Slashdot Mirror
Stuxnet Authors Made Key Errors
Trailrunner7 writes "There is a growing sentiment among security researchers that the programmers behind the Stuxnet attack may not have been the super-elite cadre of developers that they've been mythologized to be in the media. In fact, some experts say that Stuxnet could well have been far more effective and difficult to detect had the attackers not made a few elementary mistakes."
Ok! Ok! I must have, I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place or something. Shit. I always do that. I always mess up some mundane detail.
Vivin Suresh Paliath
http://vivin.net
I like
"There are a lot of skills needed to write Stuxnet," he said. "Whoever did this needed to know WinCC programming, Step 7, they needed platform process knowledge, the ability to reverse engineer a number of file formats, kernel rootkit development and exploit development. That's a broad set of skills. Does anyone here think they could do all of that?"
May I have a show of /. hands, please?
What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
It's pretty safe to assume at this point that Stuxnet was developed as an Israel/USA military collaboration. Spokespeople from both countries smirk before saying "no comment" when asked about it. That being said, hackers have huge egos. The types of hackers that present at security conferences even more so. It's tremendously easy for them to pick apart the worm several months after it was discovered and say "oh ho ho, it doesn't encrypt it's command and control communications!!" like they're smarter than the people that built it.
For those who don't RTFAs, this one has something interesting, not mentioned in the summary. The analyst thought the worm might have started as something else and been re-purposed for sabotage. There might be two separate coder groups, one who made the original program and one who made it into a weapon. The latter group was apparently less skilled, though still would have needed a considerable breadth of knowledge.
Makes me wonder if the perpetrator might not be one of Iran's less advanced neighbours, instead of the US or Israel. After all, there are plenty of Middle Eastern nations who are worried about Iranian power and expansion. And there's two obvious suspects that would be blamed when it came to light.
Of course, it could also be that either American or Israeli coders were rushed, understaffed, over-compartmentalized or otherwise had the quality of their work reduced.
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
Screwed up details that reveal it could have been built better?
Well that proves a government was behind it!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is the article worth pointing to on the subject: http://rdist.root.org/2011/01/17/stuxnet-is-embarrassing-not-amazing/, not the bullshit linkbait threatpost.com(MERCIAL) "article".
I'm guessing had it come out that it was of Chinese origin, we'd be inundated with articles about how the Chinese are so much smarter than everyone else because the code is just so darned perfect, only the scary Red Chinese could have pulled it off....and America's days are numbered....duck and cover.
But when it's the US/Israel? Meh...it's not that good.
Seems to me, CIA/Mossad devs (if it is in fact one or both of them involved) could have purposely have done it this way to throw anyone trying to figure out who did it, off the trail. These researchers are proving that to be an effective method of dealing with possible tracking.
1) From what I read, and I read a lot on that topic, Stuxnet is pretty damn awesome. The exploits alone are estimated to have been worth a seven to eight figure...
2) Secrecy might not have been a priority.
3) Maybe they wanted to be detected to drive a point home.
4) Mindgame question: What if Russia, China or someone else did it and wanted to frame the USA & Israel?
Is there a good source for a technically in-depth list of the mistakes, rather than the vague "ignored several known techniques" summary crap the article discusses?
Mistakes, well what do you expect from the lowest cost bidders for this government project?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Like breaking the law to get something done that should have been attempted by diplomacy.
Diplomacy was attempted. It failed. Repeatedly. For many years (decades ?).
I'll raise my hand but only slightly over my shoulder as I don't know EXACTLY what they mean by platform process knowledge, that seems too generic.
But just about everything else I've either gotten experience with or touched base somewhere.
The Sutxnet should have been developed using open source model. That way more experts would have seen the code and that would have eliminated all these errors. Maybe I should create a project in SourceForge.
It may very well be that the lack of proper cloaking was intentional, for at least two reasons : on the one hand, as long as the aim was reached, there was no need to reveal the full scope of expertise put behind it. Better keep still unknown cloaking techniques in case they may come handy in the future. On the second hand, stuxnet is certainly as much a psychological weapon as it is a technological one. What would be the interest to disrupt Iran's nuclear program if nobody knew what happened ? As such, it's a very good deterrent : any would be rogue third world country willing to go nuclear knows "someone" will take offense and knows that this "someone" has the abilities to bring their program down. But at this point, nobody can pinpoint who this "someone" may be with plausible certainty.
It's a government IT project, of course it is going to be botched.
Points to things been too good?
The Unabomber manifesto, the use of certain people and devices can point back to/expose groups eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladio_in_Italy
The early use of a 'new' plastic explosive, a DNA sequence http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2265-anthrax-attack-bug-identical-to-army-strain.html can all be tested. Could the code in a more perfect, more pure, quality form (as found in the wild) ever really point back to teaching methods or something geographical?
If its still highly effective on some levels, its fine, anything better could the residue of a state actor start to glow?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
It's much easier to highlight someone else's mistakes than create something that would stand up to the same scrutiny yourself.
...or maybe the creators either didn't care if it was discovered or wanted it to be discovered. If it was Israel, the last time they decided to stop another countries nuclear program, they just flew jets over and bombed it. Not too much subtly in that. It could be that they wanted Iran to eventually find it just so they'd know. Saber rattling does little good if nobody can hear the saber or know who's doing it. Perhaps somebody thought it was more important to let Iran know they were out there and would try and stop the program, than let a long term plan go into effect that would would harm but not actually stop the program.
