back to article Kaspersky says Uncle Sam snubbed proposal to open up its code for third-party review

Despite the Feds' determination to ban Kaspersky's security software in the US, the Russian business continues to push its proposal to open up its data and products to independent third-party review – and prove to Uncle Sam that its code hasn't been and won't be compromised by Kremlin spies. Kaspersky started talking about …

  1. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    WTF?

    Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

    If he wants to open his code to 3rd-party review, it seems to me that he can just do it.

    If he want to post source code on GitHub, he can.

    This sounds like waffling to me. Either that, or he is trying to rattle Washington.

    1. MatthewSt Silver badge

      Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

      Because he doesn't want to publish the code, he wants just the US government to see it so that they stop saying it's unsafe.

    2. Zibob Silver badge

      Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

      I think you are reading it wrong.

      They had been told they would be banned from the US on the basis of national security, kasperskey offered to have their code reviewed by a third party from themselves and the government.

      Apparently the offer was snubbed and now kasperskey are making it known what happened.

      Thusly, it is being shown that the US are isolationist, fearful of other countries capabilities and rather than work on themselves, even when offered to have it done for them by an independent party. It shows nation lever cowardice.

      They know they are wrong, have been given an out, refused and now are being presented as the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are.

      1. Headley_Grange Silver badge

        Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

        It's pointless to review a snapshot of the code, isn't it? It can be as clean as a whistle today and a steaming pile of malware tomorrow - or even a steaming pile of oops-sorry-I-clicked-on-the-wrong file, as we saw earlier in the week. So unless Kaspersky are going to embed US Gov in the code change and update lifecyle the offer's worth nothing.

        1. Yorick Hunt Silver badge
          Holmes

          Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

          "So unless Kaspersky are going to embed US Gov in the code change and update lifecyle the offer's worth nothing."

          Huawei already did this in the UK, granting UK GovCo (along with representatives of other nations) full access to their development code - and yet still the politicians snubbed them. When you're dealing with politics, logic goes right out the window.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

          Especially for an anti-virus package. Because even if it has the best virus removal and detection engine on planet earth, it still lives and dies on the definition files that are pushed to it...I've seen cases in the past where Kaspersky didn't detect a virus that was detectable by pretty much everything else for weeks...that could have been Kaspersky handling that particular virus badly or maybe they had some pressure to leave the gate open for a little while before they locked it...who knows? Who will ever know?

          I used to have a client where the sysadmin referred to Kaspersky as "Kerplunksky" because it was noticeably haphazard with detecting well known viruses for short periods of time.

      2. Snake Silver badge

        Re: the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are

        Thank you for posting your opinion.

        But having the code get a third-party review only works now. The idea that after the third-party review, that Kaspersky can be leveraged to change the code anyway, or that any vulnerability to the code can be used on an 'first / easy-access' zero-day, or that the AV definition updates can be compromised to intentionally ignore a targeted attack, can all still apply and therefore "schizophrenic paranoid" isn't so much of a stretch of a self-preservation system to adhere to.

        But let's let national security be potentially targeted, lest the nation-state be targeted as "schizophrenic paranoid".

        1. Strong as Taishan Mountains

          Re: the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are

          did you read the article?

          Kaspersky asked to set up a framework to ensure data integrity/security... if this had anything to do with security the data brokerages would have instead been the target (Chinaman can buy the location data for any mil personnel easy breezy)

          it'd be really easy to set up ongoing review of data pushed and sent. really not that complicated here, this keeps crowdstrike and other garbage indian outsourcing fronts in business, that is all.

          1. Snake Silver badge

            Re: easy to set up ongoing review of data

            No, it really isn't. Read the article?

            "It also requires more regional R&D and IT teams, plus local datacenters, infrastructure, software, and the like in countries that choose this method."

            If agreed upon the U.S. Commerce Commission would have to hire, and keep on staff, a full range of IT security & software professionals just to fine-pick through Every. Single. Kaspersky. Update.

            Every one.

