Talk:Kaspersky Lab/Archives/2014

Edit request from 216.214.255.146, 20 April 2010
1. Please add the following content to the second paragraph (which starts with "In 2005, Red Herring magazine), as the existing information is old. Please update with the following copy: "In 2008, IDC ranked Kaspersky Lab as the fourth-largest global antivirus vendor. Kaspersky Lab was also included in Software Top 100’s 2009 edition of the world’s software company rankings. Kaspersky Lab was listed 76th on the list, and became the first Russian software company to be included on the list."

Section References Source: Kaspersky Lab: http://www.kaspersky.com/news?id=207575957 Source: Software Top 100: http://www.softwaretop100.org/software-top-100/global-software-top-100-edition-2009
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

2. In the Products section, Kaspersky has added new products to the company's consumer portfolio. The first paragraph in the Products section should read as follows: "As of 2010, the line of Kaspersky home-user products consists of Kaspersky Internet Security (KIS) 2010, Kaspersky Anti-Virus (KAV) 2010, Kaspersky Anti-Virus for Mac, Kaspersky Mobile Security (KMS), Kaspersky Password Manager, Kaspersky KryptoStorage and AVZ Antiviral Toolkit.  In 2010, Kaspersky launched a consumer security suite named Kaspersky Pure.  Kaspersky products are widely used throughout Europe and Asia.  In the United States, Kaspersky Lab was ranked as the fastest growing internet security software, based on NPD sales data."

Section References--- Source: NPD Group/Retail Tracking/Security Software July 2006-June 2009
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

3. The Products section should be updated to include references to the company's B2B product offerings. Please use the following copy: "In addition to the Company’s consumer products, Kaspersky Lab offers a variety of security applications designed for small business, corporations and large enterprises. These offerings include security software to protect Workstations, File Servers, Mail Servers, Mobile Devices, and Internet Gateways, all managed through a centralized Administration Kit.  These applications are also available in bundled security suites , scaled to fit the requirements of organizations of varying sizes."

Section References--- Source: Kaspersky Lab: http://usa.kaspersky.com/products_services/business/security_apps.php Source: Kaspersky Lab: http://usa.kaspersky.com/products_services/business/open_space.php
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

4. In the Independed Assessments section, it can be updated with more recent product review information. The following can be added to the last paragraph of the section: "In PC World magazine’s March 2010 comparison of consumer security suites, Kaspersky Internet Security 2010 scored 4.5/5 stars, and was rated 2nd overall ."

Section References--- Source: PC World Magazine: http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/product/413778/review/internet_security_2010.html
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

216.214.255.146 (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 216.214.255.146, 20 April 2010
1. Please add the following content to the second paragraph (which starts with "In 2005, Red Herring magazine), as the existing information is old. Please update with the following copy: "In 2008, IDC ranked Kaspersky Lab as the fourth-largest global antivirus vendor. Kaspersky Lab was also included in Software Top 100’s 2009 edition of the world’s software company rankings. Kaspersky Lab was listed 76th on the list, and became the first Russian software company to be included on the list."

Section References Source: Kaspersky Lab: http://www.kaspersky.com/news?id=207575957 Source: Software Top 100: http://www.softwaretop100.org/software-top-100/global-software-top-100-edition-2009
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

2. In the Products section, Kaspersky has added new products to the company's consumer portfolio. The first paragraph in the Products section should read as follows: "As of 2010, the line of Kaspersky home-user products consists of Kaspersky Internet Security (KIS) 2010, Kaspersky Anti-Virus (KAV) 2010, Kaspersky Anti-Virus for Mac, Kaspersky Mobile Security (KMS), Kaspersky Password Manager, Kaspersky KryptoStorage and AVZ Antiviral Toolkit.  In 2010, Kaspersky launched a consumer security suite named Kaspersky Pure.  Kaspersky products are widely used throughout Europe and Asia.  In the United States, Kaspersky Lab was ranked as the fastest growing internet security software, based on NPD sales data."

Section References--- Source: NPD Group/Retail Tracking/Security Software July 2006-June 2009
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

3. The Products section should be updated to include references to the company's B2B product offerings. Please use the following copy: "In addition to the Company’s consumer products, Kaspersky Lab offers a variety of security applications designed for small business, corporations and large enterprises. These offerings include security software to protect Workstations, File Servers, Mail Servers, Mobile Devices, and Internet Gateways, all managed through a centralized Administration Kit.  These applications are also available in bundled security suites , scaled to fit the requirements of organizations of varying sizes."

Section References--- Source: Kaspersky Lab: http://usa.kaspersky.com/products_services/business/security_apps.php Source: Kaspersky Lab: http://usa.kaspersky.com/products_services/business/open_space.php
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

4. In the Independed Assessments section, it can be updated with more recent product review information. The following can be added to the last paragraph of the section: "In PC World magazine’s March 2010 comparison of consumer security suites, Kaspersky Internet Security 2010 scored 4.5/5 stars, and was rated 2nd overall ."

Section References--- Source: PC World Magazine: http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/product/413778/review/internet_security_2010.html
 * Yes check.svg Done -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 22:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

216.214.255.146 (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Reasons to the changes made 02 April 2012 by Aliya Tuktarova
My name is Aliya Tuktarova, and I'm working in corporate communications at Kaspersky Lab. I have corrected some factual mistakes, made updates where I believe they were needed and added some new facts.

