Slashdot Mirror


Stuxnet Worms On

Numerous Stuxnet related stories continue to flow through my bin today, so brace yourself: Unsurprisingly, Iran blames Stuxnet on a plot set up by the West, designed to infect its nuclear facilities. A Symantec researcher analyzed the code and put forth attack scenarios. A Threatpost researcher writes about the sophistication of the worm. Finally, Dutch multinationals have revealed that the worm is also attacking them. We may never know what this thing was really all about.

141 comments

  1. Ghost? by i_ate_god · · Score: 1

    Maybe it has a ghost that developed from the data inputs of over a billion individuals...

    --
    I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
  2. Iran should all buy Macs by Haedrian · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Everyone knows Macs don't get viruses

    </sarcastic joke>

    1. Re:Iran should all buy Macs by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Funny

      And yet, Macs *are* capable of uploading viruses to alien ships.

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    2. Re:Iran should all buy Macs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "Macintosh: The Typhoid Mary of home computing"

      Yeah, I should totally be in advertising.

    3. Re:Iran should all buy Macs by LaminatorX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Only if the ships have certain specific PLCs.

    4. Re:Iran should all buy Macs by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Only if the alien ship hardware is approved for Apple Hardware Communications. ;)

    5. Re:Iran should all buy Macs by cjb658 · · Score: 1

      And yet, Macs *are* capable of uploading viruses to alien ships.

      Yeah, but that app was rejected from the app store.

  3. Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think this is just one of those "Look at Iran, making some outlandish crazy new allegation!" thing (like it was when Ahmadinejad tried to claim there were no homosexuals in Iran or blamed the U.S. Government for 9-11). Considering the very disproportionate hit they took of these infections, the obvious suspects (those who would benefit most from their nuclear program taking a hit), the precision of the targeting of the virus (two very specific models of Seimens PLC's), the impressive sophistication of the worm, etc. I hardly think it's some tin-foil hat conspiracy theory for them to assert that it was a "western power" (most likely Israel or the U.S.) behind this worm.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think he said there are no homosexuals in Iran, he said "We don't have gay people the way you do in America." I think he means they don't really have openly gay people in society like you find in New York. It's interesting because Iran actually allows and pays for sex-change surgeries.

    2. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by i_ate_god · · Score: 1

      most likely Israel or US?

      I'm sure there are a lot of countries, like China, that would want to Iran stfu before they get blown up and the oil stops running. It's in the interest of pretty much any industrialised nation that war doesn't break out over Iran.

      --
      I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    3. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by MozeeToby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's worth noting that although many systems have been compromised worldwide, the only reports of equipment actually being damaged are apocryphal reports of 'nuclear accidents' at Iran's centrifuge facilities. The international community has assumed that those accidents were caused by the worm, and Iran calling the worm an attack on their nuclear ambitions seams to support that claim. Personally, I find the second wave of infections more likely to be someone modifying the payload and basic parameters for their own ends, it seems quite different from the mindset that drove the first set of attacks.

    4. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      It's interesting because Iran actually allows and pays for sex-change surgeries.

      Is that before or after they administer the death penalty for homosexual acts? And they *sometimes* subsidize surgery, which is not the same as "pays for".

      Fortunately, Iran doesn't consider the testimony of women to be trustworthy enough to consider as evidence (see first link).

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    5. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thats pretty much what he said. Actually, homosexuality in their culture is a whole topic unto itself. What was interesting to me was the way he seemed to imply that there is a difference between "public morality" and "private". Have you ever seen how many "witnesses" are required to accuse someone of certain things (like being a homosexual) under sharia law, for example?

      What he seemed, to me, to be espousing was the idea that "what you do in private is between you and god, but, what other people see you do, is another matter". In some ways it reminds me of a japanese woman who was interviewed for the book "Lust in Translation" (never read it, but heard several stories about it) who was not mad at her husband for having an affair, as she had her own, but was mad that he was careless and allowed her to find out about it.

      Having known a few Iranian ex-pats, I must say, they have a fascinating culture, and one thats very different from our own in many ways.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    6. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Dynedain · · Score: 1

      And that's exactly the moral of the story, The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    7. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by JustOK · · Score: 1

      China is closer to Iran than we are.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    8. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Informative

      I wouldn't even say most likely the US or Israel. I don't think there are many nations that want a Nuclear Iran.
      The list should include.
      China
      Russia
      India
      All of the EU
      Egypt
      Most of the Middle East.
      I mean really this list is long and while this worm is probably outside the limits for some guy with a grudge it isn't outside the limits for any nation with a large university with a good CS department.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    9. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by gad_zuki! · · Score: 0, Troll

      >It's interesting because Iran actually allows and pays for sex-change surgeries.

      News flash, transsexualism and homosexuality are two very different things. Please note we are talking about a country with a FUCKING DEATH PENALTY for homosexual acts. This makes Turing's treatment by the UK authorities sound like a walk in the park.

    10. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >they have a fascinating culture, and one thats very different from our own in many ways.

      Finding a death penalty for homosexuality fascinating? It should be horrifying. Same thing for atheism or denying Islam.

      >Thats pretty much what he said.

      Err, transsexualism and homosexuality are two very different things. Iran has a lot of social pressures to force homosexuals into subsidized transsexual treatment, which does nothing but victimize and humiliate homosexuals who have no problem with their gender, its what they want to have sex with that has the theocracts running scared. Theocracy is not a valid form of government. Stop defending it as fascinating. Its victimizing and horrible.

    11. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      News flash, transsexualism and homosexuality are two very different things

      Yep. This is especially troubling since only a minority of male-to-female transsexuals are "heterosexual"; in other words, men who get a sex change in order to become women are more likely to be attracted to women than to men. Which raises the question ... will the government of Iran pay to have a man made into a woman ... only to then execute "her" for having sex with a woman?

    12. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 2, Informative

      Russia does a lot of business with Iran. Ditto for Germany and the E.U. Where do you think they got all the Siemen's hardware and how do you think they flew it in?

    13. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now they need new hardware! Golly, could be a financial incentive at work here.

