Kaspersky Secure OS vs China, Iran, North Korea Hackers?
Chinese hackers have accessed US weapons designs. North Korea is becoming a hacking super power. Iran hackers are targeting US energy firms. Alas, Eugene Kaspersky was right: The world needs a secure operating system to protect industrial, financial, communications, transportation and government systems from state-sponsored espionage. But how soon will Kaspersky Lab’s cyber secure operating system arrive? And is it really a magic bullet solution for international cyber terrorism?
Hmmm… CEO Eugene Kaspersky provided plenty of clues about the so-called Kaspersky Cyber Secure Operating System back in October 2012. But so far the security software company — best known for anti-virus and endpoint security offerings — has not offered an official launch date for its operating system design.
During a Kaspersky Lab conference in New York back in January 2013, The VAR Guy gathered these updates from CEO Eugene Kaspersky:
- The company planned to test the cyber secure OS with at least one organization, perhaps a utility.
- It wasn’t clear if or how an official productized offering would launch.
- It was unclear whether Kaspersky Lab would open source the code — but the executive indicated that government partners would be allowed to view the source code so that they would be comfortable with the offering.
- It sounds like the software will be hardware agnostic and easily portable from industrial systems to industry standard systems.
Still, the biggest question of all remains: As international hacking incidents generate more and more headlines, is Kaspersky Lab getting any closer to protecting customers from cyber espionage?
Memo to Eugene Kaspersky: Any update?
The world already has one,
The world already has one, its called openBSD.
Eugene’s solution, in the
Eugene’s solution, in the best scenario, would only go partway to securing systems and communications. Take for example, the recent theft of information for a range of US weapons platforms: even if all contractors and the government were running Kaspersky’s inpenatrable system, what about the communication links between these geographically separated entities? What about when some spiky-haired manager views a PDF on his iPad? Or when Joe Smith’s laptop is taken home for the evening?
A secure OS isn’t going to fix these issues. When Manager X prints out some document because that’s what every manager does then that document is immediately insecure. It is both in the physical world and also sitting on some printer with more security holes in it than swisse cheese.
If you’re looking for a
If you’re looking for a secure OS, why not just use OpenBSD? They’ve had just two remote holes in the default install in over 10 years. No other OS can match that level of security.
Might be interesting too.
The
Might be interesting too.
The Invisible Things Lab is developing their Qubes OS for similar purposes:
http://theinvisiblethings.blogspot.com/2012/03/windows-support-coming-to-qubes.html
some thoughts on this:
1.
some thoughts on this:
1. There’s already a very secure OS, OpenBSD, existing with excellent track record, instead of reinventing the wheel, why not improve on it (whatever features or functions).
2. Security is only strongest as its weakest link; in my opinion, that link is ‘human’. Unless the OS provides defaults that ‘defend’ against common pitfalls by admins, no OS can deter the foolishness of an incompetent admin
3. Is this opensource?
An offering from Kaspersky
An offering from Kaspersky Labs would be very interesting, particularly as intimated in article sub-heading how it relates to Open Source.
There are very good secured and hardened Operating Systems (OS) available in form of RedHat based with SELinux “properly” configured, OpenBSD and FreeBSD with TrustedBSD configurations.
I cannot imagine however, how such a Kaspersky product could have much or all of the security features in those listed above, and be as “easily” setup as one would do for a standard Linux or Window 7/8 install. Many configuration parameters would need be decided in advance “before” final setup, and those making decisions on security functionality would be required to be security experts, which now-a-days could just as well be a separate technology discipline due to complexities and significant experience involved as compared to Network Administrators, Systems Administrators and other areas.
Anyone looking for a silver bullet will be sorely disappointed.
It is very interesting that
It is very interesting that ex-Soviet agent wants to help. To whom? I think Kaspersky is a source of many viruses and bots himself. He reminds me the window glass man who used to buy us soccer balls in Ankara Turkey.
This article was written in
This article was written in May before Edward Snowdens disclosing of US Government spying and hacking. I guess that’s why “US” isn’t listed as one of the hackers.
I agree, I don’t think it
I agree, I don’t think it would be able to bring anything new to the table that hasn’t already gone before from the Linux distros that come with SELinux….as long as it’s configured properly!
what about Israel and usa
what about Israel and usa whom attack to iranian energy firms by some viruses such as Flare? why you did not mentioned that?!
Kaspersky is on the payroll
Kaspersky is on the payroll of the FIS/SVR. Can he really be trusted to make a secure OS? If it’s open source, maybe. But if it isn’t, only a fool would trust him or KL.
I think it is false hope;
1.
I think it is false hope;
1. How are we going to secure hardware and firmware below the OS
2. How are we going to secure software running above the OS
3. How are we establish a secure encryption and key management system with secure certificates
4. How do we model and define secure “trust relationships” and secure “trust flow” ?
5. More over how do we develop secure application languages e.g. ADA secure?