            That's money. Who's paying for it?? Where are the infrastructure resources coming from? I seriously doubt Kaspersky would be willing to pony up the bill to the U.S. Government to pay for all that, contrary to Kaspersky's promise of cooperation. You don't just snap your fingers at a government and say "Here's our stuff, look at it as you will" and not have that create a huge bureaucratic requirement of infrastructure, methods, paid professionals, and requirements to be followed and carried out. Plus, PLUS, if Kaspersky's code would need to be overseen and approved at every update, exactly how useful would their AV product be with the delay in rollout caused by this oversight on every update?? It could be *weeks* before an update is approved for release by the government and what happens in the meantime to all the vulnerable systems?

            It SOUNDS nice, "We promise to share our code!" but it really isn't very workable here, here in the *real* world. You actually expect a code review, done by the government no less, to be "timely" to allow relevant release that addresses the threats? We would all *love* for this to happen but it just can't.

            1. Headley_Grange Silver badge

              Re: easy to set up ongoing review of data

              The Kaspersky shills are out in force on this one, judging by the downvotes!

            2. Strong as Taishan Mountains

              Re: easy to set up ongoing review of data

              Yes all of those local data centers, just like another company did in Texas with Oracle. Ring a bell?

              Still didn't make any difference, because at the end of the day the question isn't whether it is too hard to set up monitoring and compliance (which, by the way, many Federal agencies tend to make the monitored party pay for if they have their way), but irrational protectionism.

              I fully believe that states should have sovereignty over their data, but it seems this really isn't the question here.

            3. martinusher Silver badge

              Re: easy to set up ongoing review of data

              >You actually expect a code review, done by the government no less, to be "timely" to allow relevant release that addresses the threats?

              Crowdstrike, anyone?

              We can't afford not to have some kind of independent review.

              As for anti-virus code reporting back to head office -- wherever it is -- that's a given. Anti-virus companies have always offered free editions partly because they're public spirited (!) but mostly because they need the widest possible net to catch new threats. Some years ago I read Kaspersky's write up on how it handles catching, evaluating and dealing with threats and I suspect that all other AV companies do roughly the same thing. Reg should find this and reprint it, it might tamp down a lot of the ill informed speculation from politicians and their followers.

        2. This post has been deleted by its author

        3. This post has been deleted by its author

        4. Zibob Silver badge

          Re: the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are

          You are absolutely correct, but it is also just as true for any piece of code ever written.

          So by the same logic, why don't the US kick out Microsoft, Google, amazon, apple... They are just as obfuscated and just as much a threat to national security.

          So... Back to square one, why ban Kasperskey? They have gone above and beyond anything required of a private company to try and clear their name. Its the US that assume guilty and don't allow to prove innocence.

          Edit to say: my phone is acting up with touch input, so I accidentally posted twice in pieces... I have since deleted them, but that what those two deleted posts are.

          1. Snake Silver badge

            Re: same logic, Microsoft and Google

            All very true. But many Western countries have also banned Huawei under the same principle: that, in the real world, it is almost impossible to oversee what a company may be [forced] to do behind the scenes. There are just too many variables to look over in a timely manner, before any damage is done.

            It is a perfect solution? No, not really. A flat-out ban-hammer is really the nuclear option. But in today's complex *and* fast-moving world, I'm not sure it is realistic to say a different option will actually be completely effective. Shame it has to come to this.

            1. Zibob Silver badge

              Re: same logic, Microsoft and Google

              So we agree then, this is silly and pointless as everyone falls under the same suspicion.

              So again, why the ban for kasperskey?

              This is just petty, childish, fear driven and paranoid like I said, add the flip flopping on every other thing they try to world police and you get the schizophrenia, the requirements can change monthly for import/export conditions.

            2. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: same logic, Microsoft and Google

              All very true. But many Western countries have also banned Huawei under the same principle: that, in the real world, it is almost impossible to oversee what a company may be [forced] to do behind the scenes. There are just too many variables to look over in a timely manner, before any damage is done.

              Not necessarily. It just comes with a price attached. So Huawei's a good example. What's the threat? This?

