Stuxnet Worm Claimed To Be Devastating In Iran

sciencewatcher writes "At debka.com, a website associated with intelligence communities focusing on the Middle East, the claim is made that Tehran this week secretly appealed to a number of computer security experts in West and East Europe with offers of handsome fees for consultations on ways to exorcise the Stuxnet worm spreading havoc through the computer networks and administrative software of its most important industrial complexes and military command centers."

Comments

So what's the word, people.

[Pojut]

Do you think the US did this in an official capacity, an "official" capacity, or had nothing to do with it?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they didn't. Proof: it worked.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Bert64]

Doesn't really matter either way...

Iran was grossly negligent in allowing their critical infrastructure to run on software controlled by a hostile government (and which they most likely had to pirate because there are export restrictions against iran).

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Randle_Revar]

If Stuxnet is attacking Iran, I'd bet on Israel (just) ahead of the US.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[davev2.0]

I think Iran did it to themselves.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[xaxa]

(and which they most likely had to pirate because there are export restrictions against iran).

For the US -- there's nothing stopping me selling computer software to Iran, unless that software is of military/nuclear/etc use (you can see the full details of what's not allowed here (the PDF)).

Re:So what's the word, people.

[John Hasler]

So would I, but I'd put Israel way ahead. However, I don't discount the possibility that no government was involved.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Trevelyan]

It's more likely to have been Israel.

For example this story, note that its from 2009 but still make a pretty good description of how stuxnet works. Google or following the links on stuxnet news stories will bring up other possible links to Israel.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Darkness404]

...Except for the fact that encryption software is often times classified as "military" technology, making the distribution of most software impossible.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Drakkenmensch]

You assume that they couldn't find an ethically bankrupt businessman willing to sell them things under the table. Think George Bluth Sr. from Arrested Development.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[onepoint]

I am not sure, but I do recall that anything above a 56 bit encryption is not ok to export outside of the USA back in 2003, I am not up to the rules and reg of current time.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Goaway]

It's been brought up in pretty much every single discussion of this I've seen so far.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[chill]

Crypto in U.S. law was removed from the munitions classification back in 1996 by then President Clinton.

Shortly thereafter one of the exemptions granted was for open source. If the source code was freely available, you don't need an export license.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[gyranthir]

For the US, Cuba, Iran, Syria, Libia and a bunch of other countries are under an embargo, where american companies cannot export to them...

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Iran did it to themselves.

THIS is the message we should promote. That's what they say about us, right?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Hijacked Public]

So they should have built their own software to run on S7 PLCs? What country that you know of does that? Do you know of any country that does? If so name them, because I've been to dozens and never seen anything of the sort.

They could have probably run a lot of their automation with relay logic, but at a significantly increased cost.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Rob Riggs]

The U.S.? No. There's a far more likely suspect...

Re:So what's the word, people.

[NatasRevol]

Well given that they're running Windows for critical infrastructure & military command centers - apparently without AV, I'd say that yes, they did do it to themselves.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[rootchick]

Maybe it was extraterrestrials: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/188021

Re:So what's the word, people.

[bsDaemon]

Clinton issued an executive order placing cryptographic software under the dominion of the Commerce Department with regards to export, and the Commerce Department simplified export rules to make things easier. However, they can always take it back, its not law, just policy.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[rtb61]

The catch with the whole theory of a software hack, the stuxnet worm is far too tightly tied to Iran, hardware is far more likely to be the culprit rather than software. So hardware infrastructure in Iran, well if it was sourced from China or Russia likely safe, except of course in companies head quartered elsewhere were involved.

So access to windows source and Siemens PLC seems a must, so the really only leaves two suspects. Now if the worm in industrials plants result of industrial accidents that kill people, then clearly it would be an act of war, which would be pretty stupid because there are far more effective means of crippling infrastructure with far more primitive methods.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[phoenix321]

There are few means more effective that still enable the source to remain hidden and sheltered in plausible denial.

A JDAM will yield much more conclusive evidence than a stealthy virus. Additionally, getting bombed with laser guided munitions will garner support, getting bombed with a computer virus only garners ridicule.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[mysidia]

You don't need an export license, but you are still prohibited from exporting to countries or individuals on the prohibited countries / prohibited persons list, that Iran happens to be on. That is, Iran is still both an ITAR prohibited country, and an OFAC Embargoed country.

The revisions to the crypto regulation in the US allowed you to export, you are still required to make sure you never export to anyone that is on the list or that you have cause to believe is on that list, otherwise the person(s) responsible can be criminally liable.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[phoenix321]

Probably because Israel is of all countries the most interested in Iran and their nuclear program. No surprise, with Iran's leaders announcing the wipe-out of the "Zionist Entity" every other week, then in one single weekend starting up a nuclear plant AND unveil a new tactical missile capable of reaching Tel Aviv.

But even if they made Stuxnet, I could not hold it against them. What would we do in their situation? Lie down and wait for help? Make peace with the world and pray? "Never Again" is probably the most important manifest of Israel and that might take more than laying down a few flowers at Yad Vashem once a year.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[commodore64_love]

The issuing of executive orders (i.e. making law) is unconstitutional.

Only the Congress was tasked with making laws, so Clinton's XO is null-and-void if it runs contrary to existing Congressional acts. So - where does the Congress assign cryptographic software? Free trade or restricted export? That's the question that matters.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you think the US did this in an official capacity, an "official" capacity, or had nothing to do with it?

Do you think the US did this in an official capacity, an "official" capacity, an official "capacity", an "official" "capacity", that the US "did" this in an "official" "capacity", that the "US" did this, that the US ordered this, that the US sponsored this, that the US suggested this, or that you're foolish enough to think the US is nothing but a happy fluffy cloud heaven of rainbows and unicorns and everything's happy and good like the stupid, stupid sheeple you are and that I hate just so much and I hate you?

I mean, seriously, the hate-the-US attitude is cute and all, and I know it's the most common attitude here in Slashdot, but you can at least TRY to be subtle about it so you don't come off as a generic crank.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[MyLongNickName]

You might want to read about a similar feat performed by the U.S. Government here

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Drakkenmensch]

I always felt that there was a great joke opportunity missed when George tells Michael about the "light treason." It should have gone like this:

George: "You can't convict a husband and wife of the same crime."

Michael: "That's stupid, of course you can."

George: "Oh yeah? Says who, smart guy?"

Michael: "Says the Rosenbergs."

Re:So what's the word, people.

[MyLongNickName]

The issuing of executive orders (i.e. making law) is unconstitutional.

Some people have this opinion. However, that has not been the position of the courts or congress. in fact this practice has happened since at least the beginning of the nineteenth century (possibly 18th as well... they didn't keep records of exec orders until mid 20th century I think). Thus the rest of your statement is meaningless.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[John Hasler]

Wrong. Certain classes of products are embargoed. Most non-military stuff can be exported to Iran from the USA. The embargo on Libya has been mostly lifted. Some things can even be exported to Cuba and even North Korea.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[John Hasler]

> So access to windows source and Siemens PLC seems a must...

I see no need for access to Windows source, and anyone can buy the Siemens hardware.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Nadaka]

It is possible. It wouldn't be the first time a wealthy individual spent a ton of cash to lash out at his governments he felt offended by. Just look at Bin Laden.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[GooberToo]

So access to windows source and Siemens PLC seems a must, so the really only leaves two suspects.

Actually, access to Window's source absolutely does not seem a must. But regardless, obtaining it is likely trivial. I know I've seen references to it on the net before. Any student and/or spy attending any number of various universities have access to it. Accordingly, it has been periodically freed on the Internet.

You're also missing the fact that Iranians themselves have reason to do this type of thing. Iranians, on average, are far more educated than the average American. Lots work in industry. They likely have no shortage of people who are fully capable and qualified to pull off such worms. Not to mention, politically speaking, they have almost endless justification.

If you want to be honest about it, the Iranian people themselves are the number one group which have reasons to pull this off. Next are the Israelis, followed by other surrounding Arab nations, Europe, and then lastly the US, followed by lots of smaller, less interested parties.

People seem to be in a hurry to forget that with the fall of Iraq, Iran now has center stage for regional power and authority. This is absolutely not acceptable to other Arab countries in the region.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Nadaka]

AV only protects against known threats.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[chill]

Meh. The main reason this was done was because the crypto was already out there in every other country in the world. Remember PGPi? It was foolish to say "no 128-bit crypto software from the U.S." when the same software was freely and readily available from Finland, Switzerland or anywhere else. Horse. Barn Door. Close it?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[somersault]

Oh that's okay then, that must mean that there are no ethically bankrupt business men in the real world. Thanks for clearing that up! Wait, didn't I see a TV show that had a fictitious cop on it once? That means the Police force doesn't exist!..? How am I going to sleep safely at night? :(

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Anonymous Coward]

(and which they most likely had to pirate because there are export restrictions against iran).

For the US -- there's nothing stopping me selling computer software to Iran, unless that software is of military/nuclear/etc use (you can see the full details of what's not allowed here (the PDF)).

Iran is deemed a "State Sponsor of Terrorism" - http://www.state.gov/s/ct/c14151.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran

If you sell ANY software to Iran that they *could* then use in their supposed nuclear or ballistic weapons programs, you are fucked. Sure, you can argue your TODO List reminder program is benign, but heck, can you counter that it *could* be used to keep the U235 enrichment on target?? Are you willing to spend next 20 years in jail for that?

For the US,
    1. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism (Hezbolah being one)
    2. Iran wants to develop nuclear capability
    3. Iran is under UN sanctions preventing and restricting sales of dual-use equipment, software and processes.

I suspect the only computer expects Iran will be talking to will be either,
    1. threatened or put in jail for violating UN sanctions, or
    2. be foreign intelligence officers

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Low Ranked Craig]

Nothing to do with it. I think you mean Israel.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[blueZ3]

I used to work on SCADA systems documentation in a former job.

You'd be horrified to know how much SCADA stuff in the U.S. runs on Windows. You'd be hiding in your bomb shelter if you realized how many of those Windows systems are old and unpatched. And you'd be a quivering blob of liquefied terror if you grasped many of those systems are connected (in one way or another) to the Internet.

On another note though--it's at least possible that this is the work of the Iranian opposition, it's agents, or supporters. However, I think that the most likely culprit is Isreal; at this point they have to realize that Obama's "open hand" policy has utterly failed and that the Iranians are on the verge of building a bomb and using it to eliminate the "Zionist enemy" once and for all.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[MyLongNickName]

um.... did this have anything to do with my post?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Compaqt]

Yeah, but Germany isn't hostile to Iran, and German and other European companies do billions worth of business with Iran.

German Embassy in Iran

German-Iran cooperation in creating an energy-efficient city

(It's in German, just translate it with Chrome.)

Not that a 3rd party couldn't have come along and broken the weak security.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[nedlohs]

Microsoft is an American company. Hence, US export restrictions apply to Microsft Windows - irrespective of where you happen to be.

Microsoft can't export it, and others can't buy it from Microsoft and then export it to Iran without also violating US law. Now those non-US folk mightn't care about that (though once the US supplier finds out they can't keep legally keep supplying), but it does violate the licensing on the software from Microsoft and hence all copies of Microsoft Windows do not have valid licenses which makes them pirated software by definition.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[bsDaemon]

So... its unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue an Executive Order to Executive Branch agencies, telling them how he thinks they should act, within their Legislatively mandated authority to craft details of policy implementation within the scope of the legislation in question?

Just because its a bitch move doesn't make it unconstitutional.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[divisionbyzero]

Now if the worm in industrials plants result of industrial accidents that kill people, then clearly it would be an act of war, which would be pretty stupid because there are far more effective means of crippling infrastructure with far more primitive methods.

Not if it is built into the side of a mountain, like, say, a nuclear fuel processing plant.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Yvan256]

It is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy - John McCain

Re:So what's the word, people.

[LanMan04]

Except for the fact that encryption software is often times classified as "military" technology, making the distribution of most software impossible.

Yeah, like 15 years ago.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[penix1]

The issuing of executive orders (i.e. making law) is unconstitutional.

You are 100% wrong.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Executive+Order

I refer you to the following:

Absent specific statutory authority, an executive order may have the force and effect of law if Congress has acquiesced in a long-standing executive practice that is well-known to it. For example, in Dames v. Regan, 453 U.S. 654, 101 S. Ct. 2972, 69 L. Ed. 2d 918 (1981), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld various executive orders that suspended claims of U.S. nationals arising out of the Iranian hostage crisis, citing Congress's Acquiescence in a 180-year-old practice of settling U.S. citizens' claims against foreign governments by executive agreement.

That is settled law, in short, the law of the land. And...

Executive orders also may be authorized by the president's independent constitutional authority (Cunningham v. Neagle, 135 U.S. 1, 10S. Ct. 658, 34 L. Ed. 55 [1890]). Various clauses of the U.S. Constitution have been cited to support the issuance of executive orders. Among them are the Vestiture Clause, which states, "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America" (art. II, 1, cl. 1); the Take Care Clause, which states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" (art. II, 3); and the Commander in Chief Clause, which states that the president "shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States" (art. II, 2, cl. 1).

Even though they are executive policies, they still carry the weight of law.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[DavidTC]

Um, no.

The executive branch was granted the power, by Congress, to make rules and regulations about exporting munitions. Previous administrations put the entirety of that power under the State Department, which had really strict rules. Clinton's order just move encryption under the Commerce Department instead of the State Department, and the Commerce Department is a lot less paranoid. (Other munitions are still under State.)

I love how people have heard about Bush's illegal signing statements, learn they are like 'executive orders', and now presume all executive orders are illegal.

Executive orders, and signing statements, (which are just executive orders that get carried along with bills), are mostly used for the president to decide things that are left for him to decide under the law.

Congress gives the President a budget and the power to do something, he signs the bill and writes an executive order (Or attaches a signing statement to the bill as he signs it, so it will always be with that bill.) making an Office of Doing That Thing in the Department of Whatever, and gives them the money.

Executive orders are just public statements of policy that the executive branch must follow, they are not 'laws', and they move power around within the executive, they don't give the executive any power.

Bush, of course, did a lot of nonsense, things like signing a bill into law and, at the same time, asserting that no one has to follow it. This was obviously bad.

