Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lenny_Fox" data-source="post: 860377" data-attributes="member: 82776">[USER=58090]@Parsh[/USER] Thanks for the link to the article.As a youngster not interested in security at the time of Kaspersky controversy, I sort of thought Kaspersky (like Huawei now) was banned because of their possible access to data more than based on actual proof of gathering data. Due to its core function, an AV-program has to check all other programs and therefor has high integrity level rights, this gives an AV-access to nearly everything on your PC.At that time 2017 I was not interested in security and only vaguely noticed the rumors around Kaspersky. To be honest, most of my Dutch school mates thought it was just an &quot;America First&quot; accusation to discredit a Russian security provider. This accusation (in my mind) was more based on money than on security.I was unaware that the source of this accusation was The Wall Street Journal. The WSJ is a reputable newspape and would not throw these accusations without dealing with their journalistic quality standards. In a popular daily Dutch news-show (DWDD) WSJ was once quoted for their strict two independent reliable sources policy before they would publish something.My question to more seasoned members of this forum: I have always taken these allegations with a fairly large grain of salt. Now I know that WSJ published the initial scoop, should i take these Kaspersky allegations more seriously?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lenny_Fox, post: 860377, member: 82776"] [USER=58090]@Parsh[/USER] Thanks for the link to the article. As a youngster not interested in security at the time of Kaspersky controversy, I sort of thought Kaspersky (like Huawei now) was banned because of their possible access to data more than based on actual proof of gathering data. Due to its core function, an AV-program has to check all other programs and therefor has high integrity level rights, this gives an AV-access to nearly everything on your PC. At that time 2017 I was not interested in security and only vaguely noticed the rumors around Kaspersky. To be honest, most of my Dutch school mates thought it was just an "America First" accusation to discredit a Russian security provider. This accusation (in my mind) was more based on money than on security. I was unaware that the source of this accusation was The Wall Street Journal. The WSJ is a reputable newspape and would not throw these accusations without dealing with their journalistic quality standards. In a popular daily Dutch news-show (DWDD) WSJ was once quoted for their strict two independent reliable sources policy before they would publish something. My question to more seasoned members of this forum: I have always taken these allegations with a fairly large grain of salt. Now I know that WSJ published the initial scoop, should i take these Kaspersky allegations more seriously? [/QUOTE]

Verification