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei#NSA_infiltration

              The NSA was concerned that Huawei's infrastructure could provide China with signals intelligence capabilities. It also wanted to find ways to exploit the company's products because they are used by targets of interest to the NSA.

              So the UK and Huawei did this-

              https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/huawei-cyber-security-evaluation-centre-hcsec-oversight-board-annual-report-2021

              So a partnership between Huaweii and HMG with the NCSC / GCHQ providing oversight and assurance. Kind of an open book or open technology venture to provide reassurance that Huawei kit isn't a threat to national security and/or critical national infrastructure. But of course this wasn't enough for politicians, who just decided to ban Huawei products from the UK. But I used to design Huawei networks and came across this concern in the past, and the answer is usually in the design.

              If the control and data plane are seperated, how would Huawei compromise the network, or spy on users? Especially any wholesale spying. Basic stuff like Huawei's EchoLife GPON NIDs used by BT are pretty dumb devices that just connect an Ethernet to a VLAN, then switch, then gateway. So how would Huawei access that, without anyone noticing? Also true for a lot of other kit, eg Huawei make repeaters for submarine cable systems. Ripping & replacing those is very expensive, and probably unnecessary.

              But Kaspersky seems to be proposing an HCSEC-like model, and is arguably a good idea. Especially if it's a scalable solution that can evaluate other products. Which sort of happens already with security assurance levels for kit used in classified networks. But that's also an expensive game, even though it provides industry and users with a higer degree of confidence.

          2. cryptopants

            Re: the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are

            Kasperski is not an American company. It does not have any automatic right to the US market and there is no trade agreement between the US and Russia. So absolutely no courtesies are owed.

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are

            Because the US is part of the source code fiddling that happens there...but not Kaspersky, it's a different government fiddling with the code there.

            I'm still waiting for proper open documentation on how the PRNG in Windows works and where it gets it's entropy. Until then, you can't really trust any cryptography on Windows because you're getting all your "random" from a black box with "trust me bro" written on it.

      3. drankinatty

        Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

        It's never a fun thing to be caught in the middle of Geopolitics. I do feel for Kasperskey. There just isn't a workable solution. If your base of operation is in Putin's Russia, you very well may find yourself on the wrong end of sanctions for something you have absolutely no control over. However it isn't something that wasn't foreseeable. Kasperkey is free to make whatever offer it wants, regardless how unworkable it is, and it can beat its drum as loudly as it can claiming how unfairly it is being treated. But, hailing for a nation with government sponsored troll-farms, hacking units, etc.. aimed at destabilizing the western-world, it is more than foreseeable that you may find yourself dealing with economic sanctions.

        And no, creating individual exceptions for software companies one-by-one based on some offer of code review isn't a workable solution no matter how you slice it. Do you do it for just Kasperskey, or where do you draw the line. There just aren't any "I'm a good company, create an exception for me" tickets in geopolitics. Yes it sucks, yes it's unfortunate, but when you are based in a country run dictator that keeps invading its western neighbors and committing war-crime after war-crime against them, don't be surprised when you get caught up in geopolitics.

        1. Zibob Silver badge

          Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

          "But, hailing for a nation with government sponsored troll-farms, hacking units, etc.. aimed at destabilizing the western-world, it is more than foreseeable that you may find yourself dealing with economic sanctions."

          You have accuragtly described america though? This is what annoys me. We praise america and look to them for the direction of the world, and yet we demonize another that is doing harm for sure, but in the face of america with its "every president had their war" mentality.

          A full 50% of America's economy is either directly or indirectly linked to war and building resources for it. They NEED war or their economy collapses. A single F22 fighter jet, not even the latest, are $350,000,000 each. And there are hundreds of them, and further have never been used for any conflict that could not have been done by any other current aircraft they already had.

          "There just aren't any "I'm a good company, create an exception for me" tickets in geopolitics."

          And yet we see Google and other be able to bully the Indian government to make exemptions for them financially. So while.you say we can't do it, we do it constantly.