But you really need a basic civics lesson about how the executive works and about how Congress gives it powers. Very often, Congress gives 'regulatory power' over things to the executive, along with a few specific regulations, and the executive branch is in charge of figuring all that out, because you don't want the damn Congress figuring out licensing fees from a Chicago TV station or what roads to build in a national forest. Congress gives the executive branch the power to figure that out, and the President writes orders putting that power under the FCC or the National Parks Service.

Of course, often Congress does specify where in the executive branch things go, and even creates new offices, which the president cannot override. This is generally frowned upon at levels lower than cabinet positions....Congress creates the top level Departments, and maybe one level below that, but generally shouldn't be micromanaging within the offices, as it makes any sort of reorganization difficult. I.e., they create the Department of Homeland Security, and put the FBI (and others) within it, and assign specific crimes for the FBI to handle...but they shouldn't really be creating offices in the FBI to handle those crimes. (Because, over time, crimes change, and the FBI might find itself with one nearly empty office and one overworked one. I mean, at one time it would have made sense to have a 'train robbery' division.)

Congress can do that, though, legally. They just shouldn't, and don't, so it's up to the president to issue executive orders.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[guanxi]

Iran was grossly negligent in allowing their critical infrastructure to run on software controlled by a hostile government

That's a problem without an easy solution, and a serious security issue that is attracting attention. Most IT assets are assembled from components made all over the world -- code, chips, etc. I don't know if it's possible to find something that was made 100% domestically; if it exists, I don't know who could identify it. And certainly, you can't meet all IT requirements that way.

For example, must every military custom manufacture every IT asset it uses, reinventing every bit of technology from integrated circuit manufacturing to operating systems to applications? That seems impossible, even for large wealthy countries. They would never keep up with competitors who use off-the-shelf technology, either in terms of development or cost. So what do you do? How do you know someone didn't slip in a backdoor someplace, in some bit of code, on some chip, or in some other hardware?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Plekto]

Possibly, but Iran even if they have a nuclear weapon won't possibly use it as it would mean 100% of their country would die due to Israel's 100-200 "unofficial but everyone knows they exist" warheads pointed its way. I'd honestly be more worried about Pakistan and a nuke or two getting sold off to some group in Afghanistan than thinking that Iran is stupid enough to actually do something like that at a future date.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[evanism]

The longer this goes on I think it will be Nazis.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Locke2005]

Connecting that critical infrastructure to the public internet was also a pretty meat-head move.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Dare nMc]

built their own software to run on S7 PLCs

To be fair, were not at a hostile level with Germany, so we may not have the same level of concern, for a foreign based software ownership (Siemiens)

It is fair to say the PLC's don't have to be always accessible from windows computers, Can be disconnected after verified... That connection is likely for SCADA (data logging/monitoring protocol to the S7), which is available for other operating systems.

A quick search shows these guys, among others:
http://www.modcomp.com/scada/scada_app.html

So it does seam for critical infrastructure they should have done a better job of hiding the foreign (and closed) software behind non foreign software (or completely disconnected from it.)

Re:So what's the word, people.

[thegameiam]

well said, with very minor nitpick: s/other Arab/Arab/ - whether Iraq is an Arab country (or Persian country) depends on who you ask, but I don't know of anyone with any knowledge of Iranian history who would call Iran an Arab country.

I have no knowledge of who's responsible for the worm, but Steve Bellovin wrote about it very intelligently.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[amber_of_luxor]

What does China have to gain from Iran?

I'm not questioning Chinese capability. Historically, it fits their pattern of espionage.
What I am questioning is why they would drop on Iran, rather than another country.

Amber

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Will.Woodhull]

Israel's concern about Iran is certainly much greater than the USA's, and no doubt they are heavily involved in the Stuxnet effort. But they are not in a position to lead the consortium that must have built the thing. Stuxnet's operations are so tightly constrained that it must have been developed with data shared from several intelligence agencies. I don't see Israel being able to convince Saudi Arabia or Turkey, or even Germany or Russia, to share such information with them.

The USA is uniquely positioned to have coordinated the building of a Stuxnet development effort. The kind of secret agreements and so on that would have to be hammered out are central to the job description of the USA Secretary of State, and the woman currently in that position has the intellect and the training to make this kind of thing possible.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[orzetto]

What, Libya? They are friends! We were never at war with Eurasia, it is with Estasia that we always have been at war.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Will.Woodhull]

Underground Iranian groups might well be involved, especially in distributing the USB sticks. But it would be impossible for any underground Iranian group to have gathered the intelligence data needed to so finely tune Stuxnet to the regime's infrastructure. That argues for the collaboration of nations that have established intelligence communities.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Will.Woodhull]

Or it could be the Internet itself, finally beginning to demonstrate its sentience...

cue Terminator references (mmm hot grits...)

Do you really think the similarity between "Stuxnet" and "Skynet" is merely coincidental?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Zak3056]

So they should have built their own software to run on S7 PLCs?

Well, they could have used with the Linux version of PCS7, which also supports S7 controllers (and the older 505 series controllers, too) but Siemens killed this product (which had a multi-decade track record--it was UNIX based before being ported to Linux in 2000-2001) in favor of the WinNT based PCS7.

Disclosure: I'm a former member of the dev team.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Iran is more multi-ethnic, culturally tolerant and inclusive than Israel, and offers greater suffrage and enfranchisement than does Israel.

But on DEBKA, you'll never hear how Jewish women in Israel are spit on in the streets of Jerusalem, for walking without a male escort.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[davev2.0]

Actually, the code is so well tuned, that it is unlikely external agencies would have the information required. It would not surprise me to find out that someone working at an infected plant was the inside man.

I also would not be surprised to find out that the Iranian government wrote it to release on some other nation, say Israel, but it accidentally was released on their own network and they just can't get ahead of it.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Zoxed]

IIRC the initial vector was an infected USB stick

Re:So what's the word, people.

[penix1]

Of course, often Congress does specify where in the executive branch things go, and even creates new offices, which the president cannot override. This is generally frowned upon at levels lower than cabinet positions....Congress creates the top level Departments, and maybe one level below that, but generally shouldn't be micromanaging within the offices, as it makes any sort of reorganization difficult. I.e., they create the Department of Homeland Security, and put the FBI (and others) within it, and assign specific crimes for the FBI to handle...but they shouldn't really be creating offices in the FBI to handle those crimes. (Because, over time, crimes change, and the FBI might find itself with one nearly empty office and one overworked one. I mean, at one time it would have made sense to have a 'train robbery' division.)

Funny you should bring up Homeland Security. That bill was the most God awful piece of crap that they landed in the Executive Branches lap that has ever come out of Congress.

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hr_5005_enr.pdf

Just look through the table of contents and you can see the Congressional micro-management going on. I remember the change, being in FEMA at the time, and it was terrible to endure. That bill needs to be revisited to remove FEMA from DHS for many reasons (including waste, fraud and abuse) and given a much smaller budget. It needs to become a coordinating agency between federal, state and local law enforcement agencies and the intelligence gathering communities. DHS needs to get out of the disaster business. DHS raiding of FEMA money and more importantly staff resources is a big part of why they are flailing about ineffectually on just about every disaster they try to run.

Another reason the agency is impotent is the micro-management Congress has enforced on this agency through this bill. DHS is a paranoid and schizophrenic agency. It is fragmented into so many compartments it is little wonder why they are ineffective.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[blueZ3]

You could pretty much completely wipe out Israel with a single nuke, providing it was big enough. Seriously--it's about the size of New Jersey.

And as far as I can tell, expecting rational behavior from the mullahs is... irrational.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Plekto]

Considering the number of people that survived Hiroshima as well as the fact that Iran's first bomb will be fairly small, low tech, and their missiles are fairly primitive(need about half a dozen to make sure one gets through), this sort of thinking honestly just doesn't work on so many levels. No matter how hard you want it to be so to fuel your conspiracy theories, Iran has zero real interest in anything other than making a lot of noise. Certainly not in doing something that will result in almost all of their population dying in a trade for half of Israel's and most of the Palestinians in Gaza.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[bfsull]

Either or both, but almost certainly one or the other. I would, however, put my money on the US. Read this story http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/09/the-point-of-no-return/8186 in The Atlantic for a discussion of some of the issues. The risk of a cyber attack are minimal vs. sending in the Israeli air force. Make no mistake- as they did in Iraq, Israel would not allow this facility to come online. I am certain the US is involved, with the help of one or several US computer security firms and maybe Microsoft itself, as well as Siemans. Notice that it was a Belarus computer security firm that found the worm- not a British, American or German one. (Or Japanese for that matter)

Re:So what's the word, people.

[GooberToo]

That was a goof on my part. I knew the distinction, I simply didn't express it correctly. I meant to say, "...surrounding Arab", but simply got lazy and said, "...other Arab...", which clearly implies inclusion. After I submitted and re-read I realized my error. I hoped it would be overlooked. Clearly it was not.

As a side, I tip my hat to you for politely correcting my misdeed rather than the typical grammar nazi attack which is oh-so-common on /.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[DavidTC]

Indeed, when I heard that FEMA was going into the DHS I was baffled.

FEMA in theory responses to security issues in a sense, but it's not actually aimed at security issues, and most of its job is natural disasters and manmade accidents. I don't actually know that it knows how to deal with security threats...it's supposed to fix problems, not figure out if the command center they just set up is about to get attacked.

I'd like to see it turned into an entirely coordinating agency, like you said. Either standalone, or under Health and Human Services, which puts it with the CDC and ATSDR in case there actually was some sort of biological or chemical attack. And the FDA if there's some sort of massive country-wide food or drug contamination that's large enough to be an emergency.

Also, I'd like to see the 'supply' aspects of it, where it stockpiles and supplies stuff to disasters, turned over to the National Guard, who are the actual people doing it anyway.

Or, hell, if FEMA's in HHS, there's always the PHSCC to use. That raises some interesting possibilities. If we're really going to use the National Guard to fight wars, it would be nice to have a military service that was entirely used for disaster response. The PHSCC, right now, is rather too small for that, but it could always add more categories like 'Flood containment expert' and whatnot, and expand.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[lonecrow]

You bet. If there was only one facility they could have just flown an F-15 over and bombed it like before. But if there are plenty of sites, or your just not sure where they all are, letting a worm sniff them out seems like an effective approach. A lot easier to deny to :)

Re:So what's the word, people.

[thegarbz]

Note that there were few trade restrictions between Iran and Germany (the motherland of Siemens who supplied critical infrastructure) before 2010.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[reset_button]

They are able to work and vote without restriction. That is not true of Christian and Muslim Arabs, living in Israel.

I bet you didn't know that you're incredibly wrong. Any Israeli citizen can vote, regardless of religion. There are currently 14 Muslim members in the Israeli parliament. Muslims study freely in Israeli universities and work in Israeli companies. The same is obviously not true for Jews in most Muslim countries.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

I'm not talking "most". I am talking Iran - as distinct from the Arab world, and South Asia as France is from Poland or Portugal.

More distinct, even. No EU!

Re:So what's the word, people.

[commodore64_love]

>>>that has not been the position of the courts or congress

The courts/congress have also claimed its okay for them to regulate INTRAstate commerce, and tell individual home owners how much corn & wheat they are allowed to grow (the rationing case: Wickard v. Filburn). But anybody with common sense can see the Constitution's 10th Amendment forbids Congress from doing that duty..... that said power is reserved to the States and the People, respectively.

So to assume the courts are the final word is a dangerous doctrine. It would place us under an Oligarchy (rule by 9 unelected men), instead of rule by the Law (the constitution). Plus they are often just flat wrong.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[commodore64_love]

>>>So... its unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue an Executive Order to Executive Branch agencies, telling them how he thinks they should act

It is. Take as example the recently-passed Healthcare Bill. The executive signed an order forbidding the use of these funds for Abortions. About a month later the Supreme Court ruled that XO to be unconstitutional - that Congressional law overrules it and allows funds for abortions.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[MyLongNickName]

If the courts are not the final arbiter (along with the other two branches), then what is? If you say your opinion, then what is your remedy?

Re:So what's the word, people.

[nedlohs]

Microsoft disagrees with you: http://www.microsoft.com/exporting/basics.htm

I suspect they have better lawyers than you.

Re:So what's the word, people.

[RockDoctor]

So - where does the Congress assign cryptographic software? Free trade or restricted export? That's the question that matters.

To jump back by several threads, IF and ONLY IF you give a fuck about what laws operate in America.
For those of us fortunate enough to not live in America, your question is of academic interest only.

And as the PGP shenanigans amply demonstrated, even if some cryptographic algorithm were developed solely in the USA, and then converted into compilable code there, then there is still nothing to prevent the code being printed out and exported in book form, then converted (by fat-fingers or OCR ; whatever) into back into compilable code out in the free world. That's without any hint of steganography to conceal the fact that you're exporting the algorithm. (Of course, the situation may have been changed since Zimmerman et al took the piss out of the law by exporting PGP, so that legal loophole may no longer exist. But I suspect that it is mathematically impossible to allow any type of communications and to successfully ban the communication of a certain type of idea. A sort of legalistic equivalent of the impossibility of successful DRM.

A communications disruption

[Shivetya]

A communications disruption can mean only one thing - invasion.

well, what better time to fix that pesky reactor.

wait, couldn't they fix it with one of these

[macfanboy]

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8907061756

Re:wait, couldn't they fix it with one of these

[Xest]

Why does this site try to resize your browser Window? Is this Iran's attempt at getting back at us Westerners for Stuxnet or something?

Re:wait, couldn't they fix it with one of these

[Jaysyn]

You're not running NoScript? Shame on you.

Re:wait, couldn't they fix it with one of these

[Xest]

On the contrary! I was being nosy and noticed the script right at the top in the opening body tag, hence why I asked why it tries to resize your browser.

why don't they

[Anonymous Coward]

why don't they just use firefox instead of ie??

Re:why don't they

[Ant P.]

Or computer systems certified for safety-critical installations, instead of Windows which flat out says not to use it for that in the EULA?

Re:why don't they

[Hijacked Public]

You don't understand industrial control systems. It isn't Windows that does any safety-critical controlling, it is a PLC, which is the target of Stuxnet's payload. Stuxnet just happens to use Windows to propagate, which is a good choice because nearly all PLC programming and interface software is Windows only. Anyone this telented could have written a Linux worm that did the same thing, but it would have been ineffective because Linux is hardly ever connected to a Siemens PLC. Windows being a bottomless pit of zero days doesn't help, of course.

