These tales from the paranoid side about us all fit the same template. Accordingly, their basic structure and rhetoric are always identical:<\/p>\n
- \n
- Unnamed U.S. intelligence officials share certain \u2018shocking details\u2019 about [insert as applicable] with a select few representatives of a given media outlet;<\/li>\n
- Anonymous sources are mostly used; any \u2018sources\u2019 cited are incompetent\/unqualified to be sources;<\/li>\n
- Zero evidence of any wrongdoing on our part is presented (logical: there is no wrongdoing);<\/li>\n
- Distortion of reality based on the Pareto principle<\/a> (80% truth + 20% fiction = monstrous lie);<\/li>\n
- These media stories are then used as a basis for taking political decisions (proof<\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Incidentally, you may be wondering why, if all the stories about us are indeed false, we\u2019ve never taken legal action in the U.S. The short answer to that is that U.S. legislation makes establishing the truth of a media story very difficult. Meanwhile, we get a \u2018media-ocracy\u2019 \u2013 with \u2018news\u2019 that isn\u2019t news at all, just a vehicle for instilling in readers\u2019 minds images of an \u2018enemy\u2019, so as to influence the underlying opinions of the people reading those media. But it doesn\u2019t stop there. This non-news is used to justify high-level political moves against the next-in-line-to-be-out-of-favor company. Yes, of late it\u2019s not just KL being pinpointed; this is growing bigger and bigger every month, affecting other companies too.<\/p>\n
Worryingly, this media-ocracy is very influential \u2013 and highly contagious; so much so that it can now be felt all around the world, not just in America. And that now includes even the Netherlands.<\/p>\n
Media-ocracy: vehicle for instilling in readers\u2019 minds images of an \u2018enemy\u2019 and using false allegations for taking political decisions. Alas, it\u2019s highly contagious.<\/div>\nOn February 3 of this year, the largest Dutch national daily newspaper, De Telegraaf, published a \u2018sensational\u2019 article<\/a> about a hacker who, allegedly, had claimed to have hacked into the network of our Dutch office (from just outside the building) and managed to obtain a number of IP addresses<\/a> \u2013 all as part of a supposed investigation to help uncover a leak in the Dutch parliament \u2013 a leak organized to help \u2018the Russians\u2019. Inevitable questions like why specifically we were hacked, why those particular IP addresses were obtained, etc. are left unanswered, but for us the key thing to be addressed was the claim that someone had breached our own highly secure corporate network.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/media.kasperskycontenthub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/67\/2018\/06\/08192235\/de_telegraaf_kaspersky-1024x768.jpg\")
<\/p>\nSo yes, we took the claims very seriously. We\u2019re a cybersecurity<\/em> company, remember?! So naturally we carried out an internal investigation. And guess what it showed. No hack occurred. But that\u2019s only the start of this sorry tale.<\/p>\n
Going back to the hacker who, according to the news story, said she had broken into our network, it turns out she denies both telling anyone she breached us and actually doing so. \u00a0That means the story must have been fabricated \u2013 and this is confirmed by the hacker\u2019s witness testimony, her archive of electronic messages and personal recordings of phone conversations, and another witness\u2019s testimony.<\/p>\n
Wait. It gets even more ridiculous\u2026<\/p>\n
The threads of this bewildering story lead to none other than a former Dutch minister, Willem Vermeend<\/a>, who, incidentally, together with the above-mentioned hacker, had previously written a book about cybersecurity \u2013 but which was later withdrawn from circulation due to plagiarism<\/a>. De Telegraaf claims that an anonymous source told their journalists about the hacking of KL\u2019s Dutch office, and evidence points to Vermeend as the anonymous source, who supposedly whispered the fake narrative to the newspaper. Vermeend in his turn has repeatedly denied doing so.<\/p>\n
This story is merely a symptom of a large-scale disease, which has by no means struck just the Netherlands<\/div>\nAnd let\u2019s not forget De Telegraaf\u2019s journalists themselves. Despite striking differences in the various claims regarding the article\u2019s sources, the groundlessness of the accusations themselves, plus the brazen total lack of adherence to journalistic ethics, they \u2013 put candidly \u2013 lied to their readers with an opportunistic, self-serving \u2013 false \u2013 article.<\/p>\n
It all adds up to a veritable cyber soap opera of the digital age!<\/p>\n
After exhausting all other possibilities to resolve the issue directly with the Dutch newspaper, we decided that the only option left for us was to turn to court. Fortunately, European legislation offers organizations the chance to defend their reputation by doing so. So, on May 25 we filed a complaint for defamation against both the newspaper and Mr. Vermeend, with a demand for the newspaper to publish a rectification. I\u2019ll keep you informed of how things go.<\/p>\n
Actually, the main thing here isn\u2019t the story itself. The story is merely a symptom of a much larger-scale disease, which has by no means struck just the Netherlands. That disease is the incitement of hysteria in society, which, just as witch-hunts did in the Middle Ages, labels those guys \u2013 from those countries \u2013 bad, and these guys \u2013 from these countries \u2013 good; all based on, to put it mildly, dubious arguments and standards. One recent example of this is the absurd media-ocracy-driven restrictions<\/a> by the Dutch politicians: basing national-level political decisions on lies in the media and hypothetical threats in the style of Minority Report<\/a>.<\/p>\n
And finally\u2026<\/p>\n
The risks of using our software are purely hypothetical<\/em>. Just as hypothetical as with any other cybersecurity software of any country<\/em>. But the risk of becoming a victim of a genuine cyberattack is real \u2013 and extremely high. And not only cyberattacks carried out by very nasty criminals, but also unexpected ones from seemingly benign groups or individuals. And in such an environment only the very best technologies of truly independent developers can help \u2013 those verified in independent tests<\/a> and having a proven track record of ability to protect against any cyberthreat<\/a> no matter where it may come from.<\/p>\n
It makes me proud that nearly 4000 colleagues here at KL, dotted all around the world, fully share my personal mission to make the world a safer, better place. And I think I speak for all 4000 of us when I say that that\u2019s just what we\u2019re going to carry on doing \u2013 even when the going gets tough.<\/p>\n
- These media stories are then used as a basis for taking political decisions (proof<\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n