          So while.I get the point about Russia, america is a far more wording and dangerous prospect, at least we know exactly where Russia stands while america speaks out of both sides of their mouth and would see to.sanction the world for their own benefit. ASML being a great example.

          1. Casca Silver badge

            Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

            Whataboutismen is strong in this one...

            LMAO, we know where putin is standing yes. Only you are your friends think that its a good place.

            1. Zibob Silver badge

              Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

              All well and good throwing an insult,

              But what about the vail8d and informed point I made? Nothing? No come back other that "*snorts* No U!"?

              So yes it is whataboutism, doesn't make it any less accurate or valid of a criticism.

              Where does america stand then?

              1. Casca Silver badge

                Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

                Because its useless to argue with people like you.

                1. Zibob Silver badge

                  Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

                  You are the only one arguing. Inlaid out my point and you came back with base level insults and comebacks. So... Still waiting for an actual valid response.

                  1. Casca Silver badge

                    Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

                    Why? We know you think russia is the best thing in the world.

                    You put up your shit and think everyone should agree with you,

      4. prh99

        Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

        Why would they want to help a Russian software company at all? Especially with the war in Ukraine and Russia targeting western companies etc.

      5. Necrohamster Silver badge

        Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

        ...the schizophrenic paranoid nation they are.

        I guarantee you the money Kaspersky makes from federal contracts is miniscule.

        Their histrionics, and yours, are hilarious.

      6. cryptopants

        Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

        Even the Chinese don’t trust it. It’s effectively banned by the CCP on any government computer etc

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Umm, why does he need US Government approval ?

          UAE loves it. I bought a USB hard drive from there (full of malware) and they gave me a free copy of Kaspersky on a thumb drive (also full of malware, ironically not detected by Kaspersky, or at least the version they gave me).

          Apparently it was a "special gift for overseas guests"...joke was on them though because I expected it to be full of shit and bought it for that very purpose because a friend of mine had tipped me off to a large tech chain out there slinging disks of malware at British tourists...so I went into a branch he didn't go into to put it to the test.

          This sort of thing is more widespread than you think. I went to Hong Kong about a decade ago and went to a vendor in a massive tech mall, he had a sign outside saying "clean disks" which piqued my interesting and he went to great lengths to prove his disks were clean because he was aware of other vendors selling tainted stock. It was actually hurting his business that other vendors were taking bungs to sell drives with malware on....he had the full kit and caboodle for dumping ROM chips etc etc and ran a service to clean up and re-flash tainted disks...dude was a legend and worth his weight in gold. Highlighted a lot of dodgy shit going down, I rewarded him by buying him a bunch of new kit for his endeavors.

          See, thing is in less wealthy countries or countries where people don't make a lot of money, it's very easy for state actors to bung them a few quid to sling dodgy shit to tourists / foreigners...in some instances the bung might be more than their monthly wages...even though the store might be legit, the employees might not be.

          At Kaspersky there is 100% chance of Putin puppets somewhere.

    3. The Man Who Fell To Earth Silver badge
      Boffin

      The code is only half of it

      As the Nghia Hoang Pho case showed, the FSB seems to have access to anything uploaded to Kasperski's servers.

      https://www.cdse.edu/Portals/124/Documents/casestudies/case-study-nghia-pho.pdf

      It did not help that the way the US Government found out was that Kasperski was also compromised by the Israeli's, who tipped off the US.

      https://www.cfr.org/cyber-operations/compromise-kaspersky-labs

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Spying laws

    It doesn't matter if Kaspersky or Huawei has a backdoor. They are beholden to governments (Russia and China) who have laws stating that they can ask any company to help them spy. As long as those laws (or the motivation behind them) exist then those companies are a national security threat. Of course there are other countries with similar laws, such as the US (CLOUD act for one), so each country needs to decide how much risk to expose themselves to and whether to allow foreign country's technology into sensitive locations. Any political decision will have other factors at play, including politicians wanting to be seen to be "doing something about security" even if it is smoke and mirrors and lobbying from companies that might benefit from the ban but the US does have a valid reason for this action.