    14. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by jd · · Score: 1

      The article on the Netherlands reports a satellite being knocked out of service. It may not be physical damage in the sense that you could go up there and hit the reboot switch, but short of a shuttle flight to rescue it, you can effectively consider that satellite to be destroyed. It's dead in space. Deceased. Bereft of life. Since it was probably a communications satellite, and thus a repeater, it's an ex-parrot.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    15. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by at_slashdot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >they have a fascinating culture, and one thats very different from our own in many ways.

      Finding a death penalty for homosexuality fascinating?

      Since when the legal system, especially in a religious autocratic regime, is part of "culture".

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    16. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      No, they'll just convert "her" back. (Hope he saved "his" foreskin!)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    17. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Personally, I find the second wave of infections more likely to be someone modifying the payload and basic parameters for their own ends, it seems quite different from the mindset that drove the first set of attacks.

      Exactly! Just like, Sony releasing a rootkit (that would have ended up in PMITA prison for you and me) ended up in viruses being written that target that rootkit's additional vulnerabilities. Thus, the second wave.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    18. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      My mod points have expired, so I'll just say, "well said" and "that was never five minutes just now!" (In fact, it's been less than a minute, as Slashcode reminded me -- after, I'll have you note, I decided to quote Monty Fucking Python, so it was really neat that Slashcode tripped me up, yet again, to remind me that Slashcode's tripping was topical!)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    19. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      It's sprung out of culture. I guess you could view it as a formalized mask of cultural morality, warts and all?

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    20. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      Why is the above modded troll? It's a perfectly good thing to be morally outraged over.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    21. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Thearls · · Score: 1

      I would hope that the US would be more responsible than this. I'm and engineer that works with the type of instrumentation that this worm is supposed to infect. Siemens instrumentation is used all over the world. It could kill a lot of people if it infects the wrong facility.

    22. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't be too surprised if it's the Russians themselves intentionally screwing up the stuff they installed in Iran. Think about it for a moment. There's likely to be some people in Russia that don't really care to see Iran become a nuclear power. (Don't mean to Godwin or anything, but historically what ethnic/religious community bugged out of Europe during WWII? And contributed a huge portion of brainpower not only to the U.S. nuclear program but also the Russian one? Yeah... I'm sure there's still much influence.) And to be honest, with all the shit said from Iran's president and other leaders, I can't blame them for wanting to do sabotage. But not only that, the longer they can stall and prolong the nuclear project there, the more those inside on the contract jobs can profit on overruns. So it's probably a win for a certain faction of he Russian nuclear science community as well as a win for the Russian Mafia.

      I think Iran's just a cow too busy watching the carrot to realize it's walked into the milking machine. It's kinda lulzy actually.

    23. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theocracy is not a valid form of government.

      Neither is Democracy. Since, you know, the majority could up and vote for Theocracy or something.

      Stop defending it as fascinating. Its victimizing and horrible.

      To you. The majority of the people of Iran feel otherwise. As a civilization, we've decided to embrace multiculturalism. A consequence of that decision is that we must support the belief that their culture is just as "valid" as ours. You don't get to randomly pick and choose some subset that is valid based on how compatible their actions and beliefs are with your worldview, unless you reject multiculturalism completely in favor of the assertion that your personal culture is superior to theirs.

      At least not rationally. You could, however, choose to be a cultural bigot and remain logically consistent. Or you could be irrational, insist that their culture is both barbaric and equivalent, and that their culture would be fine if not for that pesky Theocracy, since we all know that all religious fundamentalist types are the same and that your average Methodist would crash an airliner into a skyscraper in a heartbeat the first chance she gets. And that's why all nation states become so benign when they suppress religion, like all the socialist states in the 20th century and their tens of millions death tolls. I guess all that victimizing and horror isn't so bad; at least all those murdered people didn't have to live under a "theocracy".

    24. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Nyder · · Score: 0, Troll

      >they have a fascinating culture, and one thats very different from our own in many ways.

      Finding a death penalty for homosexuality fascinating? It should be horrifying. Same thing for atheism or denying Islam.

      >Thats pretty much what he said.

      Err, transsexualism and homosexuality are two very different things. Iran has a lot of social pressures to force homosexuals into subsidized transsexual treatment, which does nothing but victimize and humiliate homosexuals who have no problem with their gender, its what they want to have sex with that has the theocracts running scared. Theocracy is not a valid form of government. Stop defending it as fascinating. Its victimizing and horrible.

      So your saying, because Iran has some different views then us, we should disregard all their culture, because there isn't any redeeming value in it? Seriously?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    25. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Witnesses required for stoning, homosexuality, leaving islam, insulting the government or any other capital offense according to muslims : zero.

      The wording of this racist "law" is that 2 muslim males must claim to know that the victim did something. And frankly, the distinction you imply doesn't exist. There is no privacy from the government in Iran (not that this isn't obvious to all but the most deluded, but hey).

      Also please keep in mind that separation between church and state is just what it sounds like : a statement from the bible, more or less accepted by Christians that wordly and spiritual matters are distinct and should be under distinct governance. It is not a property, in general, of any other religion. Being a muslim implies that one wants the state to eradicate homosexuals. (Just as buddhism and hinduism imply same, just to name 2 : these people see ("are required to see by their religion" if you like that better) homosexuality as a sin, and expect the state to prevent it and/or exact punishment of some kind). In all religions, except christianity (and even there this is a somewhat recent development, even if "recent" means 1500 years ago in the case of christianity) any "normal" individual has no rights at all, vis-a-vis either the religion, or the state.

      And I find our "tolerance" for gay-killing religions ... disgusting, and that's not the only disgusting feature of islam by a long shot. Muslims, defined as people who actually believe in islam, are also disgusting and dangerous, just like any other murderer or anyone planning to murder others for these kinds of offences is. And, frankly, I'm of the opinion that if one doesn't believe in "rajam", as they call it, stoning, isn't a muslim and should face the simple fact that he is not.

    26. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting point about transsexuals. Let's instead consider condemning societies where such self-mutilating pathological narcissists are subsidized, encouraged, or reassured that they are normal.

