Chinese Antivirus: the plague of today

[Sana]

Look its no secret that the Chinese got a bad rap, because of the spying via Androids, infected logistics and supply chain products and fake Rolex's. That doesn't mean that a company out there with good intentions, is going to drop an axe on their own foot.

The spying doesn't end with end products, which provide very reliable data. Australia has 500,000 students and if they're from China, then some of them are spies / informants working for the Chinese Government.

Sources:
China Spies on Global Shipping Using Pre-Infected Hardware
Tony Abbott and other Liberals took Rolexes they thought were fake
Chinese spies keep eye on leading universities

 

[Der.Reisende]

Look its no secret that the Chinese got a bad rap, because of the spying via Androids, infected logistics and supply chain products and fake Rolex's. That doesn't mean that a company out there with good intentions, is going to drop an axe on their own foot.

The spying doesn't end with end products, which provide very reliable data. Australia has 500,000 students and if they're from China, then some of them are spies / informants working for the Chinese Government.

Sources:
China Spies on Global Shipping Using Pre-Infected Hardware
Tony Abbott and other Liberals took Rolexes they thought were fake
Chinese spies keep eye on leading universities

Well said!
Today, you literally cannot trust any (internet) company, regardless if from East or West, everybody uses your data to make profit out of it, some more, some less. At least they usually use your data to send / show you "interesting" adverts to make you buy from them again (have a closer look to Amazon for that )
If some Intel wants your data, they surely won't need your AV for it...
After having used Kaspersky (check their statement on privacy on German Wikipedia - Kaspersky Lab – Wikipedia), I'm a happy user of QTS 360 for about 1-1,5 years by now. I've checked QTS360 Privacy Policy not so long ago, I did not find it that alerting.

 

[jamescv7]

Its not a surprise for Chinese AV, because no matter if there products is at the highest or lowest level of ratings where privacy treats as more combined feature product which already below the belt on conditions. I've read some articles before and what are we going to expect it? Instrument to attack especially well known companies for allegations hence plague can be spread everywhere.

 

[Morvotron]

I read that report and I admit that I'm afraid.
I've been thinking about installing Qihoo 360, but now I don't know.

I had Qihoo installed for an year, i thought it was pretty good, until i read they used an optimized verzion of its software to score higher on the reviews.. I should have saw it coming..

 

[jackuars]

If you were worried about privacy, you wouldn't be using Windows in the first place, forget about any software on it.

I had Qihoo installed for an year, i thought it was pretty good, until i read they used an optimized verzion of its software to score higher on the reviews.. I should have saw it coming..

The "optimized version" was probably turning on Avira/BitDefender engines, which anyone would have already done. I'm not sure how that'd be foul-play, it's like playing a game on Easy mode when it should be done in Normal. User tastes differs, not everyone uses a software the same way.

 

[CySecy825]

Quihoo is excellent software,but it depends too how trusted sources that info come

 

[Morvotron]

If you were worried about privacy, you wouldn't be using Windows in the first place, forget about any software on it.



The "optimized version" was probably turning on Avira/BitDefender engines, which anyone would have already done. I'm not sure how that'd be foul-play, it's like playing a game on Easy mode when it should be done in Normal. User tastes differs, not everyone uses a software the same way.

Maybe, i don't really know. All i saw is the product was disqualified, so i don't really think it was a fair play..

 

[mamamia]

So, in conclusion, is it recommendable to install this antivirus? (about allegations of espionage).

 

[Morvotron]

So, in conclusion, is it recommendable to install this antivirus?.

If i were you, i'd give it a try. Every antivirus works kind of different on every system. When i had it, it did its job pretty well. I uninstalled because of the aforementioned. It really has slow system impact, so if you're looking for freeware, yes, do download.

 

[Azure]

If you were worried about privacy, you wouldn't be using Windows in the first place, forget about any software on it.



The "optimized version" was probably turning on Avira/BitDefender engines, which anyone would have already done. I'm not sure how that'd be foul-play, it's like playing a game on Easy mode when it should be done in Normal. User tastes differs, not everyone uses a software the same way.

Not really. The used a version with QVMII engine disabled, apparently it was for reducing false positives. In addition to enabling other engines that weren't default.

While users can disable/enable Avira and bitdefender, they can't normally disable QVMII. The only way I have read to disable it is to use a firewall to block its connection.

At the end though, it was a version that no user has.

 

[hjlbx]

Concerns regarding security soft data collection and reporting are over-stated.

Chinese AVs do nothing extraordinary by security soft industry standards.

Until it is proven without any doubt that a security soft vendor is using user data in a questionable manner, then the best one can do is just to be aware of their data collection processes.

Microsoft, by far, is the greatest collector of user data - and it hasn't hacked anyone's system that I am aware of.

Getting a National Security letter that requires user infos and backdoors is an entirely different matter.

Chinese security soft data collection practices are not any worse than industry practice.

At least that is what I see.

 

[Der.Reisende]

Concerns regarding security soft data collection and reporting are over-stated.