Re:why don't they

[Missing.Matter]

This was a very targeted attack, very purposeful attack. I'm sure whatever the system architecture was it would have been compromised.

Re:why don't they

[TheLink]

Would Siemens using Linux instead of Windows even make a difference?

After all Siemens has advised customers not to change the default passwords in their product: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20011095-83.html

Re:why don't they

[Myopic]

even NetBSD?

Re:why don't they

[thegarbz]

Everyone keeps coming back to this point but on the flip side this again is quite common. It comes back to if you have physical access to the control system you're 0wn3d one way or the other. Every layer of control system design should absolutely prevent malicious access to the system, whether it be an offline system or a firewall with a one way interface talking to a sacrificial machine on the public side.

Many vendors recommend you don't change the default administration password for the PLC, many vendors even have an overriding password that they do not tell the customer about. The simple reason here is one of support. When the proverbials hit the fan you do not want to tell the plant manager that the reason the vendor can't fix their incredibly complicated piece of kit is that you changed the password. But that's the same for a lot of places. How many server administrators do you know who abide by the same password policies as joe average at the front desk?

Do you go around changing your Unix root passwords every 3 months with one at least 8 digits, containing at least one capital and one non alphanumeric number? Typically no because the level of exposure to king admin is a lot lower than joe average who has other people looking over his shoulders every morning when they log in. Think of it this way, does it hurt to write the login and password on the computer screen if the computer is located inside a bank vault and you're the only one who knows the combination to the door?

interesting

[roman_mir]

the only problem with this contract is just how much of a target one can become if one decided to go for the money and the fun of 'exorcising' the demon from the nuclear power plant (and whatever else) systems.

I guess...

[Anonymous Coward]

...it really stux to be iranian.

Re:I guess...

[ginbot462]

Stop stealing my sig! I rightfully stole this from some anon on another website!

(Wait, does this mean this wasn't a ultra-super rare pun drop?)

Re:I guess...

[blueZ3]

I thought you could only obtain that by trading in a Mr. Accessory

Does it run on Linux?

[G3ckoG33k]

Does it run on Linux? For once a relevant question... ;)

Re:Does it run on Linux?

[John Hasler]

The worm? "...Windows-specific..."

Re:Does it run on Linux?

[MBGMorden]

It doesn't. It's Windows-only and is typically first inserted through an infected USB stick after which it can spread throughout an internal LAN.

Anyone else find that site a litte skeevy?

[SlappyBastard]

I'm not a fan of quoting anything from a website whose motto is "We start where the media stop".

Re:Anyone else find that site a litte skeevy?

[Are You Kidding]

The observation is well taken. Prior to the Iraq war, Debka had a series of stories from "inside sources" who said that Sadam had constructed vast underground bunkers in the desert in which he had hidden his weapons of mass destruction. It is hard to tell whether a story on Debka is intelligence or propaganda.

Re:Anyone else find that site a litte skeevy?

[couchslug]

Getting technical information from Debka is like getting your foreign affairs info from the New York Daily News.

Re:Anyone else find that site a litte skeevy?

[AffidavitDonda]

Hmmm, Colin Powell must have read this before his speech to the United Nations...

Re:Anyone else find that site a litte skeevy?

[Will.Woodhull]

I don't believe I have ever visited Debka before, and I doubt I will again visit any time soon.

It seemed to me to be one of the CIA's interfaces for delivering dysinformation to the Grassy Knoll - Area 51 Aliens crowd.

But with that in mind, this particular article did seem germane to the Stuxnet story. The branch of the CIA that pumps out dysinformation is not going to have any direct knowledge of Stuxnet of course, even if Stuxnet was a CIA effort. But that would not stop them from opportunistically exploiting Stuxnet, and it is interesting to see the kind of spin they are putting on it. Since the group that did launch Stuxnet would have been very much aware of how the CIA would react to the story, they almost certainly factored in the damage this kind of FUD would do to Iran's regime.

Millions?

[AnonymousClown]

While Tehran has given out several conflicting figures on the systems and networks struck by the malworm - 30,000 to 45,000 industrial units - debkafile's sources cite security experts as putting the figure much higher, in the region of millions. If this is true, then this cyber weapon attack on Iran would be the greatest ever.

Millions? They have that much interconnected? I mean really, when Seimens or some other industrial supplier comes in, do they automatically say, "Oh, we need to have this connected to the internet for critical software updates." ? Do they use Microsoft's updating methods?

I really can't believe that they are that careless. I think the number cited by the Iranians are mostly networks connected to the internet - non-critical networks.

Re:Millions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly, most industrial control stuff runs on Winderz. It's all DCOM-based and takes so much banging your head against the monitor to get configured and working properly that oftentimes, you end up having disabled most any security features available out of sheer "maybe THIS will work" frustration. When you finally DO get it working, the last thing you want to do is go back and start turning on the security features as it will just break this fragile house of cards.

At least that's been my experience with it.

Posting anonymously cuz I just kind of admitted I'm DOING IT WRONG. But I swear it's true.

Re:Millions?

[grub]

I mean really, when Seimens or some other industrial supplier comes in, do they automatically say, "Oh, we need to have this connected to the internet for critical software updates." ? Do they use Microsoft's updating methods?

I can't speak for Siemens' method of updating that type of software but I know that for the MRI console software they make (for the Siemens MRIs) we have a VPN between the console and Siemens directly. No full internet access required.

Re:Millions?

[Thud457]

Actually, we realized you were doing it wrong as soon as we saw the word Windows.

But apparently, it's more a case of your whole industry putting empty-headed convenience over sane^Hresponsible architecture.

Re:Millions?

[sakshale]

> we have a VPN between the console and Siemens directly. No full internet access required.

Hmmm... Correctly me if I am wrong, but that implies an internet gateway with some level of access to the internet. If one application can find a route out that gateway, then there is always the possibility that other applications will also "escape".

Re:Millions?

[grub]

It has a private IP on a private VLAN. Internally it doesn't exist. All access (except to Siemens) is blocked via an extended ACL on the switch. The ASA duplicates that lockdown while keeping the tunnel to Siemens up. There's no NAT allowed for it either.

Basically, the only traffic that can flow to/from it is through the VPN.

Re:Millions?

[DavidTC]

This virus doesn't just spread via the internet. It also spreads via USB sticks. Yes, just by insertion.

Re:Millions?

[grub]

Don't you need autorun enabled for that to happen?

Re:Millions?

[thegarbz]

Your machines running your PLC shouldn't need to be hardened. The network they are connected to should be, not only configured as such, but physically hardened against careless insertion of USB keys and the like too by policy. We're similar at our plant. I highly doubt that any service packs have been installed on the PLC machines. None the less when we got hit by Stuxnet which spread to us from the US plants our plant area network was the only one which didn't get an infection, despite having probably the least secure windows installations in the company.

Perhaps it's just me...

[d3ac0n]

But I'm having a really hard time getting upset over the Iranian government being brought to a crawl by a computer virus. These ARE the same people that have made no bones about wanting to commit genocide against all Jews, and have tortured and murdered millions of their own people.

Personally, I hope it causes a total collapse. Perhaps then the Green Revolution people (those that are still alive, anyway) can have a chance at creating a true Democracy in Persia. The Persian people certainly deserve it.

What DOES worry me is that this is, in some ways, a "genie out of the bottle" moment. Formal "Weaponized" use of a computer virus to attack a state. While I'm sure it was inevitable, it is still a bit of a shock to know that the day has arrived.

All the more reason to be sure to be using a variety of redundant and disparate OS types to support your infrastructure I guess.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[Gordonjcp]

But I'm having a really hard time getting upset over the Iranian government being brought to a crawl by a computer virus. These ARE the same people that have made no bones about wanting to commit genocide against all Jews, and have tortured and murdered millions of their own people.

[citation needed]

In any case, are you saying they don't have a right to defend themselves from Israel's IDF paramilitary terrorists? The notorious war criminal Ariel Sharon said that all Arabs should be exterminated (yes, I know the Iranians are Persians, not Arabs). The present Israeli government seems to be doing a good job of herding the Palestinians into ghettos and taking over chunks of Palestine to expand their lebensraum. Would you like to live beside an expansionist who didn't think you were anything more than an animal?

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[elrous0]

If a virus like this were to succeed in its apparent goals (reeking havoc on the Natanz enrichment facility, or worse, the new Bushehr nuclear power plant) it could potentially cause an accident that could kill a LOT of innocent people. It had the very real capacity to send the reactors at Bushehr into meltdown. And I'm pretty sure the people who live around that facility had nothing to do with genocide against the Jews (nor have most Iranians ever fired so much as a shot against Israel).

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[Goaway]

Well, here we have someone who certainly likes to swallow his propaganda whole.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[elrous0]

No, but it sure could start a region-wide conventional war that could last a lot longer and claim just as many lives in the end.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[couchslug]

"Would you like to live beside an expansionist who didn't think you were anything more than an animal?"

Iran isn't beside Israel.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[Iphtashu Fitz]

Any modern-day reactor should have an out-of-band method of SCRAMing that doesn't rely on computer control of any sort. A common approach is to have control rods held physically over the nuclear fuel by electromagnets. If power is cut to the electromagnets for any reason then gravity drops them into place and the reaction ceases. If monitoring systems don't automatically cut power to the SCRAM system then it would just take a worker pushing a button. Heck, they may even have fuses located around the reactor that would melt in the presences of excessive heat or the presence of radiation, causing power to the magnets to be cut. So the likelihood of a computer worm causing a meltdown is highly unlikely unless the Iranians are stupid enough to disable the SCRAM system.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[zakkie]

Never mind the fact that when the Iranian people chose their government democratically, the CIA stepped in and helped overthrow it.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Too bad, so sad. Beats a nuclear war between Israel and Iran.

You're frighteningly insane. If you think this would PREVENT a nuclear war, you need to think it through again.

1) Domestic reactors go Chernobyl due to well known virus

2) Source of virus is established, either credibly or not

3) Iran petitions the UN for military retribution/economic restitution/etc, and it get vetoed

4) Everyone chooses sides and WWIII begins

This isn't even close to being far-fetched. And before we assume '4' results in 'Iran vs Everyone', do understand that going against Iran means going against the freedom to live in something other than a third world nation. Power is relatively essential, and all things considered this virus is of a TERRORISTIC nature because it seeks to attack the civilian infrastructure to achieve political goals. Do you really to side with the terrorists?

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[SeanAD]

Ahmadinejad has never even came close to saying he wants to kill all Jews. He has said Zionism will disappear, much like the Russian communist era.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[LordVader717]

Unsubstantiated?

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
– David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
– David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force."
– Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"I would have joined a terrorist organization."
– Ehud Barak's response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[elrous0]

Why is this guy labeled a troll? It's no secret that the Israelis have forced the Palestinians into ghettos for decades now (a sad irony considering that many of the Jews who did this had themselves had just come from the jewish ghettos of Germany), and that bigotry on both sides pervades the country. Even many jews admit as much, and condemn the radical Zionists who would gladly plow over the Palestinians as if they were animals. I'm no fan of the Palestinians either, BTW, but I'm under no illusions that Israel is just filled with a bunch of innocent, noble, oppressed Jews just trying to living in fucking harmony with the world.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phoenix321]

If you truly believe that Buschehr and Natanz are "civilian infrastructure", cut back on the Kool-Aid.

These plants have only one primary purpose and that is perfectly crystal-clear. Power generation is only some kind of by-product. With those costs sunk into the plants by the Iranian government, simple electricity generation would be a joke bordering on economical suicide when expressed in Dollars per Kilowatthour. - and strategic suicide considering it would place half the nation's generating power in one single site.

This thing is not meant to produce only electricity.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BlueParrot]

It's not that simple because 10% or therabouts of the energy produced in a nuclear reactor comes from the radioactive decay of the fission products, and not the fission reaction itself. Therefore the reactor core will continue to produce heat at an exponentially decaying rate, even after the chain reaction has ceased. This heat is quite sufficient to melt the core, and unless the reactor has been designed in such a way that sufficient cooling persists due to natural circulation, knocking out the cooling pumps could very well cause a meltdown.

That said, due to the much lower power output and natural circulation of coolant, it would take a considerable amount of time for this to start threatening core integrity. Modern reactors are typically designed to not require any operator intervention for at least 72 hours even after a total loss of station power.

Btw, regarding the control rods. I've seen at least one proposed system where one or several of the control rods would be held in place by a strong magnet acting on a ferromagnetic material with a carefully chosen Curie temperature. This way if the reactor temperature rises too high the magnet will no longer be able to hold the control rod in place, and it falls into the core. I dunno if this system has actually been implemented anywhere.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[DriedClexler]

No, no, no. When Ahmadinejad said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, what he *meant* was that he wanted to wipe the *hatred in the Middle East conflict* off the map.

And when he said his country doesn't have homosexuals, he meant homosexuals don't let themselves be known in public!

And he never said the Holocaust didn't happen; he said it did, and it was _justified_.

And when he said he wants to cart all the Jews back to Auschwitz and "finish the fuckin' job", he was talking about hosting a conference hear Auschwitz to honor the Holocaust victims.

Sheesh, they always, always misinterpret what Iranians say!

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[Trailer Trash]

WWIII already happened - civilization vs. communism, fought in proxy countries such as Viet Nam and Korea. Civilization won, but ironically the proxies themselves had a mixed outcome.

WWIV is ongoing - civilization vs. militant Islam. This is part of it. Iran is one of the few countries belligerently ruled by militant Islamics. Thankfully, it's also one that has the best chance for a democratic overthrow of said "government". We should be putting all our efforts toward helping them (starting with an open internet for Iran) - get rid of the nuts running the place and the nuclear issue goes away.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Ehhh, that's an interesting view point, but I'm talking about open global war. Not figuratively speaking, but open armed conflict involving many nations aligning along recognizable factions.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

This thing is not meant to produce only electricity.

No, no, I never said 'only'. But it would be parallel to China conducting an attack on Boeing or Lockheed. A lot of employees (rather than soldiers) would die for a military cause.

Besides, the United States is allowed to use uranium in their tank shells and conventional explosives. Why not Iran as well?

What about the environmental damage of causing containment to fail? That's going to take generations to clean up...

We're attempting to kill a lot of innocents to stop something that might someday happen. The harm vastly outweighs the risk, particularly if Israel is ready to be have as a legitimate government, and actively seek peace.