    27. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Israel is closer to the business end of Iranian warheads than anyone.

    28. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortunately for them, Iran's culture is not limited to hating {homo|trans}sexuals or worshipping Allah.

    29. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by gtall · · Score: 1

      Not only that, China lusts after Iranian oil. It would be in their interest to have a nuclear powered Iran since then they'd have more oil to export. China might feel it can get away with that policy since the Uighurs are Sunni, not Shi'ite and so are unlikely to be supported by Iran.

    30. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, wipe your mouth, the hate is seething out of it.

    31. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by JustOK · · Score: 1

      China would like to move in.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    32. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      So when it all blows up Iran will pay Russia to build it again for a pile of cash...
      Repeat until done.
      Also you might want to read up a bit. Russia has decided not to sell Iran a state of the art SAM system this week.
      Oh and Germany. If it blows up they will again buy more stuff form them.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    33. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think Occam's Razor usually applies to suspects too. And in this case the most obvious suspect, with the most to gain by far, is Israel. There is even some evidence in the code that this is the case, and the Israeli government itself has openly acknowledged that it has extensive cyber-warfare plans.

      Now of course, there are any number of ways to dismiss this if you REALLY want to believe that Israel wasn't involved (and it's always possible that they weren't). But you can do that with any case, no matter how clear-cut. I can make the same argument that O.J. Simpson never killed anyone (maybe it was just someone making it LOOK like he did it, there were probably other people with some reason to kill Ron and Nicole too). But is that the logical conclusion or just wishful thinking on my part because I don't want to believe that O.J. did it?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    34. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or blamed the U.S. Government for 9-11

      He is right it was a false flag attack. Hell the US has done this for over 500 years ask any Native American.

    35. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the CIA has a long history of irresponsible actions, so I wouldn't rule them out. The funny thing is that many of the researchers who have looked at this have seen evidence that the worm started out with much more conservative safeguards to keep it from spreading. But at some point some of these were removed. It's been suggested that the first version (from 2009) might have missed its intended target, leading the writers to adopt a more aggressive approach (leading to the spread of it outside its target area). Even now it has a "three strikes" and a time limit safeguards, likely intended to limit its spread.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    36. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No, no, it's just resting.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    37. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > Finding a death penalty for homosexuality fascinating? It should be horrifying. Same thing for atheism or denying
      > Islam.

      You do realize, I hope, that there is a difference between "I find it fascinating" and "I agree with it" or "I like it". You seem not. I find many aspects of the holocaust fascinating too, even though I have nothing against jews. Hell... I admonish our own soldiers and police for their willingness to use violence to solve problems, I certainly don't condone it in any other circumstances.

      So yes, a fascinating. Also, most every Iranian I have met has also lamented the invasion by the arabs and the forced conversion of people to Islam. Its really not fair to paint their culture with one big brush.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    38. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA and Israel would have had to know that it was Seimen's hardware that was being used, and the would have had to know that the model numbers of each hardware piece.

      I have a German friend in the "Know" who claims it is German hackers who have grudges. Seimens has some public relations work to do to improve its image in their home base.

    39. Re:Never thought I would defend Iran, but... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      lol, troll huh?

      --
      Be seeing you...
  4. We may never know? We DO know! by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Funny

    I for one feel it's safe to assume Iran is right, that this is a nefarious plot by unnamed western nations to stop Iran's glorious peaceful nuclear power program, but that absolutely no computers controlling the nuclear program were infected. After all, Iran is completely trustworthy and it's nuclear scientists are smart enough not to use control computers to check their e-mail and click on random links from random people.

    I'm also going to assume that fake first post was part of a nefarious plot by unnamed western nations to tarnish Iran's glorious image as first posters.

  5. Re:first post by i_ate_god · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I win!!!

    --
    I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
  6. Market for pirated Seimens PLCs? by vlm · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Is there a big market for pirated Seimens PLCs?

    You know, the Chinese business plan where they run off extra copies after the assembly line closes, and sell them for pure profit? Also the move where they change virtually nothing but the name and start selling it as a generic model at Walmart / Harbor Freight / etc?

    Maybe it was an attempt to "get" the infringing Chinese devices that got a little out of control and got the real ones too?

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Market for pirated Seimens PLCs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Siemens. Like Tolkien.

      *sigh*

    2. Re:Market for pirated Seimens PLCs? by _merlin · · Score: 1

      Your hypothesis reminds me of the "Frankie" virus that targeted pirated versions of Aladin (a Mac emulator for Atari ST). It ended up attacking most Mac emulators on the ST, and not just the ones it was supposed to target (although some, like SPECTRE, were naturally immune).

    3. Re:Market for pirated Seimens PLCs? by chill · · Score: 1

      No. The PLCs are attached to multi-million dollar, room-sized equipment that was already purchased. Pirating a PLC is like buying an Rolls Royce Phantom for $450,000 and not wanting to pay $2.50 for a replacement spark plug.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  7. Other targets by mischi_amnesiac · · Score: 1

    Makes sense, it hides the real purpose.

    --
    "Die endgueltige Teilung Deutschlands - das ist unser Auftrag." - Chlodwig Poth
  8. Might not be the West... by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm pretty sure Stuxnet is in fact a sophisticated attack worm created by a government to slow or halt Iran in producing nuclear weapons.

    There are plenty of candidates beyond the U.S. and Israel - Saudi Arabia for one, would be another country really not happy with a nuclear Iran, though certainly the U.S. or Israel seems most likely.

    But lets consider the most intriguing possibility - a country with tons of expertise in developing advanced malware already, and one with incredibly detailed knowledge of Iranian systems.

    Of course, I'm speaking of Russia.

    At first it sounds crazy because Russian scientists are helping Iran build a reactor in the first place. But perhaps that help was lined up long before, and Russia has decided Iran is too crazy now to be allowed to have The Bomb, so they activated Stuxnet, prepared in advance for such an eventuality. Or perhaps they simply wanted to get money from the help and then the cleanup...