    1. markrand
      Holmes

      Re: Spying laws

      Maybe we should ban all US IT products then. After all US companies are subject to national Security Letters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter

    2. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Spying laws

      > They are beholden to governments (Russia and China) ... that the US has no influence over and considers itself to be at war with...

      This is Kaspersky's real Achilles heel, the only real solution is for AO Kaspersky Labs (Russia) to totally divest Kaspersky Labs (UK) Limited, and for the new independent entity be responsible for the maintenance and on-going development of (non-Russia) Kaspersky. Given the existing relationship with CyberNB of Canada and the history of the US with respect to the export of cryptograph products, they probably need to add a European HQ'd partner - Finland previously would have been a good HQ location.

      The only question is whether there is an acceptable method by which the two derivatives of 2024 Kaspersky can stay in step and satisfy the export/import and political control/influence factors and we can continue to benefit from Kaspersky's not bending to government agency demands for their malware to be unflagged.

    3. abend0c4 Silver badge

      Re: Spying laws

      It doesn't even have to be "spying" as traditionally conceived. Crowdstrike has demonstrated the ease with which AV code can paralyse entire industries. Although the remedy in that case is presumably to change the design of AV hooks in Windows rather than relying on the good behaviour of any particular vendor. Perhaps the US government could exercise some of the pressure on its own industry that it attributes to its foes.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Spying laws

        AV should always be an appliance that sits between the user and their network connection not a piece of software. Doesn't matter if an AV on your machine has detected something, it's already made it to your machine.

  3. This post has been deleted by its author

  4. Grogan Silver badge

    It's not unexpected at this time. Later they will be interested in this, but for now, they simply are not going to trust the government that Kaspersky (the company) operates under, or its personnel at this time. Regardless of what they may think of Eugene Kaspersky himself.

  5. Dennis_the_performance_dork
    Linux

    Gonna miss them

    Not gonna get into the geopolitics side of things, but I am definitely going to miss Kaspersky. They were the first that I recall to make AV solutions for Linux -- back in my Slackware days, had it on the mail server to protect those Doze users who liked to click things they shouldn't in the POP3/Microsoft Outlook Express/Eudora times. Haven't used it in two decades, but I still think fondly of how many times it saved me going to someone's office to fix a virus because they clicked an email they should have known not to.

    3 decades of computing, I've never had a virus. Don't have AV software on my machine -- don't need it, locked down Fedora. I have to sudo to pick my nose, but the number of "house calls" Kaspersky saved me back in the late 90s/early 00s . . .I thank them dearly.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

    Putin invaded Ukraine.

    1. Mark Exclamation

      Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

      Me too, and we really don't need any other reason to ban them, than we no longer do business with Russian companies. Forget the security risk, which is real, just no more business with Russia. Putin chose for Russia to leave civilised society.

      1. Zibob Silver badge

        Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

        So what of america funding the murder of Gaza citizens.

        Seems the same argument. Very clear war crimes being committed with american weaponry and funding. Sooo dump all American software?

        1. Zolko Silver badge

          Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

          And what about US continuing to by titanium and uranium from Russia ? Probably orders of magnitude more money in there

          1. Zibob Silver badge

            Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

            When a single f22 is $350,000,000 I doubt it. War economy is 50% of everything g america puts out.

            1. cryptopants

              Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

              The US Govt is sole buyer of the F-22 and has refused to license it to allow it to be sold abroad even to their closest allies. It’s also been out of production for some time.

          2. pavlecom
            IT Angle

            Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

            And what about US continuing to by titanium and uranium from Russia ?

            Moreover: "Last year, seven international standards were adopted based on Russian GOSTs. In high-tech industries — in the rocket and space industry, in the railway industry, in aircraft manufacturing. My favorite example is the Russian standard for cyberdefense methods for nuclear power plant control systems, which has become international standard," Shalaev said.

            So Russian Kaspersky is really really good as it seems.

        2. Casca Silver badge

          Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

          Its not the same argument. Did the US invade Gaza? No? Then its not the same..