I genuinely believe that a cold war between Israel and Iran could well lead to peace in the Middle East for the first time since, well, ever. As it is now, Israel can freely assassinate democratically elected leadership on foreign soil. That will never result in peace.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[orphiuchus]

Unsubstantiated?

"We must expel Arabs and take their places." – David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." – David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force." – Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"I would have joined a terrorist organization." – Ehud Barak's response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian

The first two of those quotes are from a person who died in 1973, the next one is related to why Israel [i]doesn't[/i] want to kill a lot of Palestinians, and the last is disturbing for entirely different reasons than it is intended to be in your post.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

What DOES worry me is that this is, in some ways, a "genie out of the bottle" moment. Formal "Weaponized" use of a computer virus to attack a state. While I'm sure it was inevitable, it is still a bit of a shock to know that the day has arrived.

This is the third or forth such use of viruses/worms which are publicly known. Chances are, the actual number is far higher. Nothing new to see here in this regard.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

You're frighteningly insane. If you think this would PREVENT a nuclear war, you need to think it through again.

The problem with your line of thought is that it assumes a meltdown is the likely result. In reality, its far, far more likely an orderly shutdown will result whereby they can't go back online until the problem is resolved. Not to mention, most reactors also have a manual control (powered by men) to physically shutdown the reaction.

To immediately go with the meltdown scenario is to presume you've watched far too much bad television. I'm betting Homer isn't in charge of their reactors.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

Besides, the United States is allowed to use uranium in their tank shells and conventional explosives. Why not Iran as well?

Depleted uranium. Which can be purchased on the market as a non-hazardous waste byproduct. It has many, many legal and legitimate uses outside of munitions.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[blueZ3]

Since the reactor isn't online yet, I'd say now was the ideal time. Or do you think it's better to wait and bomb/sabotage Bushehr once it's up and running?

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

In any case, are you saying they don't have a right to defend themselves from Israel's IDF paramilitary terrorists?

The IDF are not paramilitary, they are Israel's military.

Is there any evidence that the IDF attacked Iran with this worm? No.

The notorious war criminal Ariel Sharon said that all Arabs should be exterminated (yes, I know the Iranians are Persians, not Arabs).

Alleged to be a war criminal by some. Never prosecuted.

And if Ariel Sharon said that, you correctly point out that it doesn't apply to Iran. Incidentally, Ariel Sharon hasn't been prime minister of Israel for many many years. In fact, he is in a coma, and has no influence on current affairs.

The present Israeli government seems to be doing a good job of herding the Palestinians into ghettos

Not true. There are many types of "Palestinians".

1. There are those who live in Israel and are citizens of Israel.

These people have Israeli passports, they vote, run for office (some are elected), and serve on the Israeli supreme court.

2. There are those who live in the West Bank and Gaza.

These people fall under the Palestinian Authority.

3. There are those that live in other countries.

If these people live in Arab countries, they are treated like dogs.

Plus, you need to define who Palestinians are, because that word predates the arrival of Arabs & Muslims to what is currently called Israel, Gaza & West Bank. If you are referring to Arab residents of the British Mandate of Palestine, then a Palestinian state exists - it's called Jordan.

And read the words of the current Palestinian Authority Chairman, Mahmoud Abbas (also called Abu Mazen). In the words of Abbas:

"I am among those who were born in the city of Tzfat (Safed). We were a family of means. I studied in elementary school, and then came the naqba [calamity, namely, the founding of the State of Israel - ed.]. At night, we left by foot from Tzfat, to the Jordan River, where we remained for a month. Then we went to Damascus, and then to our relatives in Jordan, and then we settled in Damascus.

"My father had money, and he spent his money systematically, and after a year, the money ran out and we began to work.

"The people's basic motives brought them to run away for their lives and with their property. These [motives] were very important, for they feared the violence of the Zionist terrorist organizations - and especially those of us from Tzfat felt that there was an old desire for revenge from the rebellion of 1929, and this was in the memory of our families and parents."

The "rebellion" Abbas referred to was a series of brutal Arab attacks on Jewish towns in the summer of 1929. Nearly 70 Jews were slaughtered in their homes in Hevron, 20 in Tzfat, 17 in Jerusalem, and others were murdered in Motza, Kfar Uriah and Tel Aviv.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[elrous0]

You have a point with Natanz, but not Buschehr. Buschehr is a civilian power plant with little possibility of producing nuclear fuel. It's not a new thing either. Construction of the facility actually started before the 1979 revolution. It's been off-and-on since then, with Russian contractors finally coming in to finish the job. It's really more of a symbolic thing for Ahmadinejad to finish it now (to demonstrate that Iran is a serious technological power). In practice; it will only generate about 2%-3% of the country's power, will probably never pay for itself, and will do nothing to further their nuclear weapon ambitions.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[ArcherB]

Besides, the United States is allowed to use DEPLETED uranium in their tank shells and conventional explosives. Why not Iran as well?

FTFY! Depleted Uranium is not radioactive, although it is fairly toxic when burned... but then again, so is a DU sabot round heading at you a few clicks per second. It's a weapon. Toxicity is not really a concern.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

The residual health effects of using such weapons are still not fully understood. Look at the birth defect issues in Fallujah for a recent example.

It's still uranium.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Perhaps you're assuming that the malicious software wouldn't inhibit their ability to respond?

I'm imagining the worst case scenario, to be sure, but it includes software that tampers with the readings on the computer. Readings that look fine and give the operators no reason to check the manual gauges, except as a part of their routine checks. And, if timed perfectly, this could easily be too late to prevent catastrophe.

Not only am I not assuming that Homer is operating the reactor, I'm likewise assuming that Homer didn't design the virus.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[ginbot462]

I wouldn't say nothing new. The sophistication is like going from B-29 to B-2. (e.g. stealth and accuracy)

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Ah, yes, but there are Soviets in the picture now, too.

Good point, though.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[vxice]

So what you are pointing out is that Iran is responding (self defense some would argue) to Israeli statements and not the other way around. Focusing on the present removes from your narrative that there is lots of history behind what is happening. If I were to beat you nearly to death the fact that you had illegally entered my home would be very relevant and have drastic implications. If these quotes are accurate then it shows genocidal intent from the the beginning deeply ingrained in the "shinning example of democracy in the region."

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

Perhaps you're assuming that the malicious software wouldn't inhibit their ability to respond?

Perhaps I'm assuming that these systems are specifically designed to allow them to respond given the worst of circumstance. As others have pointed out, absolute worst case means simply shutting down a breaker, ignoring the standard facilities to do the same thing, which allows gravity to force the inhibitors to shutdown. And that assumes the multitude of automated facilities fail to automatically shutdown the reactor.

While the chances of meltdown are certainly greater than zero, they are not far from it. Modern reactors are incredibly safe and are specifically designed to deal with situations far, far, far worse than those imposed by this worm.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

Not in the least. You need to read more on the various virus/trojans which have been released. As far as sophistication goes, this is actually fairly low to moderate, compared to what's being propagandized. This level of sophistication is easily within my grasp and I don't even specialize in this area.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

The residual health effects of using such weapons are still not fully understood. Look at the birth defect issues in Fallujah for a recent example.

This ignores the huge plumes of toxic smoke which covered large areas of the region which are known to be carcinogenic, toxic, be associated with birth defects, and a long list of other ancillary health problems.

It's still uranium.

It is, but only in very large quantities. Because of its mass, fallout from explosives doesn't stay airborne for long. Once scattered it typically reads background or barely above. In other words, not a noteworthy risk. Unless you happen to be a tank crew sitting on top of, and in direct contact with, a cache of shells, the health risk is generally considered inconsequential. And even for the tank crews, the risk is considered small but acceptable.

Basically, of possible causes, depleted uranium contamination is toward the bottom of the list of likely causes.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Don't forget how is gets used in bunker busters as well.

But otherwise, you may well be right. It might not be the chemicals we used in making the bombs we dropped on those civilians, it could just be the fires they caused. There certainly does seem to be something residual in the environment, though, because it is still impacting humans whose sperm cells didn't even exist at the time that smoke went up.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

So there's no way whatsoever for the software to keep the reactor operating at an unsafe level?

I'm admittedly not a nuclear scientist, but if this is the case, I'm genuinely impressed.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[ginbot462]

Count me in as one that bit on that worm the "press" used then :)

At first, I just scanned this:
http://www.eset.com/resources/white-papers/Stuxnet_Under_the_Microscope.pdf

But, looking deeper (in this very paper even), yea maybe it wasn't the Dirty Dozen afterall.

http://blog.eset.com/2010/07/19/it-wasn%E2%80%99t-an-army

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phoenix321]

Of course there are innocents in and around the facility. As true as they were in Dresden back then. Or the 2nd Imperial Death Star, if you want.

The evil plan to dominate pacifists seems to be rather safe then: install a uranium enrichment plant in your evil lair and add a few million innocents. That way, you have slave labor and soon weapons grade Uranium plus you'll never get your plans foiled.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phoenix321]

Large oil fires aren't exactly healthy. If I remember, it was Saddam who lit them.

Anyway, what would you think would result if you conducted an independent study asking the Iraqi people if they'd rather lived under Saddam a few more decades?

And what about Ze Germans? Their Austrian guy was even legitimately elected in a democratic election when he first came to power. I think since it cost several million innocent lives to bring that to an end, the Free Nations is right if they don't allow regimes like that to ever gain strength again. Making things right afterward is not always possible and certainly costs more lives.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[argontechnologies]

This is not the first time a virus has been targeted against a country as a weapon.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Oh, I don't know about the survey. Our efforts have resulted in more than one million Iraqi dead. That's bound to skew things away from your expected result.

In a poll of:

A) Saddam
B) The US-led invasion

That's probably not as clear cut as you'd think.

Consider this one:

A) Saddam
B) The US-led invasion
C) Populist uprising

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[BobMcD]

Actually the 2nd Imperial Death Star was also almost certainly a complete ecological disaster for Endor...

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[AJWM]

Indeed. One of the civilian uses of depleted uranium is in radiation shielding.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[ArcherB]

Unless you happen to be a tank crew sitting on top of, and in direct contact with, a cache of shells, the health risk is generally considered inconsequential. And even for the tank crews, the risk is considered small but acceptable.

I was a M1A1 crewman for a few years and spent much of my service surrounded by DU enhanced armor. I also spent a about a year in theater with a full ammo well of DU rounds.

DU at room temperature has no known health effects. However, if you were to eat the penetrator of a sabot round or try to weld through the frontal armor of a M1, you may suffer some ill effects. But if you're willing to do all that, you are looking for such a result.

It's burning DU that causes the health risks and I don't believe that it's related to the radio activity of DU. It has more to do with the fact that you are inhaling heavy metals in gas form that causes health issues.

I served with many soldiers who took part in the first gulf war in the 90's. I saw the "Gulf War Syndrome" effects that were suffered in a few of them. But these same effects were also suffered by personnel that were not armored crewman or spent any time around DU at all. This leads me, in my not-so-expert opinion, to believe that the problem was not with DU, but some other factor. It could have been the barrage of shots given before deployment, some strange sand flea living there or, like you mentioned, waking every morning with a poncho covered in oil from the fires there (imagine what was in their lungs!) I went there a year after the Desert Storm and suffered no health issues as a result. The only difference between what I went through and what the first group saw was possibly the shots taken and most of the oil fires were out by the time I got there.

I'm not disagreeing with your post at all. It's spot on. I just wanted to share my experience with DU and the time I spent around it. I don't get to do it often.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phantomfive]

It's wrong to blame just the Israelis for what happened to the Palestinians. Palestinians are used and treated badly by the whole middle east. Remember, there's a wall on the Egyptian side, too.

If you want to see a real ghetto, look at the Palestinians in Lebanon. They aren't allowed to bring building materials into their area (where's the flotilla to break that blockade?) and until this year they weren't even allowed to work.

The Palestinians on the border of Israel are used as pawns by the rest of the nations in the middle east. King Hussein of Jordan didn't want an independent Palestine, because he felt it would threaten his kingdom (possibly true, given historical events). The Iranians provide weapons to Hamas.

Now, if the Palestinians could make a credible commitment to not attempt to blow their neighbors up with any freedom they get, there would be an agreement within a year. Israel would bend very far. The radical zionists do not control the country (remember Israel unilaterally moved the colonies out of Gaza: if the zionists controlled the country, that wouldn't have happened). Most Israelis just want to be done with the thing.

So the main thing to be done that will lead to peace is state-building and economic development on the West Bank. With economic development comes a desire to do something besides kill other people (usually), and with state-building there is a group in charge that is actually capable of making a deal.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[Comrade Ogilvy]

These ARE the same people that have made no bones about wanting to commit genocide against all Jews

We have strong circumstantial evidence that your characterization is incorrect. Iran still includes a modest populace of Jews, even if most have left since 1979. But if they really wanted to make "no bones" about their intentions, we would expect the Jewish population in Iran today to be approximately zero.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[jDeepbeep]

If you want to see a real ghetto, look at the Palestinians in Lebanon. They aren't allowed to bring building materials into their area (where's the flotilla to break that blockade?)

There won't be one, for the same reason why it wasn't news to western bleeding-heart activists when Turkey bombed the bejeezus out of the Kurds one week after the Turkish-sourced flotilla was boo-hooing all over the news about how badly they were treated. Hear anything about that bombing? See any protests? You also didn't see westerners marching for the oppressed "palestinians" when Jordan was kicking the shit out of them and occupying the area for decades.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[KevinIsOwn]

Actual quote:

We do not wish, we do not need to expel the Arabs and take their place. All our aspirations are built upon the assumption -- proven throughout all our activity in the Land -- that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.

Go fuck yourself.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[LordVader717]

It appears you're likely correct with this one. But in any case I would recommend people who read this to judge people's intentions by what they do rather than by disputed quotes over what they might or might not have said.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[JordanL]

What? How can you possibly take a moral stand for Iran on that particular issue? If we're going to call the IDF a "paramilitary terrorist" organization, what does that make Hezbollah?

Israel hasn't had clean hands when it comes to dealing with Muslim nations in the region, but you can't seriously take the position that Iran has the moral authority on the issue, can you?

I'd also be interested in a source on Sharon being convicted of war crimes and saying he wanted to exterminate all Arabs. That was something I didn't know and would like to read up on.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

So there's no way whatsoever for the software to keep the reactor operating at an unsafe level?

