Kaspersky and its thousands of open network connections

[JMB1911]

I recently upgraded my router and installed DD-WRT. With access to new monitoring tools I have been noticed a lot (4,000 to 5,000) connections from some of my computers.

Well I tracked it down to Kaspersky. Disabled Kaspersky the 4,000 open connections from that 1 computer drop to something reasonable, like 3.

Anyone know what the deal is? Should I drop Kaspersky for Bitdefender

 

[Ketchup]

I have run Kaspersky trials over the years (as recently as this year) and there was always something about them I didn't like: some bogged down the system too much, some wouldn't shut up, some had a way-too restrictive firewall, some loved to block legit web pages. I always ended up running the stock Windows Defender and run a 3rd party scan every once in a while.

 

[lxskllr]

Another vote for Defender. I use gnu/linux, but windows machines I manage only use defender. I've had too many issue with a/v, one of which I suspect required a reinstall of the o/s(I opted to use xubuntu instead).

 

[Puffnstuff]

I recently upgraded my router and installed DD-WRT. With access to new monitoring tools I have been noticed a lot (4,000 to 5,000) connections from some of my computers.

Well I tracked it down to Kaspersky. Disabled Kaspersky the 4,000 open connections from that 1 computer drop to something reasonable, like 3.

Anyone know what the deal is? Should I drop Kaspersky for Bitdefender

I dropped them a couple of weeks ago in favor of Norton Security 2017 Deluxe which has improved my system performance. BT would probably be a better experience for you over their software not to mention the fact that they are a Russian company which makes me wonder what else its doing. I would never install the banking portion of it as I felt uneasy about it.

 

[Elixer]

All these AV programs snoop on you, everything is scanned, and these days, everything is reported back to HQ. This wasn't always the case, but now, it is.
That is the nature of the beast trying to detect what is bad vs what is good.

I stopped using AV programs and just use virustotal.com (or...) for files I download if I have a question about their origin. I also disable JS and don't use flash on sites.
I also have a FW enabled for both incoming and outgoing connections, and manually allow/deny them.
Then do the occasional malware scan. Never had a issue for years now.

 

[DaveSimmons]

At least with Microsoft your data is going to the NSA instead of the KGB. Also, Microsoft has an incentive to keep Windows running properly while AV companies make money off of fear of infections.

 

[EXCellR8]

heard something on the radio this morning about Kaspersky allegedly making some social media sites easier for spies to hack. the lab denies it of course, but who do you listen to these days?

 

[Puffnstuff]

At least with Microsoft your data is going to the NSA instead of the KGB. Also, Microsoft has an incentive to keep Windows running properly while AV companies make money off of fear of infections.

They sure do like how Norton hits me up with a popup warning me of the Wi-Fi hack and offering to sell me even more protection.

 

[Mike64]

At least with Microsoft your data is going to the NSA instead of the KGB. Also, Microsoft has an incentive to keep Windows running properly while AV companies make money off of fear of infections.

Frankly, since I'm a US citizen (only), living in the US, if I were concerned about either of those particular actors doing me personal harm (and I'm not), I'd be way more concerned about the NSA than the KGB. As a practical (let alone legal) matter, short of sending out a black ops squad to off me (which seems unlikely, to put it rather mildly) or even putting a (squad of) capable, malevolent hacker(s) on my tail (which seems only slightly less unlikely), there isn't much the KGB can do to me. The NSA and its, er, " associates" on the other hand... (And for that matter, the same goes for the mainland Chinese, and any other "evil foreign power" du jour...)

 

[JMB1911]

Frankly, since I'm a US citizen (only), living in the US, if I were concerned about either of those particular actors (and I'm not), I'd be way more concerned about the NSA than the KGB. As a practical (let alone legal) matter, short of sending out a black ops squad to off me (which seems unlikely, to put it rather mildly) or even putting a (squad of) capable, malevolent hacker(s) on my tail (which seems only slightly less unlikely), there isn't much the KGB can do to me. The NSA and its, er, " associates" on the other hand... (And for that matter, the same goes for the mainland Chinese, and any other "evil foreign power" du jour...)

When the NSA/CIA needs more funds they increase opium production in one of the war torn nations they control.

If the KGB needs more funds, they'll just empty bank accounts.

 

[Mike64]

When the NSA/CIA needs more funds they increase opium production in one of the war torn nations they control.

Not to mention the longer-term ploy of selling arms to random insurgent groups freedom fighters around the world, who'll use them to eventually form significant enough "US adversaries" to justify demanding (and getting) massive (and of course, classified) budget increases from Congress... <sigh> (Not that I"m suggesting they're far-sighted, or even quite that devious, enough to do that intentionally, mind you, it just seems to be one of the "benefits" of their SOP.)

And the other hand, sometimes the KGB uses the somewhat more sophisticated ploy of helping more or less random thugs become billionaire "plutocrats", knowing they'll be shake them down rely on them to fund various and sundry activities like fixing elections and murdering smoothing over minor annoyances like political opponents that show signs of gaining significant public support.<Yet Another Sigh>

 

[John Connor]

Try Bitdefender Free or Immunet.