Talk:Kaspersky Lab/Archives/2012

Assistance to the Iranian Nuclear Development Program
My name is Aliya Tuktarova, and I'm working in corporate communications at Kaspersky Lab. I propose deleting the following paragraph:

In 2011-12, Kaspersky analyzed viruses implanted within the Iranian nuclear power development program. As a Russian company, Kaspersky believed that its efforts to help Iran with its nuclear research would not trigger US sanctions, but as a 2012 Executive Order made clear, foreigners who indirectly provide services to Iran are subject to sanctions in the US, including possible total prohibition from selling products within the US or even to US entities abroad. US authorities were made aware, but are still considering the matter.

Reason to deleate: The untruthful information. Kaspersky Lab’s research focuses on the technical analysis of malware and cybersecurity issues. As a private company, Kaspersky Lab doesn’t have political ties to any government or security service, and has clients among the private and public sector all over the world. The company doesn’t comment on politics or geo-political implications of malware as it’s not the purpose of its work or area of expertise. This is officially claimed by Kaspersky Lab Co-founder and CEO Eugene Kaspersky in his Internet communication that can be found by the following link: http://eugene.kaspersky.com/2012/06/14/the-flame-that-changed-the-world/

Flag icon in infobox
I see that someone doesn't agree with having a flagicon in the infobox, is there any reason why one shouldn't be included? Jamshud (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism
It seems some idiots are intent on polluting this article in particular, using a number of dummy accounts and/or IP edits. Protection in order? Jamshud (talk) 22:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * yeah, looks like some idiots are pretending to be me too, awesome -.- Jamshud (talk) 17:39, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

POV
I removed the following statement as I see it as POV until someone can back up this statement with documentation from the anti-virus industry. I never heard of this s/w until now although I'm not basing my objection solely on that but more on an unsubstantiated claim.

"Kaspersky is acknowledged to be one of the best virus scanners."

RedWolf 07:57, Apr 10, 2004 (UTC)

I read Virus forums and it is mentioned as a good virus scanner. Also have a look here: http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml

Delpino

I think Kaspersky is generally accepted as the scanner with the highest detection rates, pretty hard to find a test where it participates and is not on top. If only it weren't so slow ;-) I think it is at least ok to say it is "one of the scanners with the highest detection rates". Best is too arguable (I don't use it because of the speed reason, to give an example).
 * The slow scanning speed is probably due to the fact the scanner is doing a very thorough check of the system. Some would say it's a trade-off for good protection and detection. --TonyW 00:46, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Eugene has never been a virus writer
I know Kaspersky, and he has been a cryptographer, and studied mathematics at some fairly secretive places, but he has never had to be a virus writer.

David.orban
 * Regardless, original research is irrelevant on either count (your opinion/observations included). --Marsbound2024 (talk) 03:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

TopTenReviews Award seems questionable
Does anyone actually know the reputation of this source? There are many other sites that provide much better reviews, http://www.av-comparatives.org/ is a good example. They provide a detailed contact address. VirusBulletin and ICSA Labs are also much more reputable.

RMartinez

Rouge site. TechOutsider (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider


 * "Rogue" site? Not according to TopTenReviews. By the way, such comments are considered Libel. --King ♣  Talk   19:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletions: it read like bad copy
I deleted nearly all of the first paragraph. Much of it had been written to promote Kaspersky, and hence doesn't belong in this entry. The phrases which followed 'according to' etc. should be footnoted. Any objections? Marabunta 23:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Norton fan here.TechOutsider (talk) 00:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)TechOutsider
 * We know. --CliffC (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Offline
I can't connect to kaspersky's website...