Please re-read my comments along the lines. I would not say, "no way". I would say, improbable. Pragmatically, even a normally operating reactor never has a zero probability of catastrophic failure.

Keep in mind, these days, these things are designed to be FORCED to maintain operation. They are specifically designed such that when things fail, they fail in a safe manner. Thus we have the term, "fail-safe".

As an example, imagine an electromagnet which suspends the control rods above the nuclear materials. If power is lost, be it push button, out of limits fail-safe activation, manually forced disconnection, or the throwing of a breaker, gravity forces the control rods into place to stop the process. Furthermore, modern designs typically use convective cooling. Meaning, even without pumps, the heat from the core itself maintains circulation of the coolant. The pumps simply increase efficiency, allowing for higher loads.

So on and so on...

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

Good links. Bonus points for being intelligent and inquisitive enough to do your own legwork rather than the ever popular, "citation needed". Which is even embarrassingly lame and especially unintelligent for them given this is not a researched forum.

Sorry for the soap box there...kudos just the same.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

Anyway, what would you think would result if you conducted an independent study asking the Iraqi people if they'd rather lived under Saddam a few more decades?

I can tell you the results since there has been many, many polls. They are very glad he's gone. They don't want him back. They want us out. They want us to stay for several more years. Bluntly, they always consider the US to be the lessor of evils and/or a necessary evil. That doesn't make us best friends.

Every time these facts are offered, it always gets troll moderated to hell because many nut jobs like to paint the US' efforts are on par or far, far worse than living under Saddam. Realistically, if it were not for Syrians, Iranians, and other Arabs coming into Iraq to screw things up, the standard of living would actually be far above what they had with Saddam. Many Iraqis are finally realizing this.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

I was a M1A1 crewman for a few years and spent much of my service surrounded by DU enhanced armor. I also spent a about a year in theater with a full ammo well of DU rounds.

I've read of several studies which purport sterility is higher among tank crews who have been deployed with DU rounds. Much in the same way police who used the old radar guns. This in turn indicates exposure is slightly higher than background. These studies also report that the military tells their crew they are completely safe while independent studies and studies conducted by the military both indicate they have slightly elevated risks. This is what my comments reflect.

You are correct in that these studies do not necessarily prove causation.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

Opps...I forgot...

And BTW, thanks for your service! I have the highest respect for those who serve. Especially for tank crews! I absolutely would never want to be tank crew.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[jbengt]

Depleted uranium is not particularly radioactive, but it is hazardous.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[GooberToo]

is not particularly radioactive,

Notice your qualifier; and I agree. DU typically reads above background. That's not to say I'm implying you'll glow after exposure but I certainly don't want to sleep on top of it for any extended duration. Studies do show a correlation between tank crews having been deployed with DU shells and increased sterility.

I started to repeat myself. Read my reply to the tank crewman who replied elsewhere.

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[ArcherB]

Well, I have a little girl, so I'm not sterile, whatever that's worth. And I've heard the same studies you've mentioned, but right now, my biggest fear is keeping my cell phone in my front pocket. In other words, there are lots of things that make you sterile.

I'm not saying that exposure to DU doesn't lower fertility, but judging by the rate my company was spitting out rug-rats, it must not be that big of an issue.

Nice typing with you.

And, your certainly welcome. As our drill Sgt's used to say... "Don't thank me, thank my recruiter" :). However, I knew going in that I wouldn't necessarily be fighting for my freedom or even the freedom of any Americans. I knew I'd be in some foreign land, trying to spread freedom. So, although I am patriotic, what I did was not necessarily so. It was a pleasure seeing the gratitude on the faces of the Kuwaitis and the college money and VA home loans are nice to.

Laters

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phoenix321]

Being invaded by the US was historically always the best thing that could happen to a country's economy.

All countries that were successfully invaded or "liberated" by the US are economically successful and indeed pretty "liberal" now up until the most recently liberated countries like the Kosovo which is still an Islamic hellhole.

(Liberal in the sense of having personal freedom for all or most. I never understood why the die-hard lefties in the US are called "Liberals", since that's not the true sense of the word, but anyway)

Examples?

Invaded:
Texas, Alaska, West Germany, Japan, South Korea, Panama

Liberated:
France (WW2), Israel(heavy support), Taiwan, Kuwait

Worse situations when the US invasion/liberation was cancelled or chosen to not intervene:
Iraq 1991, Somalia, Vietnam (50y later, south V. is still economically superior to the north), Cambodia, Zaire (Hutu vs. Tutsi), Sudan (current)

Worse situation after US action:
Iran

Verdict unclear:
Iraq 2003, Serbia,

Free countries that will be overrun quickly if US or NATO support were ceased:
Taiwan (PRC), Israel (Muslim brotherhood, MB), South Cyprus(?)(Turkey), Latvia(Russia, Ru), Lithuania(Ru), Estonia(Ru), Afghanistan (Taleban, TB), Pakistan (TB), Kuwait (MB)

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phoenix321]

So were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Background radiation on the entire planet is still influenced by those two events.

And I'm sure that people from Dresden, Berlin and Hamburg were not overflowing with joy when the war ended in 1945.

But that only demonstrates the need for early, swift, directed and strong interventions rather than later having to decide between a drawn-out war with unbelievable losses of life or a stand-down that enables the other side to exterminate a few million Jews, Tutsi, Non-Muslim Sudanese or Nigerians.

"A stitch in time saves nine."

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[bstender]

. These ARE the same people that have made no bones about wanting to commit genocide against all Jews, and have tortured and murdered millions of their own people.

We have so much mainstream media dedicated to misrepresenting Iran,do you really need to regurgitate this long-discredited horseshit here on slashdot?

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[phoenix321]

Questions if the "populist uprising", while it is more a "Muslim Brotherhood uprising" than anything "popular", will win by a large margin?

Yes, the insurgents killed ten times more people on *purpose* than the US Army, but only if the US Army toll includes legitimate targets AND civilians killed as collateral damage.

Yes, the insurgents made it crystal clear they will establish Shariah rule, suppress anyone in their way and imprison women.

Yes, the insurgents bombed elections, mosques, hospitals, marketplaces, roads, homes ON PURPOSE.

Let's assume for a moment that rational common Iraqi civilians would even think of voting for the group that is killing most common Iraqi civilians.

Also assume that a people that generally disliked Saddam with a vengeance will vote favorably upon a group that is killing more civilians per year then he did.

Then there's just one question remaining: how many will dare to go out in the polls and how many will be bombed to death by the oh-so "popular" uprising while in the polling booth?

Re:Perhaps it's just me...

[bstender]

"civilization vs. Communism" you say. I say "Capitalism vs. civilization". Capitalism is another word for "law of the strong"...Feudalism 2.0. We better all hope for a cure for Capitalism pretty soon before we extinct ourselves.

And your "civilization vs. militant Islam" canard is nothing more than a PR campaign designed and promoted by Zionists, appealling to people's base fears, appealing to our jungle roots if you will, to maintain the ever-eroding support for their racist colonial project. It couldn't be more anathema to 'civilization'.

Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[Motard]

This site has a lot of seemingly tantalizing information, but a lot of it is BS. It reported that one of Saddam's palaces had huge glass covered aquariums where sharks would swim under your feet. Now that all the palaces have been 'visited', there have been no reports of any such thing.

Re:Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[MiniMike]

Well that explains it. They must have actually been at SeaWorld (except there the sharks swim over you, make your own 'in soviet russia' style joke) and just fudged their expense report.

Re:Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[djdevon3]

OR.... There's nothing quite like two dictators having a pissing match that ends in photoshopping one's opulence. To this day the Iranian's still haven't figured out how to do it realistically. Iraq 1, Iran -2.

Re:Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[Anonymous Coward]

those aquariums were secretly moved...

Re:Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[theaceoffire]

Clearly the sharks used their lasers to escape.

Re:Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[Cwix]

Duh The WMD were sharks with laser beams on their heads. He hid them.

Re:Treat anything from Debka cautiously

[thegarbz]

Someone was a fan of Despicable Me :-)

Cyber World War 2 and a Half...

[wiredog]

Or something like that. Could get a bit scary, push comes t5o shove and all that. I wonder who will get hit with the retaliatory strike?

Alternatively, I wonder if this is the retaliatory strike?

You are in a twisty maze of little passages, all alike...

DEBKAfile

[lightspeedius]

Are these guys reliable at all? On the face of it, I don't see any reason to accept DEBKAfile's "intelligence and Iranian sources".

Re:DEBKAfile

[Attila Dimedici]

My impression of Debkafile is that they have sources for just about everything they report, but that they are often used by various individuals and groups to get stories out there that are not true. On the other hand, every now and again, they break some story that every other news organization has ignored/missed because there are no solid sources, but once the story breaks, solid sources turn up. What that means is that if you see something on Debkafile, look around for other sources before you take it as true (although this may take some time).

Own goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

The first thing the Iranians will want to do is to re-release this thing into the west.

This could hurt.

Incentive to give this impression

[Anonymous Coward]

(repost as the first one isn't showing up)

They would in any case have an incentive to give the impression that everything grinds to a halt. The more their nuclear programme slows down the longer it will be until Israel feels the urgent need to bomb it.

I like to play a little game called "Which world do we live in?". You describe two worlds that are generally similar but differ on some characteristics, and try to find out which of the two worlds we live in, or ways to go about finding out. I am not sure of an easy way to find out in this case.

Re:Get The Fuck Off This Site You Racist Piece A S

[jDeepbeep]

If anything he said was untrue, I feel certain you would improve your argument against his statements, by providing information from factual unbiased sources. Just saying. *waits for offtopic mods*

Spreading havoc?

[brian0918]

It's my understanding that Stuxnet was designed to only *do only* to one certain computer/system that was specifically targeted. On all other computers that do not match the signature of that computer, it leaves them alone. So what is the "havoc" that it is causing?

Re:Spreading havoc?

[dr2chase]

As I understand it (I just used teh Google to figure out whether this worm phones home), the worm does phone "somewhere", and worms on a network update among themselves in a peer-to-peer fashion.

So, perhaps it started as one thing, and has become another. In particular, if the party answering the "phone home" can tell who is calling, they might deliver different payloads to known-Iranian IP addresses and other addresses. (That's what *I* would do.)

Reality seems to be catching up to our more paranoid fantasies, and I'm not sure that's a good thing. I'm feeling better and better about cut-wire security, and it sounds like it would be a good idea to stuff the USB slot full of epoxy.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[__aaqvdr516]

IAAICT (I am an Instrumentation and Controls Tech)

Stuxnet specifically targets Siemens Simatic Wincc software and associated PLC's. Essentially, the Wincc software is the programming base to interact with the PLC's, which are discreet CPU/memory clusters running optimized code for whatever it is you'd like to do. There are many PLC manufacturers and they use their own programming software to upload/download to their cpu's. The fact that this worm only interacts with Siemens software is not surprising as Siemens is one of the major manufacturers of industrial equipment. I have a large number of Siemens devices all around where I work. I do not use Siemens PLC's though, so I am unaffected by this worm.

This whole thing smells to me like a disgruntled software guy that used to work for Siemens.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[elrous0]

It targets two specific models of Seimens programable logic controllers (by targeting the Windows software used to program those PLC's). PLC's are used to control very time-intensive industrial processes. Pretty much every power plant, nuke plant, modern manufacturing plant, etc. uses these, and they control very dangerous physical equipment. Reeking havoc with these processes can cause explosions, radiation leaks, major industrial accidents, etc. (it could even cause nuclear reactors to go critical). That's very bad stuff. Best case scenario, it could cause serious damage to equipment. Worse case scenario, it could cause significant lose of life.

In other words, tampering with a PLC can make things go BOOM. In 1982, the CIA purported did this with the Siberian pipeline, and the resulting explosion was so powerful it set off missile launch alarms in the U.S.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Dan East]

No one knows exactly what it does. More than likely it did target a specific industrial complex with the purpose of physically damaging machinery. However, there could be multiple targets, or the software could be collecting data / signatures of additional hardware which it could be instructed to attack at a later time.

This is purported to be the most advanced, complex and highest quality malware ever discovered. I seriously doubt it would be spreading as far and wide as it has for so long if it was targeting a single machine only. My hunch is it is collecting information, and will be used to simultaneously damage as much hardware as possible once it reaches a certain saturation across Iran's industries, and collected enough information to allow accurate targeting of the types of hardware the operators wish to damage.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[PseudonymousBraveguy]

I guess GP referred to the studies that concluded stuxnet would only activate some of its more dangerous parts only if the infected PLC had some very specific building blocks. So the "true" havoc would only be unlashed when the infected machine was part of a very specific facility (which was rumored, but never confirmed, to be "noclear plant", but that may be just some sensationalist's guess), while on all other infected hardware it would mostly stay ineffective, (apart from spreading and probably phoning home)

Re:Spreading havoc?

[elrous0]

Having looked carefully at this worm (I'm preparing for a presentation on it at a local security conference), I can tell you it almost certainly wasn't written by one guy. It's the most complex piece of malware I've ever seen. It's written in three languages (C and C++ on the Windows side, MC 7 assembly language on the PLC side), it uses four different Windows exploits and two stolen code-signing certificates from companies in Taiwan (both of which read as legit until just recently), and it has one of the most aggressive and clever rootkits I've ever seen. And that's not even getting into how it can update itself. Unless said disgruntled employee was the goddamn jedi master of hackers in addition to his day-job, I would say this is definitely a major team effort (a very specialized team).

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Hijacked Public]

The specific are that it looks for S7-300 and S7-400 controllers and modifies OB35, which is usually used for safety circuit type monitoring of very high speed processes. It also inserts blocks all over the PLC, which I assume is a method to increase scan times.

I've not seen anything to suggest that is looks for anything more specific than that and there are tons of S7-300/400s out there. It wouldn't likely cause 'havoc' in very many applications since OB35 isn't needed in very many generic industrial processes. Only place I've seen it needed was in a polymer reactor, but I haven't been everywhere.

Most of the articles say it attacks SCADA systems, but that is typical uninformed reporting. It uses Windows based SCADA system to propagate, but the attack is deliver to a PLC. To me that suggests the intent is exclusively to damage industrial equipment. These days most of the 'secrets' would be housed on the SCADA side and the PLC just does the actual direct controlling of the hardware.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[bill_mcgonigle]

It's my understanding that Stuxnet was designed to only *do only* to one certain computer/system that was specifically targeted.