    Russian scientists have been fleeing Iran because Iran is now going after guys in cubicles and saying they are spies. So perhaps even there, they know something most of us do not...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Might not be the West... by jayme0227 · · Score: 1

      Let's consider this possibility: Iran couldn't get the Nuclear Facility up and running properly so they needed a scapegoat. Now, it can't be something simple or else they'd be considered to be incompetent. Also, they'd need to be able to track the problem to a malevolent source, again, so they can shift all blame away from themselves. So what do they do? Create a virus that will be released into the wild and contains obscure references to past Israeli-Iranian conflicts. The virus has the bonus effect of allowing them to spy on their own citizens and companies around the world.

      In the end, it doesn't matter who created the virus. If Iran (or anyone else) can't secure a nuclear facility, they shouldn't have a nuclear facility.

      --
      But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
    2. Re:Might not be the West... by moderatorrater · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Consider this possibility: the last time people were accusing a government of being behind an attack, it was someone with a grudge but no government connection. Considering how hard it is (or even impossible) to tell the difference between a talented amateur and a professional when it comes to computers, why is everyone jumping on the government bandwagon? Maybe it's some college buddies in Tel Aviv who decided that they wanted to target Iran, or maybe Stuxnet was just a worm of the week from blackhats (many of which are getting ridiculously complex) that just happened to get into the Iranian facilities.

    3. Re:Might not be the West... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      A question I always ask : why should it be a government ? I estimate a budget of one million dollar to create this thing, and that's a high estimate. That's more than a hobbyist budget (through it could be, if made by the original zero-day finders) but in the range of many organizations. It could also very well be a criminal organization who had simply money as their motive. I am sure that with such an infection on so many presumably critical structures, getting more than one million in blackmailing must not be that hard to do...

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    4. Re:Might not be the West... by perpenso · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ... Maybe it's some college buddies in Tel Aviv who decided that they wanted to target Iran, or maybe Stuxnet was just a worm of the week from blackhats (many of which are getting ridiculously complex) that just happened to get into the Iranian facilities ...

      They needed a lot of expensive industrial control equipment to develop and test on.

    5. Re:Might not be the West... by znerk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I estimate a budget of one million dollar to create this thing

      [citation needed]

      If I were to pull a number out of my ass on what it would take to create any virus-like program, I would set the budget at:
      (1) extremely dedicated individual with internet access and some time on his/her hands.

      The information required for attacking practically anything is available online. Yes, looking for the information might raise some red flags, and accessing it could most certainly do so, but if the person perpetrating said attack is clever and careful (and maybe lucky, as well), there won't be anything pointing at a specific person for accessing that information (Public access (libraries, netcafes), wardriving, etc can all be used for misdirection).

      TL;DR: Once you have the plans for the death star, it just takes a bit of time to figure out where the reactor core is, and noticing the exhaust vent that goes straight to it.

      Pointing fingers should be reserved until after some facts have been found.
      --
      No, I didn't read the article; I still I believe my logic is sound.

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    6. Re:Might not be the West... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Well, the number the press is shouting everywhere is that it costs $250,000 to buy a 0-day exploit thatis not public. Of the 4 zero-days used, two were known. That leaves, at most, $500 000 for the two others. There is also a cryptographic certificate to get. I suspect this is at least as much expensive. 1 million is a high-range estimation I, yes, somehow put out of my ass by making very inflated guesses. It could also be a single person discovering the two unknown flaws that used them to steal Realtek's crypto key and made the virus by himself. It could very well be a zero-budget attack, as improbable as this look. All I am saying is that it didn't cost more than 1 million and that the number of organisations that have access to these resources is colossal.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    7. Re:Might not be the West... by Solandri · · Score: 1

      There's another possibility which occurred to me. You know all those reports we read warning that our power grid is vulnerable to computer attack? Maybe someone making those warnings got tired of being ignored and decided to demonstrate how easy it was?

    8. Re:Might not be the West... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that is too much like "man goes to a restaurant, orders a pelican, has a bite, goes outside and shoots himself" story, too much lateral thinking... why make something so sophisticated as a diversion...

    9. Re:Might not be the West... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Siemens PLC costs less then $600.

      http://www.matrikonopc.com/opc-drivers/opc-siemens-s7-plc/base-driver-details.aspx

      It is not expensive to develop and test on.

    10. Re:Might not be the West... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The cooperation was lined up long time ago but even then it had been known about Iran's nuclear ambitions, ideology and general attitude. Russia is playing a dangerous and sophisticated game in this region. They try to gain influence on Iran, to draw it into their orbit. It has to do with Caucassian states, oil and oil transport. They also try to play this card in the international scene as they seem to be the only country to have some persuasive power. OTOH Iran seems to be happy to buy technology from Russia but reluctant to follow Russia's rules concerning West and Central Asia policies. And here it is good to remember that Russia is notorious for applying force to their smaller counterparts.

    11. Re:Might not be the West... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      A Siemens PLC costs less then $600. http://www.matrikonopc.com/opc-drivers/opc-siemens-s7-plc/base-driver-details.aspx It is not expensive to develop and test on.

      You are forgetting all the things that plug into the PLC. Nuclear facility rated valves, pumps, etc.

    12. Re:Might not be the West... by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      you dont need that for testing, you can simply monitor the outputs of the PLC to peripherals.

      It would require some pretty depe knowledge of how the system is set up however, to plan a failure mode with the desired effect, you cant simply gamble on "close every valve in the system" if you want an effective attack.

      So yeah, given the complexity of the targetted system, i think some college buddies in a basement in tel-aviv isnt very likely, this reaks of government involvement

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    13. Re:Might not be the West... by Magada · · Score: 1

      You forget the money required to find out the actual sequence of commands that would do actual damage in an actual real-world plant. That could be very, very expensive for someone living halfway around the world from the intended target or it could cost nothing for, say, a technician at Natanz.

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    14. Re:Might not be the West... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      you dont need that for testing, you can simply monitor the outputs of the PLC to peripherals.

      So your from the school of thought that code does not need to be tested in the field, that if it works in the programmer's mocked up environment it is ready for release? :-)

    15. Re:Might not be the West... by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      god no, that sort of thinking got my current project into the state it is today (and sadly, no-one thought to warn me before i was in to deep)

      If whoever did this has enough info to know exactly what kind of equipment the iranis have, they probably know which valves are used and how to actuate them properly, they also probably know what kind of reactor design it is, and how to sabotage it.