Could anyone else confirm...

http://www.google.is/search?q=kaspersky

http://www.kaspersky.com/

last checked now - - Gunnar Guðvarðarson (My Talk) 07:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I can connect fine to the website. Noneforall (talk) 03:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Offline again- Google cache last snapshot is Jul 18, 2008 13:37:13 GMT. 70.225.196.126 (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Media Claims
What is the point of this jumbled section? Fehrgo (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Roll back vs. Restore Point
What is the difference between roll back and your standard restore point? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.52.215.67 (talk) 01:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Kaspersky Mobile Security
Creating a new page, and linking it from and to the main article. Kaspersky Mobile Security --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Virus Bulletin tests passed or not?
On this page it says "In addition, Kaspersky has passed all Virus Bulletin comparative tests since August 2003. According to PC World magazine, Kaspersky antivirus software provides the fastest updates for new virus and security threats in the industry."

On the Kaspersky Anti-Virus page (which is linked to from this page) it says "According to AV-Comparatives, Kaspersky Anti-Virus rates highly amongst virus scanners in terms of detection rates, even despite the fact that the program has failed two Virus Bulletin tests in 2007."

Seems to be a contradiction? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.56.198 (talk) 13:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

"Context menu" vandalism since January
Insertions of the "Questionable Context Menus" claim which have been going on since January, without a reliable source, will be reverted, as they have been previously.

For context about these hoax attempts (and others in this article), see Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive523,, , (WANTED: An established editor of Wikipedia to assist in defacing a certain Russian Anti Virus solution's page. PAY: 200 Rubals per edit.).

Regards, HaeB (talk) 00:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

^^^200 Rubals?? I would glady pay twice that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rofltcopterz0rz (talk • contribs) 13:48, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Transliteration of cyrillic typo
The name of Kaspersky Lab in Russian is actually Лаборатория Касперского, which transliterates to Laboratoriya Kasperskogo, not Kasperskovo. Sorry to bring this up in the discussion page but the article is locked for me :(
 * "г|With an adjective/pronoun ending in -ого, -его, the letter <г> indicates /v/ in Russian only".--Nil Blau (talk) 20:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Other
Based on an Article from Businessweek.com, The Revenue for Kaspersky in 2008 was $274 million. -source: Businessweek

Why no mention of recent security breach?
Would be nice to read more about it instead of having to rely on poorly written articles from various "technology" sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.219.116 (talk) 18:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Kaspersky adds extra stream to every file
The article should mention that Kaspersky Anti-Virus adds a small hidden NTFS Stream to every file on your computer. The stream probably contains a checksum for the file. That is how it can detect any change to any file.

However, the added streams use extra disk space, cannot easily be deleted, and generate error messages whenever treated files are moved or copied to folders on FAT or FAT32 file systems (such as Flash Drives).

An encyclopedia article should reflect any drawbacks to a product, not just a proponent point of view. I urge revision of this article to comply with NPOV. David spector (talk) 01:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That pertains more to Kaspersky's antivirus products, rather than the company. Any such information must be backed by a reliable source which is properly cited. TechOutsider (talk) 03:39, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

editsemiprotected
 * ❌. I agree with Tech, a statement like that needs a source--Jac 16888 Talk 12:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Updated AV-Comparatives results
The following section needs to be edited due to updated information:

"Independent assessments

The anti-virus software testing group AV-Comparatives gave the Windows XP version of Kaspersky AV an "Advanced+" rating (its highest) in both its February 2008 on-demand detection test (with the fourth highest detection rate among 16 products tested)[6] However, in the Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2008, Kaspersky received the "Standard" rating, detecting 21% of new malware with 1-month old signatures and receiving a substantial amount of false positives.[7]"

New test results as follows: February 2009 On-demand test results: ADVANCED+ rating, 97% detection of test set. May 2009 Retrospective/Proactive test results: ADVANCED+ rating, 50% detection of test set, rated "few" in false positives.

