the same manner that the NSA has demonstrably exploited numerous tool
      • by houghi ( 78078 )

        Ok. Here in more details if it is worse case:
        Everybody has access to everything.
        Best worst case
        The NSA has no access to Kaspersky, but has to the rest.
        The FSN has access to everything.
        The worst best case
        Nobody has access, except the FSB who have access to only Kaspersky
        The best case
        Nobody has access to anything.

        Only in case 3 does it make sense not to use Kaspersky and that is the 2nd least likely. So the Russians will have access anyway. The question now is: do you give the NSA access as well or not?

    • We know that Russia tried to get into Kasperski and that means they do not work with them

      You sure about that? I'm pretty sure the Ksaperski employees who are not in Russian prison would be quite willing to cooperate to avoid what happened to their colleagues.

  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @05:21AM (#55375939)

    If some reputable source would say it, I would certainly start rethinking my privacy strategy. But considering who's "recommending" this, I have to second guess whether the reason is that it keeps them from spying on me...

    If I had told you 40 years ago that you can't trust one of your TLAs when they warn about Russians...

  • How about buying Bitdefender instead? Was just about to decide on Kaspersky but...

    Anybody like it?

  • This is the question that needs to be asked.

    Here's a list of the features that every AV has:

    • It doesn't fully protect you.
    • It slows down your OS.
    • It interferes with your OS functions.
    • It makes you trust unknown software with dubious functions.
    • It potentially makes your PC less secure, because AV needs kernel level drivers.
    • It may potentially be used to gather any information/spy on you without your knowledge.
    • Most AVs are dumb as fuck which means they cannot intelligently tell bad software from good sof
    • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

      It potentially makes your PC less secure, because AV needs kernel level drivers.

      Explain based on your thorough knowledge of Antivirus software, Virus design and user mode and kernel mode software development experience, how it is possible to do this without a kernel mode driver? I await your thoughtful response. If you don't have one, STFU because you're an idiot

      • I've already said that an OS which requires an AV in order to guard apps/data is not the OS you should be running in the first place.

        Also, I am indeed a raving idiot [computerworld.com] because I don't have an AV installed and for my 25+ years of computer usage I've never been infected or lost my credentials (aside from companies leaking them, e.g. Adobe [krebsonsecurity.com]). That couldn't be attributed to sheer luck, right? Windows is inherently insecure and an AV gives you a false sense of security as indicated by literally tens of millions o

        • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

          I've already said that an OS which requires an AV in order to guard apps/data is not the OS you should be running in the first place.

          Also, I am indeed a raving idiot [computerworld.com] because I don't have an AV installed and for my 25+ years of computer usage I've never been infected or lost my credentials (aside from companies leaking them, e.g. Adobe [krebsonsecurity.com]). That couldn't be attributed to sheer luck, right? Windows is inherently insecure and an AV gives you a false sense of security as indicated by literally tens of millions of examples when people have got infected while having a fully updated AV installed and running.

          I asked you a direct question: How does one offer an antivirus solution that does not involve a kernel mode driver? And you failed to respond. Thanks for playing!

          • Except he wasn't arguing that you should run an AV that doesn't require kernel mode drivers. He said you shouldn't be running AV at all. You asked him to provide a solution for something he never suggested.

            • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

              Except he wasn't arguing that you should run an AV that doesn't require kernel mode drivers. He said you shouldn't be running AV at all. You asked him to provide a solution for something he never suggested.

              He made the claim "It potentially makes your PC less secure, because AV needs kernel level drivers." I prompted him for a basis for this claim and none was provided. Now if we want to discuss a different claim: like Antivirus software is more bad than it is good. We have to provide a basis for the claim usually in the form of evidence and/or subject matter expertise. When a person makes a claim like "It potentially makes your PC less secure, because AV needs kernel level drivers" yet doesn't appear to h

  • Research your options and choose what you feel is best for what you personally need. I would not consult Slashdot for advice.
  • Krapersky shovels tons of data from your system to servers in Canada and Russia without any explanation as to why this is necessary. That traffic is easy to spot and can be blocked, but it is a clear signal that you are better off with no AV than with Krapersky. And without Krapersky system no longer need half an hour to boot up and your browsers start working right again.
  • remove MS_Windows & install Debian GNU/Linux https://www.debian.org/ [debian.org]
  • Should just be careful what they download and what links they click on.