Right, and I believe that is the version released in January 2009. Now that the cat is out of the bag and Microsoft is likely to patch the 0-days, Stuxnet probably phoned home and was given all the remaining payloads. The results would be unknown at this point.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Iphtashu Fitz]

Actually a much more nasty approach would be to make the worm intelligent enough to analyze its surroundings and send them to the controller. Then the controller modifies its payload to direct the attack more precisely. So the worm does a network scan, finds some documents or emails to send back to the controller, etc. The controller sees from those documents that the worm has infected systems in a hydroelectric dam that uses a monitoring & control system from ACME corp. The controller modifies that copy of the worm to search the network for various ACME systems. Once the worm identifies the specific details of the ACME systems the controller modifies the worm again to initiate some sort of attack against them. Another copy of the worm is found to be in a bank, so that copy is modified to scramble all the bank records on command, etc.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[LWATCDR]

I have never used a PLC but this seems like you would have to know a lot of inside information to target something.
How would the worm know if an input tied to turbine RPM or if it is some other device?
Do specific inputs on a PLC got specific ports?
Or do you just have generic A/D and GPIO ports?

Re:Spreading havoc?

[hey!]

It's my understanding that Stuxnet was designed to only *do only* to one certain computer/system that was specifically targeted. On all other computers that do not match the signature of that computer, it leaves them alone. So what is the "havoc" that it is causing?

The havoc of trying to keep the damned thing from spreading is enough. You do not let the black hats keep the keys to your systems, especially when their tool is capable of updating itself using P2P techniques. We should probably add when we say anything about this worm "so far as we know." There's a lot of encrypted stuff whose purpose we don't know. Furthermore, it is possible that the whole ecosystem of infected machines could be updated to do something we haven't imagined yet.

One thing that occurs to me is that the whole Siemens business might be a "cover story". The worm might have completely unrelated purposes we don't know about.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Lord Ender]

The Air Force was recruiting hackers at DEFCON this year. The recruiter actually said they will take anyone, regardless of criminal record.

It seems reasonable that you wouldn't let criminal hackers work on your own defensive systems. So what *would* you do with them? You would develop offensive technology--that doesn't require the developers have any access to your own infrastructure.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[LWATCDR]

Actually all reactors go critical. That is how they run. I assume you mean have and excursion or some other catastrophic failure.
It is very possible and frankly it makes Rickenbacker's policy about computer controls seem like a very good idea.
At this point we should just rename this thing the Cylon worm and be done with it.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[LWATCDR]

Another quick question for you.
How the heck does this code get run?
Putting a mass storage device into a machine shouldn't run code unless you have auto run turned on.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[elrous0]

These models of PLC have a function block at OB 35 that automatically executes every 100 milliseconds. Stuxnet hides its own code at the beginning of this block (while also allowing the original code to run afterward). This allows it to mimic the original functions of the PLC, while it quietly runs in the background.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[elrous0]

I'm don't know that much about PLC's or the software used to program them. But, from what I gather, Stuxnet sends the specifics on how the PLC's are configured to an offsite server from the WinCC/PCS 7 software itself at the time of infection.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Hijacked Public]

How would the worm know if an input tied to turbine RPM or if it is some other device?

It wouldn't know that speficially, but it modifies a block that is used to control a process that requires a very fast response. There aren't very many applications that would require that block so most programmers wouldn't bother programming and tuning it and interrupting the normal logic scan unless they really needed it.

To me it seems that Stuxnet is trying to slow the response time of the block it modifies and of the PLC overall. If you were trying to control your oven's heating element by changing the current you allowed it to draw in response to input from a thermocouple, and I could slow down the calculation you were using to determine the current change, I could cause the oven to overrun the temp. If that were a turbine I could cause it to overspeed, or a pressure vessel to overpressure, etc etc. Just that one change would cause 'havoc' to whatever process it was controlling. The process is guaranteed to be time sensitive regardless of what it is.

Do specific inputs on a PLC got specific ports?

No. But a good programmer can often figure out details of the process just by watching the logic run. I can look at the constants used for a PID instruction and know whether it is controlling a heating element based on input from a Type J thermocouple...for instance.

Or do you just have generic A/D and GPIO ports?

Generally an input to a PLC will have an address like I:1.0/0. That would indicate a discrete input card was present in the first slot of the PLC's chassis and that the wires from this particular input landed on the first input point. Most are 16 bit IO so you'd have I:1.0/0 through I:1.0/15, then I:2.0/0 and so on.

A discrete output would be O:1.0/0. You'd regonize analog IO because it would be used in the logic at the bit level. IO for modern PLCs is typically modular and can be arranged in any order.

You wouldn't know what specifically the was at the end of the wires (a button or a 2 position switch or whatever) but you might be able to figure it out.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[sh0dan]

The first version of Stuxnet (Stuxnet-A), uses a special "autorun.inf", that has an executable at the beginning of the file (which the autorun.inf parser skips). After the executable the "proper" information for the autorun.inf add another "Open" option for the rightclick menu. Selecting this will execute the content of autorun.inf (the malware). read about it here.

The second version (Stuxnet-B or Stuxnet!lnk), uses the zero-day .lnk file vulnerability, that will automatically execute the content, when you browse the content of the USB stick.

See the links for more detail - it's quite fascinating (also from a technical perspective).

Re:Spreading havoc?

[mlts]

I know some firms which are starting to airgap. They have a machine for signing executable code or documents which never touches the Net, and all patches for the OS are installed via removable media. Even USB ports are disabled with BIOS protection and physical snippage of leads on the motherboard except for single port for the SD card reader. This keeps a USB flash drive from saying it is something else.

Maybe it is time to go back to the tried and true and move a bit towards more eggs in one secure basket, as opposed to many insecure buckets?

Maybe it is time to go back to the mainframe for some tasks? Yes, they are boring, but you know they will be running when you come into the office in the morning, and the IBM rep is on site fixing a problem if something failed over transparently. Mainframe security issues are a lot rarer, and if they do happen, it would be with the client OS in an LPAR.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[swb]

Why should they fear criminal hackers?

I'm sure during the "orientation" session it was made clear that if they fucked up, there were some scenarios to consider -- like suddenly finding yourself in Pelican Bay State Prison under a new name, starting a 30 year stretch for multiple child molestation convictions.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[LWATCDR]

And why would a scada system have autorun turned on?

The second option is harder to deal with. Wow that is just nasty.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[mlts]

I can confirm this. Last year when I was trying to get a prototype of a new type of hard disk jukebox built [1], I learned that there were only a few companies out there with the expertise to do a basic design for a hard disk autochanger robotics. One was Siemens. The other firms were Chinese ODMs.

So essentially if I wanted the engineering necessary, with a tried and true company, it is Siemens or nothing.

[1]: I was doing research on a hard disk autochanger that could use 3.5" drives without enclosures similar to a tape jukebox. This is easy if the drives are in enclosures. It takes engineering if the drives are just bare.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[LWATCDR]

I would assume that thermocouple would be an analog input. RPM would tend to be a digital pulse. Set a limit that if the time between pulses x then y to prevent an over speed. Seems almost like you would want a hard limiter on something like a turbine so that an programing error couldn't cause a failure but I may just being a Monday morning quarterback. PLCs mature tech so unless someone intends to blow it all should be well.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Lord Ender]

A hacker with convictions is someone you know is (or at least was) willing to steal data for fun and/or profit despite it already being illegal. Slightly higher penalties would not be much of a deterrent, especially when you consider that IT insiders with infosec skills could get data out undetectably, or at least anonymously, with a near-zero chance of getting caught.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[swb]

Except that a 30 year stretch in Pelican Bay (where all the guys who are too violent for the _rest_ of the prison system) go, under a new name and with a conviction for child molestation, isn't just a "slightly higher" penalty. It's six months of savagery until you commit suicide or get shanked for being short eyes.

And it won't be some guy making idle threats, it'll be someone who pushed the limits offering you a testimonial -- "I thought I could get away with it. The next time I woke up, I was in a van entering a state prison in California, under a different name charged with a crime I didn't commit."

And "too good to get caught"? Yeah, right. Stealing from some shitty corporation too cheap or lazy to upgrade there systems in one thing, stealing out from under the nose of the military when they already know you're someone to watch? The only hole deep enough to escape from these people is called a grave.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[kevinNCSU]

You're forgetting hackers like to target people miles away with complete anonymity. Not people they work with that hold sub-machine guns, sign their pay checks, and have their complete life's history on file along with polygraph tests.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[Lord Ender]

I'm sorry but you're just wrong. Really really wrong. Crimes are committed all around the world all the time despite all manner of terrible punishments.

You're also wrong about the government somehow being immune from insider data theft. Even amateurs can get DoD data out. Security experts who are already insiders could do it more effectively and more stealthily. It is really easy to copy and transmit bits, and it is impossible to scrutinize or even interpret (stego) all the data leaving any big org, regardless of its security budget.

Re:Spreading havoc?

[moreati]

I understand that the PLCs are connected to the Wincc machine by some sort of network, presumably for monitoring and reprogramming. I'd like to ask how you think the Stuxnet worm has reached the Wincc machines - over the Internet, or by infected media/laptops being plugged in?

I'm guessing you can't speak for Iranian ICT practises, but how isolated from the Internet are such systems? I presume nowadays sites are interlinked for remote monitoring. Are these over airgapped, dedicated lines or do they ever share infrastructure with office Intranets using for instance a VPN or encrypted tunnel?

Re:Spreading havoc?

[AHuxley]

Or the news reports are the "havoc". Different techs and directors then get on the phones/emails within Iran and start getting/ requesting more info and better reports.
Israel Army’s intelligence Unit 8200/Urim then sits back and watches Iran glow with new connections and sites.
http://cryptome.org/eyeball/ilsig/ilsig-eyeball.htm

DEBKA is totally unreliable.

[Noryungi]

This is DEBKA. Completely ridiculous website, riddled with disinfo.

Example:

Not only have their own attempts to defeat the invading worm failed, but they made matters worse: The malworm became more aggressive and returned to the attack on parts of the systems damaged in the initial attack.

'nuff said.

Of course, that does not mean Iran is not hit hard by Stuxnet - just that everything you read at this site should be taken with a big grain of salt.

Re:DEBKA is totally unreliable.

[onepoint]

If the above were true, then that would be a signature of a bot network ( or it's control center ). From what I have read in the past, upon playing with the bot, it responds with different attacks including 1 or 2 forms of deleting the hard drive but embedding itself within the hard drive to become recoverable upon restoring the windows files.

Well if anything, this looks like the start of a simple cyber-war... reduce the ability to eat ( food plant breakdowns ), reduce the availability of water ( water filtration breakdown ), Next should be transport, then it should be fuel, then the last should be available public power. All leads to government breakdown and the next revolution.

Re:DEBKA is totally unreliable.

[jlusk4]

Second.

MILLIONS of additional system? C'mon....

actually scary

[SpinningCone]

jokes aside Stuxnet worm is pretty scary. researchers definitely believe it was developed by something with significant backing. it's very sophisticated and extremely targeted. It contained multiple 0 day exploits and was designed specifically to disrupt industrial systems.

though this article contradicts others i have read that say due to its specificity that it wasn't too damaging.

also a note: these systems aren't necessarily internet connected the worm is designed to infect usb drives so it can reach systems which are unconnected for security reasons.

this type of crap scares me because i'm not confident that the US infrastructure is hardened enough o protect against malicious cyber attacks.

Re:actually scary

[couchslug]

"this type of crap scares me because i'm not confident that the US infrastructure is hardened enough o protect against malicious cyber attacks."

Nor will it be unless it is attacked. End Lusers don't care about security until their system is broken. That cannot change due to human nature, so if we are to have some immunity we need coercive damage to force change.

Re:actually scary

[mlts]

You hit the nail on the head with this.

When i was doing consulting last year, businesses had zero interest in paying more than just a token amount for security. The PHBs would say, "why bother, security has no ROI, and any hacker that wants in would get in anyway?"

Of course, when I asked the question about how they would deal with a compromise in progress, "we would call Geek Squad and they would send people to fix it" would be their answer.

I think things won't change until destructive software becomes the norm, like it did back in the late DOS days where most viruses would try to format the C: drive or zero out the flash BIOS.

However since it is more profitable for the bad guys to sniff passwords and have botnet clients spamming away, rather than erasing PCs, Joe Sixpack won't be bothered to take security precautions. Just like a dog being punished too long after a crime, Joe will not connect the lack of following basic security guidelines with the fact that his WoW account got hacked and banned, the bank account got emptied via a check (where there is no way to get the money back), friends asking Joe on FaceSpace to stop inundating them with malware links, and Joe's ISP cutting his connection due to large amounts of outgoing spam.

Got stux with windowz ? unstux that with Linux !

[noddyxoi]

Got stux with windowz ? unstux that with Linux or even better freebsd !

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[slapout]

"The uniform shout of the Iranian nation is forever 'Death to Israel.'" --Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[m50d]

"Israel" != "all Jews"

Worse it what could follow

[elrous0]

I know that Mossad, the CIA, or whoever did this probably intended this to be a one-shot deal and didn't expect it to go as viral as it did. But I hope they truly appreciate what a nasty thing they've started. Now everyone will be doing it. And these sorts of viruses have the potential to cause real-world loss of life.

All this for a petty strike against a country that probably didn't even work (and would only have pushed them closer to war even if it had).

Re:Worse it what could follow

[gtall]

"I know that Mossad, the CIA, or whoever did this probably intended this to be a one-shot deal", really? How do you know this?

Re:Worse it what could follow

[CAIMLAS]

"Probably didn't work"? If it disrupted their efforts, it had military success. If it stopped their efforts and set them back, it was a shining success.

Would you have preferred a strategic strike against said nuclear installations? I'm sure they would have been somewhat more likely to "result in war". A couple more people would have certainly died using this approach (and it'd have cost everyone a lot more).

The truth is, Iran would have no "capacity" to wage war on any significant scale without nuclear weapons. Denying your enemy the means to fight is kind of the point, thus why this was done.

Re:Worse it what could follow

[m6ack]

Or it could result for the better & people/companies that handle and vend Software that enables critical infrastructure start taking a passing thought about security -- and at the VERY least stop programming/controlling PLC's with Windows.

Re:Worse it what could follow

[elrous0]

Well, since it was only targeting two very specific models of PLC and apparently released at only one point of release (in Iran, if you believe Symantec), it obviously wasn't intended to be a general purpose virus that spreads around the world.

