It’s not available in the US yet, but Kaspersky Labs this week announced a free version of its flagship antivirus solution.
“We’ve been working on this release for a good year-and-a-half, with pilot versions in a few regions, research, analysis, tweaks and the rest of it,” Kaspersky Labs Eugene Kaspersky writes. “And we realized we had to do one thing, and fast: Roll out a Kaspersky Labs freebie all over the planet!”
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
Kaspersky Free, as the product is called, is aimed at those who can’t afford the $50 or more that retail AV products cost. And because it works better than Microsoft’s (also free, and bundled in Windows) Defender product—according to Mr. Kaspersky, anyway—everyone will benefit from the Internet being just that much safer.
As important, Kaspersky says that the free product won’t compete with the company’s paid products because it’s only AV. Those who do pay the $50 premium for the paid version get additional features like parental controls, online payment protection, a secure VPN connection, and more, he says.
That said, Kaspersky Free does appear to offer the essentials: AV protection across file, email and web, with self-defense and quarantine capabilities “This arsenal ensures convenient and safe web surfing, working with USB sticks and other portable storage media, and protection against both phishing and infected files being run,” Kaspersky says. “In short, the indispensable basics that no one on the planet should do without.” It also takes up fewer system resources than its paid siblings.
The bad news, if you want such a thing, is that Kaspersky Free is not yet available in the United States. Today, it’s available in Russia, Ukraine, China, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. And then the US, Canada, and other countries will get access to Kaspersky Free in a wave two release over the next month. The product will be rolled out globally by November, the company says.
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153539"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>The concern over Russia relates to spying on the US, I've never heard that MS products manufactured by partners that "have ties to the Chinese government" have been compromised. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153690"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>Ah, you mentioned Clinton. Enough said.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153592"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>No idea if either is true but they are entirely unconnected.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153628"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>It's not really about outrage, it's a concern about security. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153693"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>Your mixing a lot of different things together. We talking about an anti-virus program that runs on a PC. We aren't talking about the whole universe of IT. Tech support scams from India or anywhere else don't imply a nefarious connection to MS. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153952"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>Except that in this particular case the founder does indeed have a connection with the Russian government.</p>
Stooks
<blockquote><a href="#153592"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>Eugene Kaspersky was in the KGB and is a personal friend of Putin. I believe his wife was in the KGB as well.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153950"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>Maybe because Russia is adversarial country and Canada is not. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#153987"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>You seem to have an agenda that has nothing to do with the subject. Do the Clintons have an anti-virus program I'm not aware of? If not, I don't see the relevance to this discussion.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#154483"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>Of course not, they are more in the pro-virus category.</p>