      Else, they wouldnt just need the valves for their mockup test, but a complete running reactor, and the only succesfull system test would be a full-scale meltdown..

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
  9. finger pointing without proof by NonUniqueNickname · · Score: 1

    Who hates the Iran's state-sponsored cultural intolerance and the Dutch?
    Austin Powers' father.

  10. More details needed in story summary by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Despite the numerous slashdot articles and buzz about it, I'm seeing scant actual details.

    How was it delivered? Via Internet? Botnet? Unknown at this time? According to the article it "can spread using several vectors."
    It also says 2 of the 4 zero-day vulnerabilities have been patched by MS.

    The article about a possible attack scenario leads more credibility to the claim that there had to be inside help. You need people on the inside for Reconnaissance and deployment. Even if it was spread from the internet, someone had to get ahold of the security certificates to crack them and know the specific types of PLCs in use. The arrests that recently took place in Iran are making a lot more sense, despite all the knee-jerk condemnation from the /. posters.

    1. Re:More details needed in story summary by MozeeToby · · Score: 3, Informative

      Speculation/rumor is that the attack vector was USB drives used by Russian contractors. That is also it's primary method of spread, but it may be able to spread over networks as well (reports that I've seen seem contradictory on that one). Further speculation/rumor has it that a possible "nuclear accident" at Iran's centrifuge facility last year may have been caused by this worm, if that is the case it is the only report of actual hardware being damaged that I've heard of and would 100% support the idea that the worm was targeted at Iran's nuclear facilities. Given the number of infections in Iran and the artificial three hop limit that the worm's writers gave it, it would seem the attack originated there.

      I think it's likely that the writers never planned on having the worm escape the target's network, I'm guessing someone at the nuke facility broke security protocol and took home a thumb drive that they weren't supposed to and it spread from there. The worm doesn't do much except take up cycles on systems that don't match the fingerprint that it is looking for, a fingerprint only makes sense if you're looking to take down a lot of identical systems, which lines up nicely with the centrifuge theory. Basically, it's highly likely that this was a government job, targeting Iran's centrifuges, done with inside knowledge of what systems they were using, and delivered using some pretty basic social engineering (leaving infected USB drives on the ground in the parking lot for instance).

    2. Re:More details needed in story summary by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0921/Stuxnet-malware-is-weapon-out-to-destroy-Iran-s-Bushehr-nuclear-plant
      You have a USB device talking to Microsoft connecting to Siemens "something" then to some industrial system that has to work really well 24/7 and or to exact tolerances.
      Microsoft is the way in, at it seem to be looking for something, like a key and a lock.
      When it finds a match, interesting a 'new' things may happen over time to some industrial system.
      Phone home and uninstaller seem to be part of the deal http://defense-update.com/wp/20100930_stuxnet-under-the-microscope.html
      Security certificates would be floating around the web or could be stolen, bought.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:More details needed in story summary by dpilot · · Score: 1

      Somehow this reminds me of grey-goo or tailored virus attacks out of science fiction - and just as well targeted. After all, the "story" happens once things go awry, not while they're working as expected.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    4. Re:More details needed in story summary by boa13 · · Score: 1

      > Despite the numerous slashdot articles and buzz about it, I'm seeing scant actual details.

      That's probably because you're not getting your news at the right place. Here's the detailed technical analysis released last week:

      http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/media/security_response/whitepapers/w32_stuxnet_dossier.pdf

      It's quite an impressive read.

  11. only question by bhcompy · · Score: 1

    My only question is who the hell named it "stuxnet"?

    1. Re:only question by nemasu · · Score: 1

      Good question, made me curious....and I can't really figure it out. Usually whoever discovers in gets to name it, if that's the case then it's an anti virus vendor in Belarus called VirusBlokAda and going by their company name, it wouldn't surprise me.

      --
      I made an app! Shoutium
    2. Re:only question by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      IIRC, the name has been discovered somewhere in worm's files. Can't find the link though.

  12. Any one has more details on the plc payload ? by JonySuede · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Any one has more details on the PLC payload ? I want to know what kind of changes it makes to the plc software.

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
  13. Target is still speculation by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This attack is aimed at a very specific PLC configuration, and does nothing unless it finds that configuration. Until someone who has the matching PLC configuration admits it, speculation as to the target remains speculation.

    1. Re:Target is still speculation by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      "Langner's analysis also shows, step by step, what happens after "Stuxnet finds its target. Once Stuxnet identifies the critical function running on a programmable logic controller, or PLC, made by Siemens, the giant industrial controls company, the malware takes control. One of the last codes Stuxnet sends is an enigmatic “DEADF007.” Then the fireworks begin, although the precise function being overridden is not known, Langner says. It may be that the maximum safety setting for RPMs on a turbine is overridden, or that lubrication is shut off, or some other vital function shut down. Whatever it is, Stuxnet overrides it, Langner’s analysis shows." from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0921/Stuxnet-malware-is-weapon-out-to-destroy-Iran-s-Bushehr-nuclear-plant/(page)/3

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Target is still speculation by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't Siemens be able to tell (based on the commands sent to the PLC by the Stuxnet worm) what it is trying to do?

    3. Re:Target is still speculation by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Layers of NDA? Govs telling them too?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Target is still speculation by nashville-tn · · Score: 1

      It could be something that is not all that readily apparent, such as preventing a centrifuge from enriching uranium anywhere close to weapons grade, thinking the Iranians would blame their technicians as incompetent, rather than a worm.

