NSS Labs’ Anti-Trust Lawsuit Against AMTSO and Few Antimalware Vendors Filed
NSS Labs, a non-profit cybersecurity benchmarking firm has launched an anti-trust lawsuit against some antimalware companies and organizations due to an alleged conspiracy of preventing fair reviews of their security products. The accused are ESET, CrowdStrike, Symantec and the Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organizations. NSS Labs names them in the lawsuit for teaming with AMTSO in order to promulgate rules that prevent independent testers from conducting fair testing of antimalware products, to the detriment of the public.
“NSS Labs, the world’s leading provider of cybersecurity testing services, is the direct target of a conspiracy among the EPP Vendor Conspirators, orchestrated in whole or in part through AMTSO, to restrict competition in the testing of cybersecurity products that are critical to, but often fail at, the protection of computer systems operated by governments, businesses and consumers. NSS Labs already has suffered substantial damages flowing from the antitrust injury it suffered as a result of the conspiracy and will suffer further injury, including irreparable injury such as permanent loss of market share, unless the acts in furtherance of the conspiracy are enjoined,” explained NSS Labs in their formal lawsuit.
AMTSO is supposed to be an independent organization which promotes definitive standards for fair and standard testing of corporate endpoint products developed by the antimalware industry. NSS Labs has maintained their position that defects of the products from ESET, CrowdStrike, and Symantec were detected during their independent test. But these vendors conspired, with the partnership of AMTSO to conceal this information to the public. NSS accused the vendors named in the suit of trying to bypass the test against their products instead of submitting themselves to the evaluation. AMTSO is behind an alleged defective policy that antimalware testing should comply with their (biased) requirement, or else the testing cannot be done.
Testing groups such as AV-Comparatives, AV-TEst and SKD Labs have expressly communicated their dissatisfaction with AMTSO regulation, they see it as just limiting their evaluation to distort the final result of the test. Vikram Phatak, CEO of NSS Labs emphasized: “We tell customers about those deficiencies. As you can imagine, this can hurt a vendor's sales. So, what is a vendor to do? Some (the good ones) fix their products. Others try to avoid being tested. urther, vendors are openly exerting control and collectively boycotting testing organizations that don't comply with their AMTSO standards -- even going so far as to block the independent purchase and testing of their products. Rather, AMTSO and the AMTSO Testing Standard exist solely to enable product vendors to avoid competition on quality and price with no offsetting benefits to competition.”
On their part, CrowdStrike express confidence that the suit has no basis. “NSS is a for-profit, pay-to-play testing organization that obtains products through fraudulent means and is desperate to defend its business model from open and transparent testing. We believe their lawsuit is baseless.
CrowdStrike supports independent and standards-based testing -- including public testing -- for our products and for the industry. We have undergone independent testing with AV-Comparatives, SE Labs, and MITRE and you can find information on that testing here. We applaud AMTSO's efforts to promote clear, consistent, and transparent testing standards.”
Symantec has declined to comment and expressed their desire to defend itself by facing the lawsuit in the court. ESET’s spokesperson made a blanket denial of NSS Labs accusation: “We are unable to say more at this time, beyond the statement that we categorically deny the allegations. Our customers should be reassured that ESET's products have been rigorously tested by many independent third-party reviewers around the world, received numerous awards for their level of protection of end users over many years, and are widely praised by industry-leading specialists.”
Phatak expressly mentioned that if there are other vendors that end-up being in conspiracy with the accused, they are ready to add them to the respondents to the case. NSS Labs continue to assert that they will never surrender their fight for an antimalware market that truly cares for the security of the public.
“NSS Labs, the world’s leading provider of cybersecurity testing services, is the direct target of a conspiracy among the EPP Vendor Conspirators, orchestrated in whole or in part through AMTSO, to restrict competition in the testing of cybersecurity products that are critical to, but often fail at, the protection of computer systems operated by governments, businesses and consumers. NSS Labs already has suffered substantial damages flowing from the antitrust injury it suffered as a result of the conspiracy and will suffer further injury, including irreparable injury such as permanent loss of market share, unless the acts in furtherance of the conspiracy are enjoined,” explained NSS Labs in their formal lawsuit.
AMTSO is supposed to be an independent organization which promotes definitive standards for fair and standard testing of corporate endpoint products developed by the antimalware industry. NSS Labs has maintained their position that defects of the products from ESET, CrowdStrike, and Symantec were detected during their independent test. But these vendors conspired, with the partnership of AMTSO to conceal this information to the public. NSS accused the vendors named in the suit of trying to bypass the test against their products instead of submitting themselves to the evaluation. AMTSO is behind an alleged defective policy that antimalware testing should comply with their (biased) requirement, or else the testing cannot be done.
Testing groups such as AV-Comparatives, AV-TEst and SKD Labs have expressly communicated their dissatisfaction with AMTSO regulation, they see it as just limiting their evaluation to distort the final result of the test. Vikram Phatak, CEO of NSS Labs emphasized: “We tell customers about those deficiencies. As you can imagine, this can hurt a vendor's sales. So, what is a vendor to do? Some (the good ones) fix their products. Others try to avoid being tested. urther, vendors are openly exerting control and collectively boycotting testing organizations that don't comply with their AMTSO standards -- even going so far as to block the independent purchase and testing of their products. Rather, AMTSO and the AMTSO Testing Standard exist solely to enable product vendors to avoid competition on quality and price with no offsetting benefits to competition.”
On their part, CrowdStrike express confidence that the suit has no basis. “NSS is a for-profit, pay-to-play testing organization that obtains products through fraudulent means and is desperate to defend its business model from open and transparent testing. We believe their lawsuit is baseless.
CrowdStrike supports independent and standards-based testing -- including public testing -- for our products and for the industry. We have undergone independent testing with AV-Comparatives, SE Labs, and MITRE and you can find information on that testing here. We applaud AMTSO's efforts to promote clear, consistent, and transparent testing standards.”
Symantec has declined to comment and expressed their desire to defend itself by facing the lawsuit in the court. ESET’s spokesperson made a blanket denial of NSS Labs accusation: “We are unable to say more at this time, beyond the statement that we categorically deny the allegations. Our customers should be reassured that ESET's products have been rigorously tested by many independent third-party reviewers around the world, received numerous awards for their level of protection of end users over many years, and are widely praised by industry-leading specialists.”
Phatak expressly mentioned that if there are other vendors that end-up being in conspiracy with the accused, they are ready to add them to the respondents to the case. NSS Labs continue to assert that they will never surrender their fight for an antimalware market that truly cares for the security of the public.
Post a Comment