back to article Roses are red, Kaspersky is blue: 'That ban's unconstitutional!' Boo hoo hoo

Kaspersky Lab, the antivirus house, now claims that the US government's ban on its products amounts to punishment without trial. In court filings made late last year Kaspersky said it was intending to use the US Administrative Procedure Act to get the ban declared unconstitutional. Now, according to local reports, the Russian …

Silver badge

Good Luck

Good luck with that. The government will trot out the usual "National Security" line and that'll be the end of it.

11
0
Silver badge

Re: Good Luck

"Good luck with that. The government will trot out the usual "National Security" line and that'll be the end of it."

You don't think they'll trot out the usual "an AV package is not a person" argument instead? A bill of attainder only applies to people.

2
6
Silver badge

Re: Good Luck

A bill of attainder only applies to people.

Corporations based on both supreme and Congress decisions have acquired people rights. If Евгений manages to create a precedent to the contrary we should all open a bottle of bubbly. About time too.

14
1
ST
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Good Luck

> Corporations based on both supreme and Congress decisions have acquired people rights

No they haven't. Some idiot politicians state that corporations are people - mainly during campaigneering. Just because they say so it doesn't make it a fact.

0
8

Re: Good Luck

Then please explain to us just what Citizens United means.

6
0
Silver badge
Devil

Re: Good Luck

"The government will trot out the usual "National Security" line"

counting on it.

consider this: a foreign company sues your government over NOT buying its product

that pretty much sums it up.

1
2
Silver badge

Re: Good Luck

@ST: corporations are people de jure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Good Luck

Just because they've said corporations have first amendment rights doesn't mean everything that applies to a person can apply to them. How do convict a company rather than its leadership in a criminal trial, and how do you jail it?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Good Luck

How exactly does "the usual National Security line" allow them to ignore the constitution?

I mean, I get how it might be used to justify withholding evidence, but that's not the issue in this case. A bill of attainder is just flat-out unconstitutional, no matter how much evidence there is behind it.

0
0

Re: Good Luck

> ""The government will trot out the usual "National Security" line"

counting on it.

consider this: a foreign company sues your government over NOT buying its product

that pretty much sums it up."

Given that one of the aspects of the TPP that US businesses were pushing for was the ability to sue governments for instituting laws which unduly affected their profit margin, then I say more power to Kapersky for using the same tactic the US was pushing for, against the US.

2
0
Silver badge
Big Brother

Re: Good Luck

How exactly does "the usual National Security line" allow them to ignore the constitution?
Good question. I don't know how, but increasing evidence shows that it does.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Good Luck

"No they haven't. Some idiot politicians state that corporations are people - mainly during campaigneering. Just because they say so it doesn't make it a fact."

http://www.amendmentgazette.com/how-spending-money-became-a-form-of-speech/

0
0
Silver badge

I think a lot of people thought McCarthyism was dead, but that just doesn't seem the case. Does it?

17
2
Silver badge

Agreed. Hysterical xenophobia seems to be a defining trait of the US.

I was going to call you a Pinko Leftist Commie Bastard, but then I thought "Wolfe Tone? you can't call him communist!"

17
2
Anonymous Coward

When you run out of enemies

When you run out of enemies you need to create them. Reading the history of Stalin's ussr - it is scary how it repeats itself. Even speeches are nearly verbatim repeats.

Who is not with us is against us. - Stalin's or Shrub's? Answer- both.

18
1
Silver badge

I'm continually surprised at the number of people who dismiss the possibility that Russia is interfering in US elections, hacking emails, etc. Russia is basically run by gangsters but somehow a lot of people seem to think they are squeaky clean!

4
2
Silver badge

@DougS, there are undoubtedly a lot of scum in Russia. Like the one whose email I was scrutinising just half an hour ago, in the vain hopes of finding someone I could plausibly report it to, trying to extract bitcoin from me. Since they claimed to be Ukrainian, I'm assuming they were at least patriotic Russians and quite possibly employed, indirectly, by the thug-in-chief himself.

But that doesn't mean every allegation against Russians should be considered "true". Particularly when the allegation takes the form of a law that would still be unconstitutional even if the claims were all 100% proven.

There are ways of dealing with rogue companies, but "passing a law against doing business with that particular company" is not a legitimate one.

4
0
Silver badge

"I'm continually surprised at the number of people who dismiss the possibility that Russia is interfering in US elections, hacking emails, etc. Russia is basically run by gangsters but somehow a lot of people seem to think they are squeaky clean!"

Well the first part is easy, as in the US election "interference". Twitter came out with the numbers, along with Facebook, and the number of "Russian" created bots were somewhere in the region of 0.5% of the total tweets/posts sent regarding the election during the election campaign. The effect was tiny, if there was any effect at all.