Let me start with the updated information: 1. I removed the data that Natalia Kaspersky is the Chairperson of the company as outdated. Since July 2011 Natalia doesn't hold this position anymore and doesn't work for the company 2. I changed the outdated revenue of 2009 to the official data of 2011 which was announced to international media and published internationally in February 2012 3. Information about the number of company offices was outdated. I inserted the current number of the company offices 4. I changed the outdated headcount to the data of 2011. 5. I substituted the outdated information about the company ranking in various ratings to the newer one. Each fact has a reference to the researches and ratings: Kaspersky Lab ranks fourth in the global ranking of antivirus vendors [3]. It was the first Russian company to be included into the rating of the world’s leading software companies, called the Software Top 100 (81th on the list). Kaspersky Lab is ranked 4th in Endpoint Security segment according to IDC data for 2010 [4]. According to Gartner, Kaspersky Lab is currently the third largest vendor of consumer IT security software worldwide and the fifth largest vendor of Enterprise Endpoint Protection. Kaspersky Lab has officially been named a "Leader" in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Endpoint Protection Platforms [5]. 6. Partnership with Jackie Chan is corrected from the present time to the past time as it is over. I added two global actual sponsorship projects which are both widely covered by international media.

And then there is some information that I changed – knowing that this will be a matter of discussion by the community. If the community decides to stay with the old information – no problem at all. 1. I removed profit data as Kaspersky Lab as a private company does not officially disclose the profits so the source of this data and its accuracy is under the question. 2. Changed the definition of "Russian” security company to "global" as the company operates in almost 200 countries of the world with offices in 29 countries. Only our headquarters are based in Russia. 3. Changed the general company definition to "Kaspersky Lab is a developer of secure content & threat management systems and the world’s largest privately held vendor of software security products" - this definition is used in all the official company communications and gives more precise wording of the company occupation.  4. I added new data: "The company currently works in almost 200 countries across the globe. The company’s products and technologies provide protection for over 300 million users worldwide and more than 200 000 corporate clients globally". This is the official company data, measured and used in all the official communications.

Part of this data will inevitably have links to internal documents (ex. Kaspersky.com website) as this is exactly the company internal data.

I will be happy to discuss these changes with you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aliya Tuktarova (talk • contribs) 12:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Citing and attribution of claimed statements are important. I'd be inclined to say that unless the numbers are independently verified or sourced, it might be better to mention "Kaspersky Labs reports XYZ users" and similar wording. It makes clear to a reader who is making that assertion. Claims like these need to be attributed - that is to say, it should be clear if they are the company's own assertion, or someone else's statement (or whatever), not least since in this article it is the company itself adding them (as it might be seen).


 * Also I'd suggest, be careful of "tone" issues. It's not important if this is a "definition" used throughout company literature and marketing. Wikipedia isn't (as I am sure you know!) a marketing arm of anyone. What we use when writing here is a plain, factual style, not a marketing style. That's exactly how it should come over, and such a style is not going to be the same as (or favor) any 'usual' corporate literature or marketing style used by most companies. What might be better here is to state "Kaspersky describes itself as..." which is then more accurate.


 * (Or else reword it, perhaps like this: "As at ____ 2014, the company is active in around ___ countries across the globe, and states that it has over 300 million individual and 200,000 corporate clients worldwide" [or whatever the actual figures are]. See what I mean by tone/style? Simpler, and also accurate as to who claims it.)


 * Also the fact a company doesn't publish its profit is not a reason why we wouldn't have it in our article (again, neutrality). There is no 'veto' system on articles, their content is decided by the community's editing policies, and editors' discussion + consensus. Clearly its a significant piece of information about a well known company, therefore if indications of profit/revenue (or other matters that editors agree are worth mentioning) are added, and sourced from acceptable quality sources, you should know that they are likely to stay in the article.


 * It is worth mentioning, also, that information in an article must, in principle, be capable of being checked by a member of the public, and the source must be "reliable". We use the term "attributable", it is capable of being attributed to a source the public can (in principle) check. That's more subtle than it seems, so I explain a bit more. For example, iur article on Kaspersky Labs might say some stated fact. The user must be able to confirm where we got it, and that it's represented as it is in the source, and that the source is one that is "reliable". Reliable for us means, we know which person/company said or wrote it, we have reason to believe they know what they are talking about, and an ordinary person can verify they did in fact say or write it (they could be wrong, but they did say what they are quoted as saying). So if we say "Kaspersky Labs has 30,000 employees" the user must be capable of confirming for themselves where we got that figure from, even if it's someone else's statement or belief. It doesn't mean the reader needs access to KL's records, because the claim isn't that KL has 30,000 employees, it is that this source said it has 30,000 employees (we often describe this as "X said Y"), and this is what can be confirmed. So, we might say "Le Monde says KL had 30,000 employees in 1994", and link to a specific date and page in Le Monde where the reader can check we have quoted Le Monde correctly. So this is the key, that if a notional reader asks "where does this statement come from", we should be able to direct them to some source like a reputable newspaper, an informed commentator, a formal report or a third party assessment, or something like that. If we said "Eugene Kaspersky said X" then the reader needs to be able to find where that claim came from.


 * I hope these points help. The edit overall.. it's a good edit. And thank you for your honesty and disclosure, Aliya. I hope this comment will help if/when you wish to edit further. FT2 (Talk 06:47, 21 June 2014 (UTC)