Ahem . . . has your antivirus program been compromised by GCHQ and NSA?

[Joe Hone]

I don't think this has been posted here. The Intercept reported Monday: "The National Security Agency and its British counterpart, Government Communications Headquarters, have worked to subvert anti-virus and other security software in order to track users and infiltrate networks, according to documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden." There is quite a list of potentially targeted antivirus programs. The article mentions how Kaspersky Lab was singled out by GCHQ and makes the ironic observation that Kaspersky has been a thorn in GCHQ and NSA's side by uncovering superviruses that appear to have been created by those agencies. It is a good read.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/06/22/nsa-gchq-targeted-kaspersky/

[Tuxman]

Just another reason to stop using snake oil software.

[Curt]

“Anti-virus products, with only a few exceptions, are years behind security-conscious client-side applications like browsers or document readers . It means that Acrobat Reader, Microsoft Word or Google Chrome are harder to exploit than 90 percent of the anti-virus products out there.”

They don't tell who the few exceptions are, except maybe Kaspersky.

[MilesAhead]

Just another reason to stop using snake oil software.

A friend of mine had a boss who liked to say "using a prophylactic is like taking a shower with a raincoat on."  I feel the same way about computing with av running. 

[Stoic Joker]

Just another reason to stop using snake oil software.

A friend of mine had a boss who liked to say "using a prophylactic is like taking a shower with a raincoat on."  I feel the same way about computing with av running. 

Or something like this perhaps?

[MilesAhead]

Just another reason to stop using snake oil software.

A friend of mine had a boss who liked to say "using a prophylactic is like taking a shower with a raincoat on."  I feel the same way about computing with av running. 

Or something like this perhaps?
(see attachment in previous post)

Heh.  With that packaging the brand should be changed from Durex to Duress. 

[Renegade]

Heh.  With that packaging the brand should be changed from Durex to Duress. 

Err... rebranding like that is pretty hard. And forcing people to take it is, well, just rapacious. Is the company up for it? It may just be a limp proposition.

[MilesAhead]

Heh.  With that packaging the brand should be changed from Durex to Duress. 

Err... rebranding like that is pretty hard. And forcing people to take it is, well, just rapacious. Is the company up for it? It may just be a limp proposition.

Such comments may be a bit premature.