Chinese AVs do nothing extraordinary by security soft industry standards.

Until it is proven without any doubt that a security soft vendor is using user data in a questionable manner, then the best one can do is just to be aware of their data collection processes.

Microsoft, by far, is the greatest collector of user data - and it hasn't hacked anyone's system that I am aware of.

Getting a National Security letter that requires user infos and backdoors is an entirely different matter.

Chinese security soft data collection practices are not any worse than industry practice.

At least that is what I see.

Well said, can't agree more!

 

[Axelrod Sven]

'Never let a friendly fox into your hen-house. One day he's going to get hungry.'

Here's how I view it.

1) Russia, U.S, U.K based products (Kaspersky, McAfee, Norton, Sophos, but to name a few) may follow Government orders in assisting spying on people and consumers, and do assist in tacit cyberwarfare. However, even they are relatively capable of fighting the order in court. They may not always exercise that right, but they do so. And they are often accountable and relatively transparent about their Data Collection and privacy policies, and accountable towards their Shareholders, Corporate Law and other Ethics laws.

2) Germany, Finland, etc (Avira, F-Secure, similar products - I'm not going to name all) follow strict Corporate protection laws and they regularly require transparency and.. well blah blah. In short, they can be trusted with personal data a little more.

3) China - a whole new ballgame in itself. Even their Billionnaires are not allowed to speak out against the Government. If the China Government orders, say, all the Chinese based security software to turn their consumers computers into a DDOS botnet, or launch a cyberattack, or steal all their consumers data... these vendors have no choice but to comply. it's simply not a risk I'm willing to take. This is a country that muzzles free speech, democracy, the internet, does human rights violations, commits atrocities, and just buries everything behind a facade of normalcy.

On a technical level, I wouldn't mind using Qihoo. However, on a moral and logical level; I refuse to use Chinese antivirus.

 

[upnorth]

That is brilliant!!
You are using an AV called "Brain"

What is your favorite malware?

 

[viktik]

Don't worry chinese antivirus companies will continue to grow despite all opposition.

 

[jackuars]

'Never let a friendly fox into your hen-house. One day he's going to get hungry.'

Here's how I view it.

1) Russia, U.S, U.K based products (Kaspersky, McAfee, Norton, Sophos, but to name a few) may follow Government orders in assisting spying on people and consumers, and do assist in tacit cyberwarfare. However, even they are relatively capable of fighting the order in court. They may not always exercise that right, but they do so. And they are often accountable and relatively transparent about their Data Collection and privacy policies, and accountable towards their Shareholders, Corporate Law and other Ethics laws.

2) Germany, Finland, etc (Avira, F-Secure, similar products - I'm not going to name all) follow strict Corporate protection laws and they regularly require transparency and.. well blah blah. In short, they can be trusted with personal data a little more.

3) China - a whole new ballgame in itself. Even their Billionnaires are not allowed to speak out against the Government. If the China Government orders, say, all the Chinese based security software to turn their consumers computers into a DDOS botnet, or launch a cyberattack, or steal all their consumers data... these vendors have no choice but to comply. it's simply not a risk I'm willing to take. This is a country that muzzles free speech, democracy, the internet, does human rights violations, commits atrocities, and just buries everything behind a facade of normalcy.

On a technical level, I wouldn't mind using Qihoo. However, on a moral and logical level; I refuse to use Chinese antivirus.

When a war/shootout is happening between 2 countries I always find it funny that both the countries points fingers at the other as the one who started it all, and reports themselves as innocent.

This is what I can make from this post.

If Qihoo was that bad, it wouldn't have even been featured at MalwareTips forum, or become user's favorite free antivirus here. Rest is left up-to personal preference including morality.

 

[Venustus]

What is your favorite malware?

Indeed!!
Pardon the Pun...

 

[Rishi]

As I've said before, some companies harvest more data some need less, nothing is for free really and there is no such thing as absolute privacy unless you switch off your net.If you like the company you help it, or change the vendor. Regarding the use of security softw, the complexity and rate at which advanced malwares evolve, it is better to have additional security layer, saves a lot of time for other critical things in life.

 

[Morvotron]

As I've said before, some companies harvest more data some need less, nothing is for free really and there is no such thing as absolute privacy unless you switch off your net.If you like the company you help it, or change the vendor. Regarding the use of security softw, the complexity and rate at which advanced malwares evolve, it is better to have additional security layer, saves a lot of time for other critical things in life.

As much as i've heard, every company that has its main headquarters on USA must facilitate the required data from their users if the law requires so. Is this true? (i'm clearly not from USA)

 

[Rishi]

You might be interested in the big two :

Microsoft doesn’t beat around the bush when it comes to surveillance state issues:

Finally, we will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to: 1.comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies…

Just take a look at this snippet from Apple’s privacy policy: It may be necessary − by law, legal process, litigation, and/or requests from public and governmental authorities within or outside your country of residence − for Apple to disclose your personal information. We may also disclose information about you if we determine that for purposes of national security, law enforcement, or other issues of public importance, disclosure is necessary or appropriate.

Source