Also, we've had the release of the memo's that point to the Obama administration getting FISA warrants based on discredited information from that Steel chap. You know, the guy who came out saying Trump paid prostitutes to piss on a bed slept in by Obama? That story came from 4Chan, and Mr.Steel himself was paid to investigate these claims by the DNC. It's been said that the FISA warrants wouldn't have been issued if his evidence hadn't been given during the FISA hearings.

The hacking of the DNC emails, the Podesta emails, came from Podesta getting an email looking like it was from Google asking him to change his password. He forwarded it to his IT guy, who said it was "legitimate" - when in fact he meant to say "illegitimate". So the sophisticated email hacking Russia did was nothing more than what everyone gets these days - the equivalent of throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks. But the NSA, as well, have come out and said the download of internal DNC emails was localised, meaning someone inside the DNC leaked the emails. The transmission rates just wouldn't have been possible to get from a remote server.

Yeah, Russia is ran by gangsters. But you'd be a complete fool to believe America isn't being run by equally as bad - and inept in cases - gangsters.

1
1
Silver badge

Oh looky here, we have another one who gets all their news from only Trump approved sources.

Sorry, the FBI probe was started BEFORE the Steele dossier came out. That's been proven in open congressional testimony, not that Fox News is going to tell their viewers that because it conflicts with the storyline lie that the right wing is trying to spread that blames everything on Steele.

3
3
Silver badge

"Oh looky here, we have another one who gets all their news from only Trump approved sources."

Trump only likes Fox News. I've never, ever, listened to or seen Fox. What I've read has come from all over the place. Interviews on CNN, articles from The Guardian for example.

"Sorry, the FBI probe was started BEFORE the Steele dossier came out. That's been proven in open congressional testimony, not that Fox News is going to tell their viewers that because it conflicts with the storyline lie that the right wing is trying to spread that blames everything on Steele."

I never said the FBI probe was started after the Steele dossier came out. I said that the dossier helped the FBI with their FISA application. Those are two very different things.

But don't let your own bigotry get in the way of understanding plain English.

2
0

sorry didnt read . just got annoyed at the umpteenth roses are red thing and had to post about a lack of imagination.

After the first 1500 times of heading a news story with it, its not funny any more.

*rant over*

8
10
Anonymous Coward

annoyed at the umpteenth roses are red thing

Lighten up a bit, fu-christ-sake, it's one day a year.

Jeez, some people have no sense of humour.

8
2

Re: annoyed at the umpteenth roses are red thing

roses are red ,violets are blue, apparently i'm annoyed, and now so are you...

21
0
Anonymous Coward

more lol

Kaspersky is Red, USA is Blue, NSA gave Norks Eternal Blue.

MacAfee sees green, as they slip in, just like they planned to do.

8
0
Anonymous Coward

They can be funny you know.

Roses are red

Violets are blue

Pr0n hub is down

Your mum’s facebook will do.

18
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: annoyed at the umpteenth roses are red thing

Roses are red, violets are blue, cheer up or get laid - it's what bunnies do!

7
0
Gold badge
Flame

Roses are red

Violets are red

The grass is red

The sky is red

Shit! The garden's on fire!

18
0
Silver badge
Joke

@fluffyBunnyUK:

Yer just jealous that its not easter yet. Yeeesh. Its coming bunny, its coming.

2
0
Silver badge

Some roses are red

Violets aren't blue

I'm pedantic

How about you?

Seriously, they're even called 'violets', who would think they're blue?

13
0
Silver badge

@fluffybunnyuk

Somebody needs a cuddle

4
0
Silver badge

@phuzz: "violet" refers to any of a dozen or so species of flower which come in multiple varieties, and cover a wide variety of colours, including violet, darkish purples, blue, cream, and even some fairly raucous shades of orange and yellow.

So while they aren't *all* blue, some of them are, and a bunch of others are neither violet nor blue.

Overall, it's not really very informative.

3
0
x 7
Silver badge

Wild violets come in many colours - white, pink, dark blue, pale blue, lavender, violet.....

try going out into the countryside and actually looking at what you're seeing

or try reading a book, such as this page

http://paintdrawer.co.uk/naturebooks/wild-flowers-the-wild-flowers-of-britain-and-northern-europe-by-marjory-blamey-fitter-fitter-9780006364573.jpg

1
0
Silver badge
Trollface

"just got annoyed at the umpteenth roses are red thing"

/me points out the article date - 2/14

repetition - sometimes its funnier that way

3
1
Anonymous Coward

Roses are red,

My name is Dave,

This poem makes no sense,

Microwave.

9
0
Anonymous Coward

@fluffybunnyuk - Are you that guy that actually responds to the April Fool's stories as well?

0
0
Silver badge

"Wild violets come in many colours - white, pink, dark blue, pale blue, lavender, violet.....

try going out into the countryside and actually looking at what you're seeing"

You're right of course, but the only ones I see flowering at this time of year near me are purple (they're dog violets).

0
0
Silver badge

Seriously, they're even called 'violets', who would think they're blue?