    5. Re:Target is still speculation by sapphire+wyvern · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not necessarily. The "P" in PLC stands for programmable. PLCs have a large amount of generic physical I/O (relay outputs, 4-20mA inputs, etc etc). From looking at the Stuxnet code, you *might* be able to tell that a particular output is being turned on - but without knowing what's wired into that output, you still haven't learned much. And that's a fairly blatant scenario (where Stuxnet is directly controlling PLC I/O),

      If Stuxnet is doing something more subtle, it could be doing something like patching the PLC code to silently disable safety interlocks, by replacing the results of a logic calculation with a different value. It's similar to installing a NoCD crack in a game executable so that the check_for_valid_disk() function call return value is always set to TRUE, and the disk checking code never even runs. If we can only see the patch (Stuxnet's observable behaviour) but not the original executable (the PLC code) there's no way to tell exactly what Stuxnet's payload is. Even Siemens wouldn't be able to figure it out unless they had a copy of the code put into the PLC by its owners.

  14. Dutch companies were NOT attacked by sciencewatcher · · Score: 1

    The worm was found on pc's in The Netherlands like they were found elsewhere throughout the world. The worm did NOT attack the Siemens machines, and the worm was easily removed using standard AV programs. So far only militairy hardware in Iran has been attacked. The press release was written by non techies.

  15. World-wide distribution by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dutch multinationals have revealed that the worm is also attacking them.

    The Wikipedia article has a table of purported number of infections in various countries. Indonesia and India have the worst problem after Iran. Over six thousand in the Anglophone countries. If this is in fact only spreading via USB sticks, we've got some really promiscuous behavior going on.

    (You may well be skeptical of the six million reported for China. It's not a defacement; there's a link to an article that quotes someone actually making the claim. But the quote makes it sound like the speaker doesn't know what he's talking about.)

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  16. It was random segments of code by Noughmad · · Score: 1

    One day they'll have secrets... one day they'll have dreams.

    --
    PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  17. Just NeoCon propaganda? by webalimaster · · Score: 0

    Up to now I have not seem a single report from really trusted sources in Iran. All media stories are western-based stories about iran. It's just me or this equals to propaganda. I don't trust the anti-virus companies reports (I don't use Windows either). This story smells funny too because of all the media hype anti-iran about it's nuclear energy production by the neocons (still alive). It seems more of the same. Bash Iran, create false news, whatever. I have worked in Software/Systems for Advanced and normal industrial automation and it's standard procedure this networks are disconnected from the Internet.

  18. The US by codepunk · · Score: 1

    I doubt the US had anything to do with it, we have a administration with "no bag" in office. Isreal on the other hand would be my first suspect. I can only hope that part of the stimulus money made it to a worthy cause such as this.

    --


    Got Code?
    1. Re: The US by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      I doubt the US had anything to do with it, we have a administration with "no bag" in office.

      The US intelligence agencies have a long history of doing things without getting clearance from the White House.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re: The US by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bullshit. The intelligence agencies never do anything without implicit authorization from the White House. They just sometimes find plausible deniability convenient. Occasionally they find it necessary to drive out a scapegoat.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:The US by nashville-tn · · Score: 1

      "no bag" What are you basing that on? This admin authorized Navy Seals to kill Somalian pirates, authorized a marked increase in CIA drone attacks in Pakistan, authorized ramped up surveillance of comms concerning terrorism, authorized a surge of troops in Afghanistan, increased military exercises in the vicinity of North Korea, etc. Something previous admins didn't do.

  19. I hope it's the Daemon... by Valtor · · Score: 1

    I hope this is The Daemon spreading. :)

    --
    "Sockets are the standard networking API, also useful for stopping your eyes from falling onto your cheeks" zeromq.org
  20. Could be any number of people by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    I hardly think it's some tin-foil hat conspiracy theory for them to assert that it was a "western power" (most likely Israel or the U.S.) behind this worm.

    Possibly. What if they were having problems getting their plant working, and didn't want to look bad. Something like this might be a great way to blame the west, and get sympathy from other countries that might be willing to help out a victim of western aggression.

    Or, this might be the work of a western NGO. There are any number of groups that aren't part of the governments of the US or Israel that don't want to see a nuclear Iran. Perhaps this is a uninvolved state that just wants the US and Israel actively engaged and distracted by dealing with Iran.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Could be any number of people by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this is a uninvolved state that just wants the US and Israel actively engaged and distracted by dealing with Iran.

      Tinfoil hat territory.

    2. Re:Could be any number of people by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The bizarre claim that Iran did this to themselves is by far the silliest claim I have yet heard on Stuxnet. I can understand arguing for China, Britain, or even Russia. But arguing that Iran sabotaged *itself* reminds me of old lynching victim death certificate bit: "Victim suffered a broken neck, 20 gunshot wounds, and was severely burned. Cause of death: Suicide."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  21. Siemens Stuxnet support / advisory page by cpghost · · Score: 1

    Siemens has a support and advisory page on Stuxnet, which is infecting their Simatic WinCC / PCS7 systems.

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  22. Skynet by lmnfrs · · Score: 1

    Seriously, though, it is Windows PC's that are present in government organizations, can gain sentience, and launch nuclear attacks to destroy all humans..

    1. Re:Skynet by blair1q · · Score: 1

      WOPR was an IBM compatible?

    2. Re:Skynet by Hardtrance · · Score: 2, Funny

      ICBM, actually.

      --
      This post is LAW where prohibited by VOID. Prosecutors will be violated.
  23. Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by joeflies · · Score: 1

    Before Stuxnet, I'm sure the general public had no idea that Siemens was selling technology to Iran to fulfill its nuclear ambitions. Given that the west has a lot of misgivings about letting Iran do so, shouldn't western companies be a little more careful who they sell nuclear reactor parts to? I don't necessarily want to compare them to IBM's role in selling computers to the Nazis, but is there some point where you take some corporate responsibility before profits?

    1. Re:Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 1

      Iran knows how to buy things through complicated webs of shell companies in order to hide the final destination.

      --
      September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
    2. Re:Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 1

      My guess, is that the tech was sold to Russian contractors who then sold and installed the tech for Iran.