Cited sources: AV-Comparatives.org February 2009 On-demand test report: http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report21.pdf AV-Comparatives.org May 2009 Retrospective/Proactive test report: http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report22.pdf

F-Secure change
F-Secure of Finland no longer uses the old AVP4 scan engine licence. As of version9 / 2010 products, F-Secure now uses an OEM "Aquarius" scan engine licence from BitDefender of Romania. 82.131.210.163 (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Kaspersky update slaps Trojan warning on Google Adsense
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/25/kaspersky_adsense_false_positive/  Ottawahitech (talk) 20:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Kasperskogo
Why is "Касперского" transliterated as "Kasperskovo"? One of them is clearly wrong, and, judging by the Russian version of the article and a couple of Google searches for "kasperskovo" and "kasperskogo", it looks like the transliterated version is the mangled one, and should be replaced by "Kasperskogo". 213.60.22.32 (talk) 21:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The text you are referring to was introduced in: "Revision as of 01:34, 4 November 2008" by 82.226.240.4. It appears that no one else contributing here has any knowledge of the Russian language? Why don't you go ahead and change it to the correct one? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I can read Russian Cyrillic, but since I have no actual account on Wikipedia as of yet, and this article is on semi-lockdown, I can't fix the typo. And yeah, г is the Cyrillic equivalent of g. в would be more accurately transliterated as v. --76.19.190.81 (talk) 02:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I registered, finally, but I read on г that in Russian, if it's between two other letters, it's actually /v/ rather than /g/. --Quadunit404 (talk) 00:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Kaspersky Rescue Disk highly dangerous
Instead of working off a RAM disk, Kaspersky's Gentoo-based boot system searches for partitions on the host PC to write on. It creates the directory "Kaspersky Rescue Disk 10.0" at the root of the fist partition it finds, in my case Ubuntu's system partition (/dev/sdb1), then saves any data it downloads in this folder, in my case over 15Mb, which it doesn't clean up on exit. Partitions it doesn't understand (like EXT4) seem to get permanently damaged. In my case all files were erased and impossible to recover, possibly because it had overwritten essential inodes. Large encrypted files are especially at risk since they have no standard header/footer signatures.

At no point does the software ask the user's permission, nor show a warning. Log files left in "kavrescue_sysinfo_2010_MM_DD.hh_mm_ss.tgz" detail why and how data gets destroyed.

Threads on Kaspersky's user forums show it is an ongoing problem affecting both Windows and Linux users: http://forum.kaspersky.com/lofiversion/index.php/t110903.html

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Petah contrib (talk • contribs) 14:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Piece of crap
It's pretty surprising to me that this article is so entirely positive about KASPERSKY. In the past 4 weeks, I had TWO support inquiries from companies running KASPERSKY, begging me to help them with their EXTRAORDINARILY SLOW network and local performance since they installed KASPERSKY. I REMOVED KASPERSKY from ALL those computers, making them happy again - however, on one of them I had to reinstall Vista because Kaspersky's uninstaller DESTROYED it! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.196.68 (talk) 22:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

This article is overrating Kaspersky. TechOutsider (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider


 * WP:NOR. And, given your obvious Norton preference, WP:NPOV. --King ♣  Talk   19:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Honestly though this article is written as though it were an advertisement for the company. Can we unlock this article or something?  I mean, we don't need to know that this product is available from Best Buy.  That's just fucking stupid.  Someone unlock this or help change it into something suitable for Wikipedia.  God damned marketing companies control much of Wikipedia.
 * Anyone with a registered account that has just a minor editing history may edit the article. The article has been protected from editing by new user and IP editors due to a ridiculous pattern of disruption and vandalism by them. Saying things are just fucking stupid, without giving examples of the exact issues you have and how you'd fix them is not helpful and only reinforces that protection on this article is reasonable. NJA (t/ c)  10:32, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to hear that Kaspersky made your company slower, however, you don't know that that was it for sure. Putting Kaspersky down because of that is being biased because of one bad experience.  Just because you think it is a load of crap doesn't mean that everyone agrees.  Wikipedia articles need to remain to a neutral point of view.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stormstream (talk • contribs) 02:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And on top of that, Kaspersky interferes with the caps lock key on people's computers too, activating and deactivating it randomly! SchnitteUK (talk) 08:56, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Founders inconsistency
The text clearly states that Natalia was a co-founder, but there is no mention of her in the infobox. Which is correct? Couch (talk) 14:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)