If I'm not mistaken, isn't Kaspersky Labs one of the best(or were) anti-virus vendors out there?
That's the rub. They are rated very well, and work very hard- but their potential associations, which are vehemently denied by their founder (CEO?) who shares the company name, aren't positively separable from their enterprise.
It's like Cisco and the NSA: you knew that the NSA could do whatever they wanted with Cisco products, and you knew that you'd probably never actually know- absent leaks, you wouldn't. You can't even assume that Cisco really 'knew'. Assume the FSB (and federal counterparts) are similarly effective, and Mr. Kaspersky can deny associations all he wants and have a legitimately market-leading product, but he'll never erase suspicion.
Which I find unfortunate; I'd hoped that our global fortunes were going in the opposite direction. However, [politics, heads up JBI] given the gap in hard power/military prowess, expect global US adversaries to invest in soft power and cyber power as they can to counter.
They can't jump ahead in stealth composites, radars, or jet engines, for example, but they can surely bribe/blackmail/threaten (if even necessary in say China's case) software developers.