    3. Re:Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Isn't there some point where we realize Iran is a sovereign nation and as such is well within their rights to pursue nuclear technologies? Did Siemens directly violate trade embargoes? If that's the case, that's where you take them to the task. I haven't followed this issue so I don't know if Siemens violated any laws on the matter, but if it's a "well, I just don't think those guys should have that stuff..." public sentiment issue, I don't see why they would (or should) care.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    4. Re:Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by dave562 · · Score: 1

      A lot of technology falls under the multi-purpose loop holes. A PLC is a standard industrial component. It is a "programmable logic controller". It simply activates machinery and coordinates activities in industrial machinery. The PLC doesn't know if it is opening a valve that is dumping gas into a centrifuge, or water into a sanitation system.

    5. Re:Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 sockpuppet

    6. Re:Why isn't Siemens being taken to task here? by gtall · · Score: 1

      Siemens is on record as stating they have never sold equipment to Iran and presumes they got it through third parties.

  24. Re:We may never know? We DO know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh geez. Iran is the same nation where beheadings are common (as is cousin and even double-cousin marriage), women have to be kept in beekeeper outfits for fear some Iranian neanderthal male will see an ankle and go on a rampage of rape and destruction...

    Yes, we know, you hate Iran and Iranians, but don't you get sick of posting the same troll again and again on every article that has to do with Iran? You knew parent's post was tongue-in-cheek, but you still took the time to make it known how much you hate Iran before going "oh, it was tongue-in-cheek" ha ha ha. So clever.

    This is what Iran looked like in the 1970s before the revolution -- none of these people were "neanderthals". It's not the people who want their women to dress up in "beekeper outfits", it's the tyrannous government. I take it you were born after 1979? Please, get some perspective.

  25. Organized crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Organized crime types have used computer viruses to blackmail business before. Instead of simply threatening to wipe out computer data, Stuxnet could actually stop production at a factory. Not sure why this would be any different.

    1. Re:Organized crime? by perpenso · · Score: 1

      Organized crime types have used computer viruses to blackmail business before. Instead of simply threatening to wipe out computer data, Stuxnet could actually stop production at a factory. Not sure why this would be any different.

      Because the target is a government not a business. Businesses don't have the resources to fight organized crime, governments do. Like many predators organized crime would pick a target that is least able to defend themselves.

  26. Re:Obviously it was the Italians... by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    I mean Stux is a variety of linux from Italy:

    http://gpstudio.com/

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  27. That's what it was about! by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Earth was under attack by alien ships controlled by Siemens PLCs. Stuxnet was released to repel them and they all blew up and vanished into hyperspace. The whole thing was hushed up, of course, and what we are seeing is just the collateral damage.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  28. "Friendly" nations engage in espionage too by perpenso · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wouldn't even say most likely the US or Israel. I don't think there are many nations that want a Nuclear Iran. The list should include. China Russia India All of the EU Egypt Most of the Middle East. I mean really this list is long and while this worm is probably outside the limits for some guy with a grudge it isn't outside the limits for any nation with a large university with a good CS department.

    Russia does a lot of business with Iran. Ditto for Germany and the E.U. Where do you think they got all the Siemen's hardware and how do you think they flew it in?

    So some of these "friendly" countries had the best access to the iranian nuclear infrastructure, that's enough to warrant their inclusion on the list. Given that stuxnet was "dormant" and not attempting to damage anything it may have been more of an insurance policy and not so much of an active weapon. Any of these countries would love to monitor and have a remote off switch should Iran begin to act against their interests at some future date. Now is this the most likely scenario, no. However it is still highly plausible.

    1. Re:"Friendly" nations engage in espionage too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So some of these "friendly" countries had the best access to the iranian nuclear infrastructure, that's enough to warrant their inclusion on the list. Given that stuxnet was "dormant" and not attempting to damage anything it may have been more of an insurance policy and not so much of an active weapon. Any of these countries would love to monitor and have a remote off switch should Iran begin to act against their interests at some future date. Now is this the most likely scenario, no. However my tinfoil hat is on a little too tight today

      There fixed that for you.

  29. But. but, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....didn't they say that the worm did nothing to them? I don't know what you guys are talking about.

  30. correction TFA by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    "Almost all SCADA systems are -- for safety reasons -- standalone: not connected to a network, let alone the Internet."

    should actually read:
        "In theory, almost all SCADA systems are -- for safety reasons -- standalone: not connected to a network, let alone the Internet."

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
  31. Not looking close enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think all this deal with people wondering what "nation" is attacking what "nation" is missing the elephant in the living room. This isn't about that, it has been an attack against *Siemens*.

    That's the one common denominator that everyone seems to keep missing, even though it is mentioned in every article about it. Hiding in plain sight.

    Now, motive, means, opportunity. The latter two can be purchased on the open black market for this sort of attack, it could be contracted obviously, now who has a *motive* to hurt Siemens (revenge/disgruntled employee action, or "it's just business" from a rival or potential rival, whatever), and what is it?

  32. Intriguing. by jd · · Score: 2, Informative

    Those marking me "troll" for having said earlier that other, definitely and unquestionably innocent, victims could happen, and then marked me "troll" for noting that the protections against such accidents didn't mean they wouldn't happen anyway, will doubtless ignore the fact that the Dutch are (a) not Iranian nuclear weapons scientists, and (b) that the only Iranian victims so far have been moderates who might have kept the program somewhat sane have now been arrested as spies. Iran is not known for treating those they suspect of spying very nicely.

    It is indeed unclear who the worm was aimed at, but I'm confident that it wasn't the Dutch and I'm now more certain than ever that other innocent victims will turn up. We have proof now that the safeguards (however well-intentioned) did not work. Which is no great surprise - it's hard to have a failsafe weapon as there are so few scenarios in which you need a weapon that badly and have it be safe if it fails.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Intriguing. by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      It is indeed unclear who the worm was aimed at, but I'm confident that it wasn't the Dutch and I'm now more certain than ever that other innocent victims will turn up.