Re:Worse it what could follow

[elrous0]

I somehow doubt that a good Samaritan did this as a proof of concept. But, yes, it is certainly a warning. And hopefully businesses will take this seriously and take serious steps to improve their security measures. But considering how lax a lot of companies already are in regards to security against existing conventional viruses, I think that's unlikely.

Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Dr. Crash]

What I don't understand is why the *heck* the SCADA systems running Iran's { illegal | sooper-sekrit | stealth } nuclear weapons program aren't air-gapped! Isn't that something like standard procedure?

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Jaysyn]

All it takes is one asshole to dig out the epoxy in the USB slots & not get caught & boom, you're infected.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Hijacked Public]

They probably are, but they rely on contractors to program them. Stuxnet arrives via the contractor's laptops, or USB drives, or wherever else, then persists on Iran's control network.

Windows AV software really isn't much help with malware that it doesn't already know.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[LWATCDR]

Wouldn't you disable the USB slots at the BIOS or OS level as well.
Also wouldn't autorun have to be turned on or something!
Just sticking mass storage in a drive shouldn't cause an infection.
Or is this some really nasty hacked file system exploit.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Jaysyn]

Or just run something off the USB drive maybe. Not all PCs have BIOS options that you describe, I know a lot of laptops don't either.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Ephemeriis]

What I don't understand is why the *heck* the SCADA systems running Iran's { illegal | sooper-sekrit | stealth } nuclear weapons program aren't air-gapped! Isn't that something like standard procedure?

It doesn't really matter if they're air-gapped. Plenty of malware moves around on removable media like USB flash drives. And you have to be able to upgrade/reprogram/patch these SCADA systems somehow.

All it takes is one person plugging a USB stick into the wrong computer and your air-gap has become useless.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[LWATCDR]

Windows does have the ability to block the USBs at the OS level.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Jaysyn]

And some PCs don't have PS2 ports thus your input basically has to come via USB. We just don't have enough info to know why they weren't secure enough to prevent this.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[Locke2005]

My initial reaction as well, but stuxnet was designed to infect air-gapped machines though the USB flash drive. Now, why any competent system admin would leave autorun enabled IS beyond me.

Re:Is this really stupid, or... what?

[LWATCDR]

You just block USB mass storage devices.
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/06/26/disable-usb-removable-mass-storage-device-drive-access-in-windows/
The problem is how do get data on or off the system.
If it was me I would consider a network server/workstation that runs Linux or BSD. Copy the data from the flash drives to the server then run anti virus on them.
Doing and not copying the lnk files but just the data files might have prevented the infections.
Thing is that if this slows down Iran's nuclear program without hurting anybody.
BTW why is everybody jumping on it being the US? Israel is more than capable of doing this and they have an even better reason than the US does.
I doubt that you would have any problem finding a team of top notch programmers and engineers in Israel that would be willing to work on something like this.
 

Debka == BS

[andy1307]

Debka is BS at times and Israeli misinformation at other times.

Re:Debka == BS

[ginbot462]

But, why should I believe you? If you want to argue that side, you're going to have to present more evidence than logging in (course, that DOES rank you higher than most slashdot posts).

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[Beezlebub33]

Take a look at the wikipedia page on Ahmadinejad and Israel. He's pretty nuts and definitely wants to get rid of Israel. I don't see a quote about genocide though, just wants to get rid of the state; weird comments about the holocaust and 9/11.

the accepted liability of running windows

[bl8n8r]

Go ahead and mod me down, but it's only a matter of time before this happens again. You either accept the liability and put your trust in microsoft for patches, or do something else. It's not a stretch to expect more of the same.

"At the same time, the company said it would not patch Windows because doing so would cripple existing applications."
http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/applications/3236953/microsoft-confirms-unpatched-vulnerabilities-in-key-enterprise-programs/

"The security firms also notified Microsoft of two other unpatched bugs that the Stuxnet worm exploited"..."Microsoft said last week. It has not set a timetable for the fixes, however."
http://www.techworld.com.au/article/361843/microsoft_confirms_it_missed_stuxnet_print_spooler_zero-day

"was first identified by information security researchers in June"
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=207166&ref=g_homelink

Re:No hefty consultation fees needed

[NatasRevol]

Or just install AV on all the Windows machines...that you have running critical infrastructure and military command.

get rid of windows

[sxpert]

remedy is simple...
install some form of linux instead of windows, and run the scada software through wine

Re:get rid of windows

[EmagGeek]

Just in case it isn't absolutely obvious, do NOT do what the parent suggests.

concentrated acid for blood

[milkmage]

"The malworm became more aggressive and returned to the attack on parts of the systems damaged in the initial attack.
One expert said: "The Iranians have been forced to realize that they would be better off not 'irritating' the invader because it hits back with a bigger punch."

Ripley: How do we kill it Ash? There's gotta be a way of killing it. How? How do we do it?
Ash: You can't.
Parker: That's bullshit.
Ash: You still don't understand what you're dealing with, do you? Perfect organism. Its structural perfection is matched only by its hostility.
Lambert: You admire it.
Ash: I admire its purity. A survivor... unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality.
Parker: Look, I am... I've heard enough of this, and I'm asking you to pull the plug.
Ash: [Ripley goes to disconnect Ash, who interrupts] Last word.
Ripley: What?
Ash: I can't lie to you about your chances, but... you have my sympathies.

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[Jaysyn]

Just the ones that live in Israel. Great argument there.

Re:Hilarious US Media Lies About Iran

[BobMcD]

Dear Coward, take note:

1) Your tone is horrendous. There are certainly a large number of people who will assume that the link you're offering is the same kind of angry, insulting tripe with which it is surrounded.

2) Your link could well be one of the most enlightening things on youtube. I'm going try to verify that it is true independently before deciding, but this could be bigger than Pat Tillman.

My advice to you is to tone down the bullshit, and stick to the salient, intelligent points being made. This could be difficult, due to the obvious emotion you're displaying, and so I wish you luck either way.

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[Dodgy G33za]

I never knew he spoke English. Or maybe, just maybe, that is a favourable translation...

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[Dodgy G33za]

Take a look at the wikipedia page on Ahmadinejad and Israel. He's pretty nuts and definitely wants to get rid of Israel. I don't see a quote about genocide though, just wants to get rid of the state; weird comments about the holocaust and 9/11.

Denying the holocaust is a crime in many countries. Since history is written by the victors, is it really any surprise that people not of that group may question the facts as presented by the victors. After all, consider the "facts" that Colin Powell presented to justify the invasion of Iraq, Also bear in mind that Mr A is playing to an audience. Here in Australia a certain Mr Katter may be "nuts" to many but he is loved in his electorate. For those in the US that don't understand the reference just insert the name of your local evangelical leader and that will probably do the job.

Re:Hilarious US Media Lies About Iran

[BobMcD]

AC's are always so eloquent, aren't they?

How does it make you feel, wanting so deeply to disrespect me, and yet lacking the ability to come up with anything better than the above? Surely you know that I've seen far worse, and your comments would do nearly nothing in the way of harm to anyone who has spent more than five minutes on the internet.

Kinda sad, really.

Re:So...

[milkmage]

thumb drives

Siemens has released a detection and removal tool for Stuxnet. Siemens recommends contacting customer support if an infection is detected and advises installing the Microsoft patch for vulnerabilities and disallowing the use of third-party USB sticks.[19]

Also

[Sycraft-fu]

Most modern reactor designs have a difficult time going critical. They are made such that if coolant goes away, they stop working. Depending on the kind of fuel you use you can set it up so that when the coolant goes away the excess heat causes things to spread out and thus the reaction slows. It gets hot, but not hot enough to melt down. Not fool proof, nothing is of course, but makes it pretty hard for things to go critical even in a worst case scenario.

It also should be noted that often the SCRAM systems go beyond that. The rods will have springs behind them to force them in quicker, and there are usually secondary systems to drive them in as well, should the primaries fail.

Over all, the world did a pretty good job learning from the problems of early reactors and it is pretty hard to cause a meltdown these days, with a modern reactor design at least.

Do remember that the people who build these have a large vested interest in making sure they DON'T go critical, even in adverse situations. Safeties are taken seriously.

Re:Also

[BlueParrot]

makes it pretty hard for things to go critical even in a worst case scenario.

All power reactors in the world today go critical as part of their normal operation. That's why they can sustain a chain reaction. However, they are all designed in such a way that their criticality is not sufficient to allow the reactor to remain critical without the contribution from so called delayed-neutrons. These are neutrons emitted by the fission products some time after the fission event. It's because the release of these neutrons is much slower than the release of fission neutrons that it is possible to build a stable nuclear reactor. Without them the reactor would either be sub-critical and hence not produce any power without an external neutron source, or it would be prompt-critical, which pretty much means you would not be able to control the rate of the chain reaction rapidly enough to prevent dangerous power fluctuations.

Modern pressurized water reactors typically can't go prompt critical, since the quantity of relatively low enriched uranium is too small.

Re:Also

[Sprouticus]

you misunderstood the OP. What he is saying is that the reactor is built so that outside of normal operation (no coolant flow, physical damage, etc) it is difficult to concentrate the fuel to the point where criticality can occur. If you have to 'work hard' to make it critical it is inheriantly safer.

Ex:
Heat seperates the fuel which lowers the neutron flux to go subcritical.

Lack of coolant also reduces neutron flux by either not moderating the neutrons properly or causing the temp to go up so that the 1st example occurs.

Fast criticality has been unlikely(I never say impossible) in most commercial designs (outside Russia) for a very long time.

NOTE: My hands on experience on nuclear plants ended in 1991, and I am going my memory.

smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[amias]

have a look at the whois for debka

Registrant:
      DEBKAfile Ltd.
      4, Hamaapilim St.
      Jerusalem, 92545
      Israel

why should anyone trust news about Arabic interests that is published by people living in Israel ?

it would certainly suit Israeli interests to discredit the security of Iran and its the kind of racism that
seems to be all too common in Israel .

Toodle-pip
Amias

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[Anonymous Coward]

The web site should be judged on its track record, not on your strange definition of "racism".

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[Reservoir Penguin]

More importantly why do you think Iran has anything to do with *Arabic* interests?

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[John Hasler]

Iranians are not arabs. You have a point, though. One should never trust any one source.

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[amias]

and your comment will be judged by your cowardice.

racism is when someone treats someone different because the are from a specific race , in this instance i am alleging that an Israeli run website will be instinctively biased toward exaggeration of
facts that show Arabic people in a bad light.

i think it would take a special kind of ignorance to state publicly that Israel was not a country that had a predilection for racism.

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[amias]

oops sorry , i didn't realise that iran was not a member of the arabic league . i assumed it was synonymous with muslim but it appears not to be.

however for the purposes of israeli hatred it doesnt seem to matter , as long as they are muslim.

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[jpmorgan]

So what you're saying is you're treating the website differently because it's from a specific race.

Gotcha. Racist.

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[Omniscientist]

It's a completely reasonable assertion to view a news source as potentially unreliable based simply on its point of origin vs the subject matter.

It isn't necessarily because the people writing the article are untrustworthy or biased, instead it is the framework they operate in (where they get their information from, government sources, etc.) itself that is biased, as it naturally has interests.

Re:smells like more israeli racism than news to me

[stumblingblock]

Why bother with whois? The site clearly is Israeli, look at how you are given a choice of English/Hebrew. Also the ads for Alan Dershowitz's book should be a tipoff. This does not prove anything, however.

Thank God it's not named...

[master_p]

...Tuxnet.

or... ...Suxnet.

Re:Thank God it's not named...

[Xyrus]

Fuxnet?

Re:Hilarious US Media Lies About Iran

[BobMcD]

My Karma speaks for itself, and I fully understand the weight and value of your opinion.

Re:No hefty consultation fees needed

[ginbot462]

There are others mentioning the Linux plus VM (or WINE); but, from what I heard how it infects is more insidious than previous rootkits. It fakes out the OS to hide itself (though it hides in plain site). In short, this virus may be the most difficult one to forcefully remove we've seen.

Who knows how far backups for the SCADA system are infected. Is the firmware infected? It sounds as if the PLCs are infected as well.

What worries me with weaponized virus attacks from nation-states, is what if another entity mutates your virus to hijack it for their purposes? It seems like that is the next inevitable step.

So, thanks NSA/Mossad/HamsterNinjas to giving the Eastern Bloc keys to my bank account.

(Who am I kidding, I meant to my porn collection.)

m

Step one...

[hesaigo999ca]

Step one, never ever, link a computer that is critical and or military in nature. We all hear never should any computer used to control the power grid be placed connected to the internet, follow this rule, as your #1 priority, then the rest follows, no matter how many times you fix it, it will return broken because you are connected to the biggest network of hackers of all, the internet...!

Re:Step one...

[CodeBuster]

Step one, never ever, link a computer that is critical and or military in nature.

I don't think they get Battlestar Galactica over there in Iran...

Re:Step one...

[hesaigo999ca]

I laugh because when I watched the show, it reminded me of that report the guy that defected from the CIA wrote about how he could take down all of the US using certain vectors and targeting many of the supposed "mission critical" utilities companies that makes this country run. It ended up being a great story for die hard (the last one)....but also yes, I do agree, when I watched BSG, I thought, if your opponent is a computer, why would you use computers to win against him, that it could easily take control of....

As far as being dead on about needing to be off the grid (internet)....why would you want to have a control center for a nuclear reactor on a network that employees use to access their hotmail accounts.
I think if you have a control center that takes care of a nuclear reactor, you do not want it to have
anything to do with other systems, for the sake of failure...have a second computer in the control center that is made for communications, but that first one is only for running the reactor...without usb or cd roms etc...so that some bright individual does not get the temptation to use it for other things. That is all that really matters.

What are the odds?

[HikingStick]

Given the apparent complexity of this worm, what are the chances that it was actually developed by the US Military, Israeli intelligence, or a US ally? Just because the US military has a poor history of securing many of its servers doesn't mean it couldn't pull together a sophisticated attack. None of the major US media outlets have (to my knowledge) even seriously raised the idea that Uncle Sam could be behind it. It's one "conspiracy theory" that seems just plausible enough to believe.

Re:Hilarious US Media Lies About Iran

[d3ac0n]

BobMcD,

Heh, haven't you learned yet? Don't feed the trolls.

