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

The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

quora.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 507 posts

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#281

Post by ishaanbahal »

wepple wrote: post #199
trisimix wrote: post #193

So what if I run my top secret weapons grade uranium producing plant on a sanely secure operating system, like linux.

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but if not: the idea that Linux is any more secure against a nation state than windows is ridiculous. There are no shortage of regular vulns discovered in each part of the Linux OS as used by stuxnet.

Yeah, I never understood why people think like this. I often read people saying Linux is most secure or some Unix or Mac, Any operating system can be equally vulnerable, humans are writing code for it after all. And blaming Microsoft for the insecure OS seems even worse. Their OS runs on way too many machines, making it the first target. I love linux, not for the security, but just for the utilities on the command line I can use. I'd feel equally unsafe on either OS!

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#283

Post by azernik »

Sangermaine wrote: post #272
kbutler wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MAD is a local maximum of peace, but only if we define "peace" to include "tense standoff". It appears to be the best we can do in the presence of overwhelmingly powerful offensive capabilities. Imagine the different "peace" if instead we had overwhelmingly powerful defensive capabilities.

But everyone would have to have those, or else the first country to develop them would have an insurmountable advantage. A country that has both nuclear weapons and the ability to block all attacks including nuclear would rule the world, or at least dominate it without opposition.

Hence the local maximum.

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#284

Post by eddywebs »

It is worth noting the stuxnet worm version that effected Iranian nuclear facilities only attacked certain industrial controlled system built by Siemens systems otherwise the worm stays dormant. The wormed allegedly had signed drivers which could be state sponsored inside job to get signing facilitated.

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#285

Post by throwaway77384 »

ardent_uno wrote: post #212
erkkie wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only in a western welfare bubble. Morality over war is what you can afford having other security needs taken care of.

The western world has developed institutions that give it security. Once those parts of the world ravaged by war do the same, they too will enjoy peace and stability.

Well, we're undoing these institutions with an ever-growing fervor, as we appease the insecurities of a few rich and powerful people by handing them yet another election and yet another few units of currency on top of their almost unimaginably huge mountain of existing wealth.

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#286

Post by bdamm »

superflyguy wrote: post #227
indescions_2018 wrote: post #113

Stuxnet changed history. Any "game of chicken" style equilibria is broken if the probability a nuclear actor's command and control drops below 100%. If there is even a 1% chance that when a Big Red Button is pushed the missiles fail to launch the game becomes unwinnable. Simulations of imperfect information in dynamic brinkmanship where both players are known to have advanced cyber capabilities results in a single dr…

That's all very well but theory and maths aren't too relevant when the man behind the button is an illiterate cretin.

Removal from position due to medical incapacity is not only a real transfer of power mechanism but also fairly easy for the Vice President to do, assuming that the Secret Service agrees.

Remember, the Secret Service works for the US Treasury.

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#287

Post by yummybear »

donald_fump wrote: post #270
yummybear wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without any kind of metric for “sophisticated” it’s all subjective anyhow. I like Stuxnet as an example - it’s devious and a true hacker approach, albeit as blackhat as they come.

i think for something to be sophisticated we are looking at how complex it is. this worm does nothing new in that regard (taking advantage of 0days, hiding, covering tracks etc.) it is no more sophisticated than a regular worm. quora is a fucking joke.

Personally, I think the Stuxnet work is comparable to a Rube Goldberg contraption.

So you could ask, is a RG machine more sophisticated than say a computer - maybe not on a strictly technical level, but again without a metric, it's all about how we feel about it.

Anyways, I thought it was a great writeup that explains at least one aspect of what sophisticated software is, in a language most anyone could understand.

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#288

Post by fredley »

perlgeek wrote: post #236

I'd argue that Google Search is much more sophisticated than Stuxnet. Windows is much more sophisticated. Linux is more sophisticated than Stuxnet. The list goes on. We tend to ignore the sophistication of things we are familiar with, and hype those that surprise. But that's not a fair measure of anything.

Windows certainly has more undiscovered Windows/Driver exploits in it than Stuxnet ever had!

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#289

Post by donald_fump »

ktpsns wrote: post #278
eberkund wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But do those things really contribute to the sophistication of the software? For example imagine some code written with no understanding of uranium enrichment: const int CENTRIFUGE_RPM = 500; And then some other code written with a deep understanding of uranium enrichment: const int CENTRIFUGE_RPM = 1203; Can you really say that the second bit of code is more "complex"? Same goes for stolen driver signing keys and so…

The complexity or quality of a software code does not neccessarily say anything about the complexity of the problem it solves.

so true. upvoted

Re: The Stuxnet worm may be the most sophisticated software ever written

#290

Post by coldtea »

eberkund wrote: post #276
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my view, the sophistication is implied by the breadth of expertise required to put the whole thing together. Google Search and the OS landscape are for sure broad and sophisticated. However, their development was accomplished by computer scientists. In order for stuxnet to be effective, it was necessary to employ expertise in: - Uranium enrichment methods and processes - Capital equipment control systems and their…

But do those things really contribute to the sophistication of the software? For example imagine some code written with no understanding of uranium enrichment: const int CENTRIFUGE_RPM = 500; And then some other code written with a deep understanding of uranium enrichment: const int CENTRIFUGE_RPM = 1203; Can you really say that the second bit of code is more "complex"? Same goes for stolen driver signing keys and so…

>Can you really say that the second bit of code is more "complex"?

Yes.

Complexity in the sense discussed is related to the domain knowledge (including CS knowledge) required for the program to be written and work well.

Else even a trivial BS program could be very complex, just sprinkle it with gotos and unnecessarily convoluted code...

Post reply on HN