          Go away to twitter where you belong

          1. Zibob Silver badge

            Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

            By proxy yes.if it american guns, bullets, bombs and planes being provided for the express purpose of genocide and war crimes.

            So please do explain how this is nothing to do with america?

            And if you want places america did invade there is a very VERY long list of failed coups, over throwing governments, installing their own failed government, and of course more war crimes.

            Constructive replies please, taken your time.

            1. Casca Silver badge

              Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

              Why would I? You have your hate the west rhetoric set in stone. Its a waste of time.

              Why not move to russia if you like it so much?

            2. jabuzz

              Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

              Well in the first instance, there is no genocide in Gaza. Just because lots of civilians have been killed does not mean genocide is occurring. In fact, the population of the Gaza Strip is higher today than it was on October 7th, which seems remarkable if genocide is occurring. In the end, the population of the Gaza Strip voted in a genocidal terrorist organization to be their rulers and are now reaping the consequences of that decision. I would add that parents get to make decisions for their children. Remember the Hamas charter calls for the extermination of all Jews in the world (that's genocidal intent if ever I have seen it) and is legally classified in the UK (and many other countries) as a terrorist organization.

            3. Casca Silver badge

              Re: I dropped Kaspersky for one reason

              And and I will give you a contructive reply when you have something worthwhile to reply to.

        3. Sandtitz Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Russian whataboutery

          Hey, you forgot to mention that US is also lynching Negroes.

  7. Necrohamster Silver badge

    As welcome as a fart in a spacesuit

    And then anyone from another country or region deemed inappropriate – let's say in Russia – can't access the data or the infrastructure used to process and store the information.

    lol do you actually think a geofence is going to keep out Uncle Vlad and the GRU?

    Evgeny needs to come to terms with the fact his company's done...finished...in the Western World. Move on.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: As welcome as a fart in a spacesuit

      Quite right. Though you can narrow down some countries outside Russia that are often used for Russian attacks. Northern Cyprus being one of them. I fended off a DDoS once that appeared to come from Northern Cyprus...I was amazed that Northern Cyprus was even capable of this sort of attack...until we discovered it was Russians...took us two attempts to stop the DDoS...first attempt, we blackholed the traffic to a non-existent server...which failed...then we blackholed them to the gay side of Pornhub. They never returned.

  8. StrangerHereMyself Silver badge

    Unknowable

    Showing the source code isn't enough. He'd have to give the U.S. government permanent access to their code and build process. That would take way too much time and effort the government is willing to spend on it. It's easier to just ban it.

    Can you imagine the uproar if Kaspersky added a backdoor after the government checked the source code? The Russians would simply deny everything and snap into your face: "No proof!"

    I can sympathize with the government for simply banning Kaspersky.

  9. fg_swe Silver badge

    It Is Very Simple

    There is a war ongoing in Ukraine, somewhat similar to Korean war. US weapons against Russian weapons. Two power centers duking it out.

    Even if Mr Kaspersky is totally no longer a KGB man, some of his employees will be KGB and GRU assets. Even if he does not know, they can insert backdoors or use the gathered data for purposes of the Russian state.

    Moscow threatens nuclear Armageddon weekly. They apparently want to kill more people than have died in Hiroshima, Dresden, Tokio, Hamburg and so on. Also, they like to complain about "Fascists", all while acting like such.

    So, find a truce and then a peace and we can use your products again. Until then, no chance.

    1. fg_swe Silver badge

      Plus: ABC Weapons

      They also like to use ABC weapons against their traitors, in very dangerous ways. This already killed two innocent British citizens, because they disposed of the weapon in a highly unsafe manner. True Russian bumbling.

    2. fg_swe Silver badge

      Migration Weapon

      Then they want to use Arab migrants to destabilize the EU, in true KGB thug fashion. Three days before KGB man PUTIN claimed he "wants to preserve Europe".

      A little thug he is. No principles except raw power.

      https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/11/11/world/belarus-poland-border-migrants#tensions-escalate-at-the-poland-belarus-border-as-migrants-face-dire-conditions

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like