This is why I browse with AC's auto-set to -1. If someone hasn't the courage to mate their statement to their nick, then I have no interest in what they have to say. Especially trolls that post nothing but foul language.

Otherwise, thank you for your attempt to bring civility to /. It is appreciated.

Who died and made you...

[CountBrass]

Who died and made you the Supreme Court? Or is there something in the constitution that allows any ill-informed muppet the right to make that judgement?

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[TapeCutter]

Iran's Jewish population is the second largest in the Middle East, after Israel. Reports vary as to the condition and treatment of the small, tight-knit community.

This is just pure lie, see proves below...

[XARG]

All this quotes are pure lies:
search for "must expel Arabs and take" in
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/David_Ben-Gurion

search for "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation"
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=22&x_article=775

etc...

some arab supported seem to just LOVE using lies as the best weapon.

Re:This is just pure lie, see proves below...

[NeutronCowboy]

Because if Wikiquote doesn't have it, it doesn't exist? Someone wasn't there when they explained how to use encyclopedias.

Re:This is just pure lie, see proves below...

[CannonballHead]

Replying because I modded the wrong way. Doh. Sigh.

Re:This is just pure lie, see proves below...

[sabt-pestnu]

A fair number of the GPs quotes seem to come from mepja.org, or at least are among those also quoted there.

I find both the original references, and the refutation links interesting.

The first refutation link is to a wiki (wikiquote), which one can imagine being subject to propaganda struggles on popular pages. The second refutation link describes the quote being refuted as from some entirely different sources than the GP's. One can't help but wonder, when a quote is attributed to different sources. Of course, the GP's quotes are from sources obscure enough that researching them becomes more than an idle moment's diversion from work as well.

The parent's CAMERA.org link is to a page debunking a few particular "sources of misinformation". It is hard to tell, from the sidelines, whether they've cherry-picked particular statements that are provably false, or whether they have chosen a small set of examples fitting a larger pattern. The sources quoted, as well as those used for verification, are obscure beyond the idle endeavor.

But in as much as I have no first hand evidence, and no experience with any of the sources or organizations involved, I have no basis to place trust in either side. CAMERA evidently has its stated goals, as described:

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, or CAMERA, a media watchdog founded to combat what was perceived as anti-Israeli press coverage...

Columbia Journalism Review

...devoted to promoting accurate and balanced coverage of Israel and the Middle East. ... non-partisan organization, CAMERA takes no position with regard to American or Israeli political issues or with regard to ultimate solutions to the Arab-Israeli conflict. ...Frequently inaccurate and skewed characterizations of Israel and of events in the Middle East may fuel anti-Israel and anti-Jewish prejudice.

CAMERA's stated policies.

I would have more trust if they were an academic organization, or if they were interested in busting myths about both Israelis AND Arabs/Palestinians, instead of being specifically a defense of one side.

And this, really, exhausts how far I'm willing to research a set of topics I have no personal stake or influence in, on whim alone. Someone wants to compensate me for my time, I'd develop more interest in chasing down these quotes.

But it does show that you can trust quotes only as far as your personal knowledge, and your sphere of trust goes.

Hey Iran...

[RogueWarrior65]

Stux for you!!! Sorry, couldn't resist and resistance is futile. HA!! Thank you. I'll be here all week. Try the veal.

Re:Israel Threated To Wipe Iran Off The Map

[ArcherB]

It shouldn't be surprising to anyone that Iran is building up their defenses in preperation of possible Israeli terror attacks.

"Iran should be wiped off the map"

Benjamin Netanyahu

And Iran has threatened to wipe Israel from history... Iran has called the US the "Great Satan"... The US called Iran part of the "Axis of Evil"... your point is?

Quid pro quo for Peace Talks?

[divisionbyzero]

It seems interesting that the Israelis committed themselves to peace talks right when Stuxnet hit Iran. Maybe Israel is now reassured the US takes the the threat of Iran seriously because they are doing something about it? Let the conspiracy theories begin!

I've got an idea

[ILuvRamen]

You know what'd be really funny? If they used the same ultra-stealth techniques as the TDSS rootkit and others and then made the virus sleep and at a random date between now and like 2 years from now, it would fry system files or do a half BIOS flash or generally destroy the computer. Then machines would slowly break nonstop, taking down the industrial sites for a long period of time instead of just destroying a bunch outright. Maybe it's already doing that, who knows?

Re:Whatever became of

[NeverVotedBush]

Not all the time it doesn't.

Re:Hilarious US Media Lies About Iran

[BobMcD]

I'm feeding them poison, though, so it's fine.

Nice, but

[medv4380]

Given that Iran doesn't have a "Modern" designed reactor like the US, EU, or even Russia how can you assume they have one with the most rational safeguards? If memory serves didn't Russia go over and beyond with Chernobyl removing things like basic safeguards just to "Test" a worst case scenario. What if Iran just hasn't built them in because they think they are choose by god?

Re:No hefty consultation fees needed

[mlts]

Another idea is to have a hypervisor OS that is locked down and can do auto snapshotting. This way, if the Windows VM gets compromised, it can be rolled back, the infected snapshot cloned for forensics, and life can go on. VMWare can pop snapshots automatically and maintain them by day/week/month.

Caveat: This is if you know the point in time the machine got infected. A lot of malware will install and then go dormant to make it harder to find when a box got compromised.

How gullible

[SmallFurryCreature]

If Stuxnet is CLAIMED to be attacking Iran by Iran, you bet on Israel... wow, swallowed the pill whole didn't you?

Stuxnet spies on Iran. So who has motives to spy on Iranian CITIZENS? Oooh, Iran? And then when it is found out, they blaim it on outsiders. Just as they blamed the shooting of the girl during the violent supression of peaceful protests on outside agents as well. Very handy outside agents, you can blame anything on them.

And people like you swallow it whole.

And why would Israel spy on Indonesia?

No, I get the feeling the truth will be far simpler. Someone created a worm, released it, techies think "well I couldn't do it, therefor nobody could, therefor is must be CIA or Mossad". People claim that it was impossible for an individual to write because it involved keys from very very cheap hardware makers. Right at the same time that the master key from Intel was leaked...

Connect the dots.

I am willing to bet good money there is no conspiracy. Just a virus outbreak in a country were IT is backward (oh and call me a racist if you want but if you want to see truly horrific computer security go to countries like Iran and Brazil) and run by people raised to obey without thinking, not question everything, the hallmark of a good system admin.

The conspiracy allows you think someone is in charge and nuclear reactors are safe... not that an entire countries network could be at risk, including nuclear reactors because they don't know squat about security.

Odd that Iran was so quick at being able to determine the origins and just how sophisticated it was, yet NOW, days later has to ask for western help... with what? Didn't they already know how it worked? What more is there to know?

Isn't the very fact that they now got to ask for outside help a very good explenation of why the worm was so succesfull?

Similar bet, a new worm that is 100% effective at attacking windows 7 will totally disable MS campus. Gosh... the conspiracy!!! All Iran's affected systems were of a similar origin. Monoculture. Any single succesful attack on a common system will have a massive impact.

Lets not forget that this is the country whose leaders claimed earthquakes are caused by skirts. Very handy, to be able to blaim everything on someone else. Personally, I don't take their word for anything. Nor from anyone who takes an Iranian's official words for anything.

Re:How gullible

[Randle_Revar]

>If Stuxnet is CLAIMED to be attacking Iran by Iran, you bet on Israel... wow, swallowed the pill whole didn't you?

No, if it IS attacking Iran (in particular and on purpose).

Nothing to do with what is merely claimed. I made no statement as to whether I believed the reports. I am still making no statement about that, because I haven't looked into it at all, and I suspect that if I did, it would still be inconclusive.

Re:d3ac0n - The Stupidity Is Sickening

[SethJohnson]

Denying the holocaust is a crime in many countries

Fortunately, there is Iran, who hosted a recent Holocaust denier's conference attended by former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, David Duke, among other revisionist-history luminaries. And in Iran, denying the Holocaust is not only legal, but popular.

Seth

Worm may have been planted by a friend ...

[perpenso]

Yeah, but Germany isn't hostile to Iran, and German and other European companies do billions worth of business with Iran.

My understanding is that the worm has never gone active and done any damage. It has merely been discovered and removal is the problem. Perhaps the worm was installed by a country friendly to Iran, someone involved in the nuclear infrastructure project, as some kind of insurance. If at some time in the future Iran starts moving against the interests of this current "friend" then the worm would get activated. I think the suspect list that is commonly offered is too short.

Re:Worm may have been planted by a friend ...

[Compaqt]

Hmm, interesting possibility. The fact is the Europeans, Russians, and Chinese want to trade with Iran.

Iran's a very natural trading partner for Russia, all they have to do is put a boat with 40' containers on the Caspian Sea from Dagestan down to Iran.

From there, their wares could also go to various places in the Middle East and beyond.

But they don't want Iran upsetting the American Eagle, which could ruin these cozy arrangements for everybody.

Re:Worm may have been planted by a friend ...

[perpenso]

I'd wager that the governments of those foreigners involved in building the Iranian nuclear infrastructure considered various plausible blowback scenarios that went far beyond upsetting the Americans. The possible risks go far beyond the financial impact of economic sanction.

Why are these sources safe? Why not a sleeper?

[perpenso]

... if it was sourced from China or Russia likely safe ...

Why? Given that the worm was idle it may have been an insurance policy, something to activate in the future should Iran start moving against the interests of current "friends". A digital sleeper agent. The current Iranian government is hostile to the west but the population is largely friendly towards the west in general. A future Iranian government that is in line with its citizens may realign itself politically. Or the current Iranian government could just start down a path that is a danger to everyone including current friends.

I don't claim the above is the more likely scenario but it is certainly highly plausible. I think the current suspect list that everyone is tossing around is a bit too short.

Debka is not a reliable site

[mschuyler]

I concur with several comments here. I'm not saying this BECAUSE it is in Israel. It's unreliable--period. Last year they claimed a huge fleet of destroyers was in the Indian Ocean that did not exist. More reliable sites such as strafor http://www.stratfor.com/ do not use debka and consider it a source of disinformation at best.

Take with a pinch of salt...

[sapgau]

It might be so but coming from DEBKA I would look for some confirmation.
After all they have somewhat of a little bias against all of the middle east.

It was DEBKA who was reporting an imminent war this past summer involving the US, Iran, Israel, etc.

If you can confirm their reports with, I don't know, AlJazeera maybe then we can say the news is quite legit.

They do make for great reading though.

How?

[ThatsNotPudding]

How do you have true Democracy when a fundamentalist religion insists on controlling every facet of human life? Even Turkey and Indonesia can't pull off this trick very well. As much as the Teabaggers wish to rewrite history, one of the truly great accomplishments of the American revolution was establishing the concept of the separation of Church and State. In Islam, the Church is the State.

Re:No hefty consultation fees needed

[inasity_rules]

You can't normally infect a PLC. It runs some specialized OS and does not even have all that much memory. Probably separate program/data address ranges. HMIs however can be... Most of the fancy ones seem to run some windows derivative......

The word is probably the USA and Others

[Will.Woodhull]

Stuxnet is clearly a precisely targeted weapon, and from all that I have heard about it to date, the targeting has been done by exploiting features that are unique to Iran's infrastructure. Which suggests that Stuxnet is a one-shot: that it cannot be repurposed to use against any other target.

As the Stuxnet story unfolds, it is beginning to look like it is the exact opposite of the mythical neutron bomb: that device that was supposed to eradicate all life while leaving the buildings standing. In contrast, Stuxnet appears to be designed to destroy the infrastructure of the current Iranian regime while not harming any civilians or their day to day activities.

Because of these qualities, only players with the kind of intelligence gathering capabilities that the USA has could have constructed the thing. To be so devastating and tenacious within such a tightly constrained region of cyberspace requires an intimate knowledge of Iranian Top Secret material as well as a development team with skills and resources far beyond what went into producing Avatar or any other publicly available computer product.

It makes sense that the USA is deeply involved in constructing Stuxnet. It makes even more sense that the USA would not do this alone. It is also doubtful that the USA, or any other single nation, would put so much effort into assuring that Stuxnet could not be used against any other potential enemies. Only the conflicting interests of several nations would provide the kinds of checks and balances that would guide the code development to this end.

There are a large number of countries in Europe, the Mid East, and middle Asia who are threatened by Iran's increasingly irrational behavior, and who would willingly contribute to a multinational covert effort to cripple Iran's nuclear and missile programs. It would not serve the USA's long term best interests to go this route alone; that would risk the trade agreements and treaties the USA desperately needs to regain its economic footing. The USA would have no trouble gathering allies for this kind of effort, and it would be incredibly stupid of them not to do so, That would also be in opposition to current USA policy, which is to avoid any appearance that the USA is going back to the Bush-era "go it alone" approach to world politics.

So I think there are a consortium of governments involved, supporting a software development team no larger than the teams active on Linux core development, or LibreOffice, or Apache, but obviously with some different kinds of skills. This would be a low budget operation: only personnel costs-- nothing like the costs of developing a uranium processing industry (Manhattan Project) or manufacture of precision titanium parts (SR-71 Blacbird)-- and costs could be borne easily by any nation, and easily hidden within their bookkeeping systems. The costs of the delivery system, perhaps a few hundred USB sticks, could be buried within the funding of some small city's budget for K-12 schools.

Who are likely members of the Stuxnet consortium? You could list all the countries within range of Iran's latest missiles as a start. Or going at it another way, you could list all the countries that the USA Secretary of State has visited since taking office, where she has had top-level private conversations. Hiliary Clinton is very adept stateswoman, and you could not find a better person to put an effort like this together. Also, this kind of thing is dead center in her job description.

Oh, great.

[forkfail]

New meme inbound: Geek Terror

I wonder how long it will be until the FBI wants to monitor all the engineers, developers and assorted other technical types out there to keep the children safe from terrorists?

Re:No hefty consultation fees needed

[simp]

It's a bit late in the thread to reply but anyway...

Stuxnet is special in the fact that it indeed does propagate to the Siemens PLC itself. It has specialized code that will run inside the PLC even if the Windows configuration host is cleaned. And even scarier: the code in the PLC seems to be well hidden so that even a experienced engineer will not see it.

no autorun needed

[r00t]

Merely explore the drive, and it runs. It has to do with how Windows draws icons for *.lnk files.

Warm and Fuzzy

[DigitalLogic]

It makes me feel warm and fuzzy that an aggressor can be taken out so easily.