    • >Should just be careful what they download and what links they click on.

      Yeah, you wouldn't want to accidentally drink polonium tea after posting an insult to Putin on social media...

  • I've had Kaspersky Internet Security for a couple of years now. It's my understanding that Russian law is similar to Chinese law about software--to sell in those countries, you must provide the government with your source code. I have no doubt the Russian spy agencies found an exploitable vulnerability in that source code and have been using it. I'm no more worried about that than the NSA's covert knowledge of vulnerabilities in Windows. And I place little credence in anything that Israeli intelligence say
  • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
    Help find the next
    Stuxnet
    Flame
    Equation Group
    Duqu
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
    A more secure and safe internet is great news for all users.
  • by black3d ( 1648913 ) on Monday October 16, 2017 @07:16AM (#55376267)

    Since the OS it's running on top of is already deeply rooted by the NSA, what difference does it make if another spy agency has a zero day for one particular program I'm running on there? Hell, I'm sure both the KGB and NSA have zero-days for half the software I run on my PC. It takes a good half-hour of regedits, scripts and service disabling just to turn off telemetry in Windows 10, and that's just the stuff you're meant to know about.

    If I was working on documents that I really needed to keep secret from a state-sponsored attacker, I'd need to air-gap that shit. Whether I was running Windows, Linux, or XBMC.

    As it is, while Kaspersky won't keep state-sponsored attackers out (and neither will any other AV, or Windows Defender), it does a darn good job of keeping non-state-sponsored attackers out. And if a malicious attacker gets access to the same kind of tools a state-sponsored attacker does, it makes no difference whether I'm using Kaspersky or something else.

    Unless someone can show me that Kaspersky puts me MORE at risk from non-state-sponsored attackers than a competing AV (or no AV at all), then swapping one out for another makes no difference. And no, "a hacker could get a-hold of KGB's zero days" is not an argument against Kaspersky, since a hacker could also get a-hold of NSAs zero days which don't target Kaspersky.. you know, like the whole dump of NSA zero-days that was dumped.

  • Uninstall Windows.
  • If Kaspersky wants to continue selling its software in the west, I think the only way they can convince everyone that they're NOT providing a backdoor in their software to FSB is by going open source. That is, they should make their AV engine open source, and but the virus definition data could be provided as a paid subscription.

  • Antivirus programs cause all kinds of trouble. I suggest, for people who are able and willing to stay alert and investigate warning signs, not using any antivirus program at all. Use a tripwire system instead.

    If, however, you're the sort who ignores warnings and red flags, then use an antivirus program. Should you use a different one over Kaspersky? I don't think it matters that much.

  • After all, microsoft already has full control of the OS layer, no intermediaries required.

    If Microsoft wants to spy on you, they will spy on you, no matter what antivirus you use. So, if you stick to Windows defender, there is one less vector for others to spy on you (because, once you start using windows as your OS, you cede control to Microsoft to potentialy spy on you).

    Windows Defender (or Microsoft security essentials, if that's how you roll) are free (as in beer), have decent detection capabilities, do

  • The threat I have rational reasons to worry about is domestic and foreign cybercrime. I don't know why NSA would want my data either, but they probably don't need a very strong reason. Kaspersky would be same for defense from the crooks and a little better for defense from NSA, so it's a keeper. Also it would be naive to expect to be able to defend oneself from a major spy agency without training that can probably only be given by another spy agency.

  • .... are claiming is evidence to substantiate the notion that it the software is dangerous.

The computer is to the information industry roughly what the central power station is to the electrical industry. -- Peter Drucker

Working...