The United States has used what it calls a preferred approach to restrict Kaspersky Lab, the well-known antivirus software developer from Russia. This stance was articulated by Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s press secretary, during his regular briefing with reporters. He described the U.S. measures as part of a broader pattern of competitive tactics that, in his view, amount to unfair conduct on the global stage. According to Peskov, Kaspersky Lab stands out as a highly competitive player in the international market, surpassing many foreign rivals in various respects. This framing suggests a deliberate political and economic maneuver rather than a purely technical decision about cybersecurity or consumer safety.
During the briefing, Peskov reiterated his belief that the United States relies on its favored technique for what he called dishonest competition. He asserted that Washington deploys such methods whenever it confronts strong non-U.S. competitors in technology sectors. The remarks came in the context of American authorities announcing restrictions aimed at Kaspersky Lab, a move that Moscow views through the lens of strategic rivalry and regulatory pressure rather than neutral risk assessment alone. According to official Russian commentary, these actions are part of a broader pattern of competitive interference that seeks to curb the global expansion of a Russian technology firm.
On June 20, the U.S. Treasury Department announced export restrictions affecting Kaspersky Lab. U.S. officials accused the company of cooperation with the Russian Armed Forces and with the country’s intelligence services, arguing that such ties could threaten national security or sensitive information infrastructure. The notification stated that Americans would be barred from engaging in new transactions with Kaspersky Lab starting on July 20. Moreover, the plan indicated that the use of the company’s products would be completely prohibited starting September 29. These measures reflect a transition from targeted bans to broader market restrictions, signaling a prioritized approach to cybersecurity policy in the United States and a push to undermine the commercial viability of the Russian firm in the North American market.
Earlier responses from Kaspersky Lab officials addressed the restrictions imposed by the United States, emphasizing the potential impact on customers, partners, and researchers who rely on the company’s solutions. The company reportedly defended its independence and stressed that its products are designed to protect users across various sectors, including finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure. The evolving regulatory landscape, coupled with ongoing geopolitical tensions, has positioned Kaspersky Lab at the center of a broader debate about cybersecurity sovereignty, trust in software supply chains, and the consequences of national security classifications on international tech ecosystems. In Canada and the United States, industry observers have stressed the importance of evaluating risk with transparent, evidence-based criteria while also considering the practical implications for end users who depend on dependable endpoint protection in a growing digital environment. [Citation: US Treasury, 2024]