Eugene Kaspersky at the Security Analyst Summit. Photo: Manuel Velasquez/Getty Images

A Washington D.C. court has dismissed Kaspersky Lab's lawsuits against the U.S. government over two different rules banning Kaspersky products from federal systems.

The background: Both a federal law passed as part of last years National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA,) and a binding operational directive (BOD) issued by the Department of Homeland Security, prohibit federal agencies from using Kaspersky products. Both portrayed Kaspersky, a Moscow based company, as a national security risk.

The details:

  • Kaspersky sued to prevent the two rules from coming into place, claiming the NDAA was a form of unlawful punishment against a specific company known as a bill of attainder. The judge reasoned that "The NDAA does not inflict 'punishment' on Kaspersky Lab. It eliminates a perceived risk to the Nation’s cybersecurity and, in so doing, has the secondary effect of foreclosing one small source of revenue for a large multinational corporation."
  • Because the NDAA ruling remains in effect, the judge ruled the BOD case was more or less a moot point. No matter what the ruling in that case, the NDAA would continue to block federal agencies from using Kaspersky products.

The perceived threat: Lawmakers and DHS have publicly said the national security threat from Kaspersky products stems from Russian law. Antivirus programs and other security programs often upload files to a security firm's server in the course of analyzing them for threats. By law, Kaspersky would have to honor Russian official requests for the data.

  • Media reports suggest there may be a more specific espionage threat. The New York Times and Wall Street Journal reported Russian spies used Kaspersky Lab products to search for classified files on U.S. systems that had Kaspersky installed.
  • Kaspersky has denied any fealty to the Russian government or willing involvement in an espionage scheme and moved its data centers to Switzerland in order to boost public trust.

Go deeper

America's nightmare foretold

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

President Trump made it clear at the debate that he’ll continue to call the results fraudulent — and contest the outcome in key states — no matter how wide the margin. That’ll be amplified by a massive amount of disinformation, even though the platforms are trying to curtail it.

Why it matters: Back in 2000, we didn’t know Bush v. Gore was going to happen. We know this is going to happen.

Congress looks to squeeze Big Tech ahead of election

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

Tech companies are bracing for a tough day in three separate Capitol Hill committees Thursday, as lawmakers move to show they're tough on social media platforms in the days leading up to the election.

Why it matters: Big Tech has become a go-to punching bag for both the right and left, and tech policy has become increasingly fertile ground for grievance politics.

The array of far-right groups "standing by" after Trump's call

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

President Trump's refusal to condemn white nationalists during Tuesday night's debate drew a lot of attention — including from the Proud Boys, the far-right group he asked to "stand back and stand by."

Why it matters: The Proud Boys remain relatively small — a Portland rally this past weekend billed as the group's largest-ever gathering drew just a few hundred people. But Trump's failure to condemn extremist groups has been welcomed as an endorsement by a wide constellation of people on the fringes.