Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 321 posts

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#91

Post by bilbo0s »

rooshdi wrote: post #25
joshmaker wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Iran is a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treat ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treat... ) and their development of Nuclear weapons is thus in violation of international law.

Violation of international law huh...as long as the law doesn't apply to America or Israel I guess: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law_and_Israeli_s... http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/29/us-israel-nuclear-... Oh, that and the fact that America and Israel can't trust anyone but themselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5-9aAFvWXA

Uhh...

What?

Have you read the NPT? And are you able to point to the sections that the US is in violation of along with the evidence proving that violation?

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#92

Post by andylei »

cynoclast wrote: post #62
ck2 wrote: post #28

It's a new cold war. Eventually Iran will write viruses in return to attack US power grid. All fun and games until Homeland Security Theater is given new powers to raid your home and shoot your dog if they think your computer is being used as part of a botnet.

No, we are the aggressors here and I remain highly skeptical that Iran is even trying to do develop nuclear weapons. All the news outlets that speak English are biased as hell on this. If you want real news instead of propaganda you have to watch RT or Al Jazeera. Both of which condemn the US and Israel. Not Iran.

>> Both of which condemn the US and Israel. Not Iran.

you know, its possible that the US, Israel, AND Iran are all doing bad things. just because Iran is not being condemned by a some media organizations does not mean it has any meaningful high ground.

why are you skeptical that iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons? if they weren't, why would they be developing secret enrichment facilities? why would "The IAEA Board of Governors passed a resolution[186] by a vote of 32–2 that expressed "deep and increasing concern" over the possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program" (from wikipedia)?

and more importantly, israel and the us are clearly concerned about iranian nuclear weapons development. it seems as if private intelligence lines up with public intelligence. why are you so confident that everybody else is wrong and you are right?

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#93

Post by elarkin »

philiphodgen wrote: post #82

The fact that the NYT published this piece is interesting. Assume all details are true. Why did the dog bark rather than choose to be silent? And the sources. Assume all of this is true? Why feed the info to the NYT? When coupled with recent revelations that Mr. Obama personally approves every killing of militants (for certain strained definitions of that term), the upcoming election springs to mind as a motivation.…

Likely the person(s) who spoke out now feel a burden lifted from their conscience.

If the information is true, it surprises me that it has stayed hidden for so long.

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#94

Post by talmand »

nicholassmith wrote: post #55

You know what's most surprising about this? That the developers, knowing fine well it was for a single target and the damage it could do in the wild, didn't implement a kill switch. Quite frankly cowboy coding like that is why we'll end up with Skynet becoming self-aware.

Actually, in this case, a kill switch would be a bad idea for the original coders. It opens the possibility of the target rendering the attack pointless.

Imagine a tank with a nice big, red button that shuts down the internal systems instantly. Now imagine that button on the outside of the tank. Sure, you could put some kind of password encoded lock on the button but it's a huge START HERE sign on the outside of the protection of the tank.

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#95

Post by [deleted] »

philiphodgen wrote: post #82

The fact that the NYT published this piece is interesting. Assume all details are true. Why did the dog bark rather than choose to be silent? And the sources. Assume all of this is true? Why feed the info to the NYT? When coupled with recent revelations that Mr. Obama personally approves every killing of militants (for certain strained definitions of that term), the upcoming election springs to mind as a motivation.…

[deleted]

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#96

Post by [deleted] »

philiphodgen wrote: post #82

The fact that the NYT published this piece is interesting. Assume all details are true. Why did the dog bark rather than choose to be silent? And the sources. Assume all of this is true? Why feed the info to the NYT? When coupled with recent revelations that Mr. Obama personally approves every killing of militants (for certain strained definitions of that term), the upcoming election springs to mind as a motivation.…

[deleted]

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#97

Post by gaius »

cynoclast wrote: post #62
ck2 wrote: post #28

It's a new cold war. Eventually Iran will write viruses in return to attack US power grid. All fun and games until Homeland Security Theater is given new powers to raid your home and shoot your dog if they think your computer is being used as part of a botnet.

No, we are the aggressors here and I remain highly skeptical that Iran is even trying to do develop nuclear weapons. All the news outlets that speak English are biased as hell on this. If you want real news instead of propaganda you have to watch RT or Al Jazeera. Both of which condemn the US and Israel. Not Iran.

So here's the thing with news: it's expensive to run a news operation, and almost impossible to make any money doing it, since there is so much competition. All serious news operations get their funding elsewhere. The BBC is funded by the UK taxpayer (and thus behaves like a branch of the civil service). Reuters is funded by its financial services wing (the point of it is to provide news to traders, who will then trade via Reuters). Al-Jazeera is funded by the local Sheikh. Once you understand this, all the inherent biases become obvious.

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#98

Post by technoslut »

cynoclast wrote: post #62
ck2 wrote: post #28

It's a new cold war. Eventually Iran will write viruses in return to attack US power grid. All fun and games until Homeland Security Theater is given new powers to raid your home and shoot your dog if they think your computer is being used as part of a botnet.

No, we are the aggressors here and I remain highly skeptical that Iran is even trying to do develop nuclear weapons. All the news outlets that speak English are biased as hell on this. If you want real news instead of propaganda you have to watch RT or Al Jazeera. Both of which condemn the US and Israel. Not Iran.

Much of the news is based on propaganda and assumptions.

>No, we are the aggressors here and I remain highly skeptical that Iran is even trying to do develop nuclear weapons.

You may believe that but it doesn't make it so. There was a recent story about how UN inspectors found traces of uranium that were enriched higher than they were supposed to be for civilian purposes.

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#99

Post by wissler »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #64
wissler wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The centrifuges could have been destroyed, and with loss of human life. The system itself was damaged. I wouldn't call this a "cold" war. It is a very real, very physical war(albeit precisely targeted, for now).

The same sort of stuff used to happen during the Cold War with the Soviets [1]. Cold War doesn't mean no loss of life or destruction, just that there aren't two armies going at it on the battlefield. 1. http://www.damninteresting.com/the-farewell-dossier/

"Cold War doesn't mean no loss of life or destruction, just that there aren't two armies going at it on the battlefield"

If so, then "cold" vs. "hot" would be a distinction without a difference.

I don't think the populace is generally educated to think that a "cold war" means "overt attacks on the enemy producing destruction and death." Rather, I think most people think that "cold war" means heightened political/military tension without overt attacks.

To define a "cold war" as one in which no soldiers are used is fallacious: it's a definition by non-essentials. What is relevant to war is whether there is a systematically planned and ongoing violent attacks, not whether soldiers happen to be the means of attack.

Re: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it

#100

Post by acuozzo »

lambersley wrote: post #84
why-el wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might have read you wrong, but in case you meant China doesn't have nuclear power, you are mistaken.

I believe the point is, what if a cold war scenario was to happen between China and USA; China being nuclear-equipped

> I believe the point is, what if a cold war scenario was to happen between China and USA; China being nuclear-equipped

It wouldn't matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_assured_destruction

Post reply on HN