Kaspersky Lab is willing to go to extreme lengths to reassure the U.S. government about the security of its products:
Eugene Kaspersky is willing to turn over computer code to United States authorities to prove that his company's security products have not been compromised by the Russian government, The Associated Press reported early Sunday.
"If the United States needs, we can disclose the source code," said the creator of beleaguered Moscow-based computer security company Kaspersky Lab in an interview with the AP.
"Anything I can do to prove that we don't behave maliciously I will do it."
Also at Neowin.
In Worrisome Move, Kaspersky Agrees to Turn Over Source Code to US Government
Over the last couple of weeks, there's been a disturbing trend of governments demanding that private tech companies share their source code if they want to do business. Now, the US government is giving the same ultimatum and it's getting what it wants.
On Sunday, the CEO of security firm Kaspersky Labs, Eugene Kaspersky, told the Associated Press that he's willing to show the US government his company's source code. "Anything I can do to prove that we don't behave maliciously I will do it," Kaspersky said while insisting that he's open to testifying before Congress as well.
The company's willingness to share its source code comes after a proposal was put forth in the Senate that "prohibits the [Defense Department] from using software platforms developed by Kaspersky Lab." It goes on to say, "The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that any network connection between ... the Department of Defense and a department or agency of the United States Government that is using or hosting on its networks a software platform [associated with Kaspersky Lab] is immediately severed."
Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat tells ABC News, that there is "a consensus in Congress and among administration officials that Kaspersky Lab cannot be trusted to protect critical infrastructure." The fears follow years of suspicion from the FBI that Kaspersky Labs is too close to the Russian government. The company is based in Russia but has worked with both Moscow and the FBI in the past, often serving as a go-between to help the two governments cooperate. "As a private company, Kaspersky Lab has no ties to any government, and the company has never helped, nor will help, any government in the world with its cyberespionage efforts," an official statement from Kaspersky Labs reads.
Source: Gizmodo
(Score: 2) by inertnet on Tuesday July 04 2017, @10:07AM (5 children)
So for instance, it would also be a good thing if the European Union demanded the same from American companies?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 04 2017, @10:35AM
Err, it happens?
https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/01/6048-2/ [arstechnica.com]
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2931212/microsoft-lets-eu-governments-inspect-source-code-for-security-issues.html [pcworld.com]
(Score: 2) by zocalo on Tuesday July 04 2017, @10:53AM
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday July 04 2017, @05:26PM (1 child)
Actually, I think it's foolish for any government to use ANY foreign hardware or code. If I were the EU I'd certainly not use American software and Chinese computers.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday July 04 2017, @06:46PM
Yes you would, because you'd be constrained by the same low-bid laws and interoperability requirements as any other country or organization.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_laptop_brands_and_manufacturers [wikipedia.org]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 05 2017, @01:14AM
It would be good for the EU.
It would be bad for American companies and their nation. American companies should resist. The US government should apply pressure to the companies to help them resist, and should apply pressure to the EU to discourage the EU from demanding source code.
Maybe one government caves in exchange for something completely unrelated. Protection of geographic identifiers for example could be adopted by the US or dropped by the EU. Maybe one side buys aircraft from the other. Maybe the EU accepts freedom of speech or the US shuts it down.