Stuxnet

[bascule]

Re: Stuxnet

Regardless of your feelings for (or against) the US, Israel, and Iran--do you consider this an act of war?

Yes, although one I'm not quite as morally opposed to as drones in Pakistan that are actually killing people but I'll leave that one where it is and return to the subject at hand ;)

[Thorn]

Re: Stuxnet

Regardless of your feelings for (or against) the US, Israel, and Iran--do you consider this an act of war?

No, IMO, it's more akin to something like spying: something that every nation takes part in, and then gets morally outraged over when the other guys do it.

In the case of Stuxnet, the net effect may have been more widespread in a given facility, but it's not much different from getting a spy to perform some sabotage.

Yes, although one I'm not quite as morally opposed to as drones in Pakistan that are actually killing people but I'll leave that one where it is and return to the subject at hand ;)

You surprise me with this. While I'm OK with drone attacks in and of themselves, drone attacks in a location where we are not officially providing military assistance, or not officially involved in hostilities, strike me as much more legally questionable than running code on on some computers in a nation that is openly hostile to us.

While I understand your reluctance to drag this off the topic of Stuxnet, per se, in some ways I see drones as the flip side of Stuxnet. Both are technology-driven attacks that reduce the amount of "boots on the ground." Generally, I'm OK with things that reduces the bad guys ability to strike at us (or reduces the bad guys themselves), and keeps the amount of our military guys getting shot at to a minimum. Drone and Stuxnet both so those things.

[bascule]

Re: Stuxnet

No, IMO, it's more akin to something like spying: something that every nation takes part in, and then gets morally outraged over when the other guys do it.

In the case of Stuxnet, the net effect may have been more widespread in a given facility, but it's not much different from getting a spy to perform some sabotage.

Sure, I'll accept that, but I'm not sure how to interpret a spy sabotaging their facility either

You surprise me with this.

I think you interpreted the intent of my statement the other way around. I think killing people is a lot worse than using malware to break centrifuges.

[theprez98]

Re: Stuxnet

No, IMO, it's more akin to something like spying: something that every nation takes part in, and then gets morally outraged over when the other guys do it.

I generally agree, although I think we (the US) might sound more outraged if/when it happened/happens to us.

[Thorn]

Re: Stuxnet

Sure, I'll accept that, but I'm not sure how to interpret a spy sabotaging their facility either

I think we can all agree that in a perfect world, nobody would need or want spies. The truth of it is that every nation does need them, and uses them a great deal, although it's probably much less 007 and much more of "Here's a $1000, now just give me a copy of those blueprints." Espionage is most likely tolerated by every nation for the simple reason it's a lot cheaper, as well as more expediant for a lot of stuff between diplomatics means and war.

Stuxnet just seems to be a logical jump in the spy game.

I think you interpreted the intent of my statement the other way around. I think killing people is a lot worse than using malware to break centrifuges.

Gotcha. That's much more consistent with your views in the past. I did interpert it backwards.

[astcell]

Re: Stuxnet

Not really an act of war. I see retaliation in kind. It would be hard to fight byes with bullets unless things got really serious like taking out ATMs and stuff (have you seen Prime Risk?). We hack them, they hack us, we play that game in the digital field.

[D0ct0r]

Re: Stuxnet

My question is has any new info surfaced about the few small files that have not been decoded?