      Interesting. I tell you "I am a victim" so therefore I could not have written the virus. Hmm... (Just interesting, definitely not informative or insightful -- pre-meta-modding.)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    2. Re:Intriguing. by jd · · Score: 1

      I did not say the Dutch did not write the virus, I said I was confident they weren't the target of it. Veeeery different things. If you want to critique my views, that's great and I learn a lot from people doing so. But it isn't terribly useful when you don't first read what it is you critique.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  33. Obligatory William Gibson by lennier · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Someone had reprogrammed the DNA synthesizer, he said. The thing was there for the overnight construction of just the right macromolecule. With its in-built computer and its custom software. Expensive, Sandii. But not as expensive as you turned out to be for Hosaka.
    I hope you got a good price from Maas.
    The diskette in my hand. Rain on the river. I knew, but I couldn't face it. I put the code for that meningial virus back into your purse and lay down beside you.
    So Moenner died, along with other Hosaka researchers. Including Hiroshi. Chedanne suffered permanent brain damage.
    Hiroshi hadn't worried about contamination. The proteins he punched for were harmless. So the synthesizer hummed to itself all night long building a virus to the specifications of Maas Biolabs GmbH. Maas. Small, fast, ruthless -- All Edge.

    New Rose Hotel, 1981.

    Wonder if we'll ever find out what Stuxnet did in 2010, and if it did what its designers hoped.

    --
    You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  34. MOD UP by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    They needed a lot of expensive industrial control equipment to develop and test on.

    That is the part that totally screams to me "government".

    Defiantly not the work of one guy in a basement.

    Now it could be some large and well funded organization, sure. But I just don't buy that it's an amateur effort instead of a well funded affair, and if it's someone like organized crime where is the payoff? Organized crime funds botnets because they make money from them, it's why for some time now no worm or botnet has really destroyed systems like in the early hacking days when destroying a system was just as fun as manipulating it for an individual.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  35. Stuxnet Sux or Stuxnet Success Story? by wiredmikey · · Score: 1

    Win32/Stuxnet might be described as a worm of a slightly different color, though it’s attracted interest from the media that’s comparable in intensity to Conficker, or Code Red, or Blaster. David Harley did an interesting piece on this... http://www.securityweek.com/stuxnet-sux-or-stuxnet-success-story

  36. Re:We may never know? We DO know! by fishbowl · · Score: 2, Informative

    I had a friend who would respond to the knee-jerk attacks about Iran by showing his vacation pictures. My favorites were from the ski resort outside Tehran. It's really amusing, because nobody expects to see *really good alpine skiing* in Iran, let alone pictures of Iranian ski bunnies. This stuff isn't supposed to exist, in their world where all of the Middle East is a barren wasteland...

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  37. Eheh by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    And the claim short skirts cause earth quakes, that a western agent shot Neda, that the elections were fair etc etc.

    And then you swallow WHOLE the claim that Iran was hit hard by stuxnet... a claim made by WHO? Verified by who? And couldn't a big outbreak just be an indication of really bad security in Iran IF the claim is even true? The worm has also attacked in Indonesia and Holland. Might other places where better security kept it limited just kept quiet? After all, if MY security was bad I wouldn't tell YOU about it.

    As for the sophistication of the worm... right. If it was so sophisticated, why was it dissected so easily? That it was effective means nothing. Worms we KNOW to be written by amateurs have had massive world wide outbreaks. So a worm that only has an outbreak in one country with suspect IT skills is better? Odd definition of better.

    What amazes me is that you are paranoid to believe western governments can lie, but Muslim nations are to backward to spread false propaganda. Personally, I don't trust either one and follow the money. And there is no money for the west in this. Iran however has now got a scapegoat for anything that goes wrong. Yet another one. It is how dictators work to keep the population on their side, it is all the fault of group X. So support me or X will kill you.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Eheh by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      nd then you swallow WHOLE the claim that Iran was hit hard by stuxnet... a claim made by WHO? Verified by who?

      Symantec made this crystal clear in their white paper on the worm. Or do you think that Symantec is in the tank for Iran?

      As for your rant about amateurs being able to write this worm, it's quite clear you haven't taken even a cursory look at it. Everyone who knows anything about worms who's looked at it has acknowledged that this is the most sophisticated piece of malware they've ever seen. This wasn't written by some script kiddie in his mom's basement.

      What amazes me is that you are paranoid to believe western governments can lie

      It amazes me that you think they don't.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  38. Also by network shares by Sinn3d · · Score: 2, Informative

    It also spreads through network shares, so once inside it can quickly get around. Still, F-Secure has a nice Q&A bit up on StuxNet + demo vid.

    http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00002040.html

  39. Put your money on a centrifuge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting read:
    Don't understand what this really means:

    “The problem is to impose a 3-D pattern on a curved surface using a negative without having creases,” one European expert says. Pakistan eventually learned how to finish the bottom bearing during the late 1970s and early 1980s. Now it's Iran's turn.

    But it funnily enough also has a lot of Dutch in it... Sounds like someone shouldnt have made it out with certain papers and blueprints back in the seventies...

    Link is here:

    http://bos.sagepub.com/content/62/6/35.full

  40. Occam's Razor theory by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    Has anyone actually seen physical evidence that Stuxnet was present on one of the Iranian nuclear power computers?
    Or is it possible that their nuclear program has serious problems and they decided to create some propaganda to shift the blame to their arch-enemies?
    I personally wouldn't take the chance that it was the latter case. As a matter of history, the Soviet Union was far less advanced than originally thought but it took a surge in Cold War activities to find out.
    If there is a third world war, IMHO it will begin with a country like Iran. Yes, just as there were Germans who didn't follow the Nazi regime or the Kaiser's regime, there are Iranians who don't subscribe to the regime's ideals and there are Muslims who don't blindly follow sharia law or subscribe to radical Islam. But for the foreseeable future, radical Islam is entrenched in the halls of power.

  41. Negative, only two probable choices by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    It takes considerable resources to put something like this together, and the two probable entities would be the USA (DoD/NSA)or the gov't. of Denmark, as these are the only two countries (other than Germany, but I would discount them) who have the requisite relationships with Siemens and other groups to pull this off.

  42. I know what it's about by kuei12 · · Score: 1

    This is designed to create Havoc and hostility in the few sort months leading up to the Myan End date of Dec12 2012. The US government will want to justify a nuclear assault by creating fear in the minds of the common american imbecile. This could be just like 9/11/WMD but on a much bigger scale. Just my theory:, but, I was pretty accurate about Bush before he took office.