"Lavenders blue, dilly dilly, lavenders green

When I am King, dilly dilly

You will be Queen"..

(Wanders off whistling "Freaks")

0
0
Silver badge

repetition - sometimes its funnier that way

For at least, oh, two seconds or so.

It's a bit like the pling that they always use repeatedly in headlines regarding Yahoo - you sometimes just have to go with the flow and supress the homicidal thoughts that try to bubble up..

1
0

Russian spies have rights

Specifically, they have the right to prepare the way for an enemy cyber attack on the US by deploying enemy enabled infrastructure.

If you ask me, Kaspersky might even end up in jail, if he insists of these rights.

Kaspersky cannot work on special projects for the FSB, be a personal friend to Putin and expect to be treated as not a risk Security is about reducing risks and getting rid of Kaspersky makes sense, from a risk management perspective. After all, if there is a cyber attack, and Kaspersky is involved, all those ignoring the warnings should go to jail.

3
8
Silver badge

Re: Russian spies have rights

Of course he can. He is a friend of Putin and when Putin says something, you have to believe him.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Russian spies have rights

A Russian spy who is within the jurisdiction of any US court has exactly the same rights as any other person within the jurisdiction of that court, including the protection of the constitution. Go read the 14th amendment.

By all means "treat Kaspersky as a risk". There are plenty of ways to do that. If the government sees fit it can declare Kaspersky Labs a proscribed organization, freeze its assets, deport or arrest any representatives it finds in the US, prevent them from entering the country (or leaving it, or travelling within it for that matter)...

But the government hasn't done any of those things. Instead it's passed a bill of attainder - a form of law explicitly forbidden by the constitution - not even the bill of rights, but the main text of the constitution itself. The politicians who drafted and voted for that law, and the president who signed it, should all be recalled/impeached for perjury, because they all took an oath to uphold the constitution, and they've all broken it.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: Russian spies have rights

But the government hasn't done any of those things. Instead it's passed a bill of attainder ...

No it hasn't. A bill of attainder is legislation which declares someone guilty of a crime without a trial.

The action by DHS is not legislation but an operational decision on which software to use, and justifies the decision by claiming Kaspersky's software is an information security risk. If publishing software which is an information security risk were a crime, Bill Gates would be serving several life sentences.

The National Defense Authorization Act also does not claim any criminal act on Kaspersky's part.

The worst they may say is that Kaspersky's software is not fit for purpose or does not meet government standards. Neither of those two is a crime; hence the bill of attainder argument is complete fallacy.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

WTF is going with today's register headlines?!

stroppy head-bot? :/

0
0
Silver badge

Re: WTF is going with today's register headlines?!

The headline writer needs a special friend for the evening?

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Seriously

Is it better dead than red day?

If you had read the original report then you would know that the same content was leaked to china first but I guess the US worries that if they annoy them the way they do the Russians they will call in the debt and bankrupt them.

Personally I cannot fault Kaspersky for how they dealt with the NSA letting their contractors take their malware home with them, Kaspersky dealt with it exactly how an AV company is supposed to after a advanced user agreed to upload suspicious content for analysis it did just that and found they had the US malware arsenel.

There is no doubt in my mind that this ban is purely because they are associated with Russia and is an anticompetative slur.

I presume that Kaspersky will now just add all the US malware to their databases and then the only people who the NSA will be using them on will be their own, perhaps a bid to improve inter-agency communication?

5
0

hehe thx guys funny stuff!!!

Back on topic , Its only unconstitutional if someone holds the government to account, and gets away with it. The USA has a track record of this kind of nonsense.

I had a good upvote run yesterday so just awaiting the downvote roll-in

4
0
Anonymous Coward

If company X decides not to buy products from company Y, for any reason at all, is that unconstitutional?

So if government X decides not to buy products from company Y, is that unconstitutional?

This 'ban' doesn't apply to anyone apart from the US government itself. Crucially, it is not imposing the ban on anyone else.

2
3
Silver badge

...So if government X decides not to buy products from company Y, is that unconstitutional?...

Governments are a bit special - they run off taxpayer's money, so they have a duty to be fair.

However, they also have a duty to support the country that they run, so if they determine that a particular firm would be bad for the country in some way they should refuse to trade with it. Cruicially, they should have evidence for that - and it's probably no good enough to say that 'We politicians are trying to scare the country into war with Russia, and so a knee-jerk reaction against anything Russian is a good political move..."

5
0
Anonymous Coward

> Governments are a bit special - they run off taxpayer's money, so they have a duty to be fair

1. This duty is written in the constitution?

2. This duty of fairness extends to everyone, including non-US corporations?

0
0
Silver badge
Joke

'Kaspersky' is the problem

'Kaspersky' even sounds Russian. Talk about making things difficult for themselves. Why don't they just rename the company to something like 'Mom's Apple Pie AV' and then there won't be any more problems.

9
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018