... Makes me wonder if the perpetrator might not be one of Iran's less advanced neighbours, instead of the US or Israel ...
I've always thought that it was politically expedient and sloppy to assume that the US or Israel was behind it. The equipment is not coming from either of these countries, neither are the technicians who have had onsite access. It is silly to assume that because some Europeans, the Russians and the Chinese are friendly to Iran that they are also OK with Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. Major powers want client-like states, not regional competitors. All major powers know that Iran is unstable and the makeup of its government in ten years is basically unknown. No one wants the current or some future Iranian government to be nuclear armed.
The comments within the article were more informative than the article itself. A number of commentators pointed out the context in which the Stuxnet developers were working and presumed tradeoffs in complexity behind covering their tracks versus achieving their objective. (Which by most accounts appears to have been successful at covering their tracks long enough to permanently damage the uranium centrifuges. Sounds like a solid achievement to me and not whatif conjecture on how good it could have been.) As usual the self-appointed /. experts assume that their "hive" hindsight knowledge could conquer the day. More likely you'd just flame one another over irrelevant technical details, and boast whose toolkit was bigger and more colourful.
http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/stuxnet-authors-made-several-basic-errors-011811
Security of any sort is always about tradeoffs -- you can always make things more secure, but is the cost (in dollars or convenience) worth the effort? The same general principle applies to the kind of things that could have been done to Stuxnet that the author of this article talks about. He presents the conclusion that they simply ran out of time, but overlooks the more likely answer: that they decided the extra time wouldn't be worth the extra benefit. Sure, some of those things might have delayed its discovery, but they would have also delayed its initial deployment. Even if there was no hard deadline, it's not clear that the benefit here would be worth the cost.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Was it more important to have a really amazing virus, or was it more important to get something "good enough" out the door in time?
I think Stuxnet did pretty well at its intended purpose.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
It might have something to do with assassinating the former democratic leader of Iran and installing an autocrat in his place, in addition to American belligerence in the area. See Mohammad Mosaddegh and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. If I were the Iranians, I would want nuclear weapons, too.
SSC
Every news story in /. seems to conclude something wasn't really that good. Or at least, their users do.
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
Especially when that causes the key to get stuck in the lock, or even break off... I only go to good key cutters if I want keys made without errors.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
Right, because all of those who think the US or Israel was behind it have to be raving lunatic conspiracy theorists and anti-Semites. Whether they did it or not, the US and Israel certainly have the motive, and the Israelis have been speaking openly about military action. It is not merely the NYT who suspects the Israelis and Americans; officials from both countries have had smirks when asked about Stuxnet, which has fueled speculation. I'm undecided, but one doesn't have to be mad to list the US and Israel as possible suspects.
SSC
Suggesting it "failed" suggests that there is only one possible outcome, and it's the one you want. And that's not diplomacy.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Can't really say though. Its a good way of ensuring that people might fear you.
Like Israel's nukes. The leaders don't want to claim whether they have or haven't gotten nukes, so everyone just assumes they do. They don't actually need them anymore.
What you say?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
And they probably skipped beta testing too. Oh, look, those same /. hands are still up...
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
I thought it was "proven' that the US and Israelis wrote it, only days ago on /.
Did someone outsource the development to India?
The last part of the development of Stuxnet was the live test on the centrifuge, probably coordinated by a mechanical engineer. And we, mechanical engineers, usually don't know jack about programming.
This was probably not a western state. There were too many mistakes made.
Does this mean I'm really Chinese?
Decades? Decades ago Iran was on our side. We were selling them weapons and intel. We installed a leader for them. There was no need for a 'diplomacy' decades ago.
Have gnu, will travel.
Then Iran can have Nuclear Weapons. The only thing I ask is that they can only be aimed at you.
Ask not what Iran can do for you, but what you can do for Iran.
to distract from the other one.
Plenty of state actors and state connected actors have an interest and or motive here. Other journalists have pointed this out with better supporting research. To default to the US & Israel as prime suspects is essentially swallowing Ahmadinejad's whargarbl hook, line and sinker.
officials from both countries have had smirks when asked about Stuxnet, which has fueled speculation.
I'm not saying it was or wasn't--but that statement is hardly logical. Are you telling me the droids talking to the press were actually in on the action and therefore smirking? Most places use public information officers who are low-level droids programmed to say 'No comment'. If you did something bad, you definitely don't tell your PIO "Yeah--I totally fscked up" and then follow it up with "There are the cameras, go lie.". You give your PIO the 'official' story and point them towards the cameras.
There's no place like
They didn't release it under the GPL.
Who's to say Stuxnet was the only, or even the primary payload?
This would be up to 5 already if I had a mod point.
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
In the real world where results count, lawlz is very rarely part of the project plan.
Decades? Decades ago Iran was on our side. We were selling them weapons and intel. We installed a leader for them. There was no need for a 'diplomacy' decades ago.
2011 - 1979 = 32, that is over 3 decades, Jimmy Carter was president.
Perhaps you are confusing Iran and Iraq. We supported Saddam Hussein in Iraq with weapons and intel because we viewed Iran as the enemy.
1: SpinUpCentrifuge
2: BOOL shaking = Alert( "Is Centrifuge shaking violently?" );
3 if ( ! shaking) FAIL TEST
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Oh my government employees rushed to produce results? Government workers produced a less than perfect product? It surely couldn't have come from the country that coined the Phrase "Good enough for government work."
Those developers being outsmarted by a teenage kid makes the idea of government involvement much more believable.
If most governments did it, it was sent out to be done by a contractor for the lowest bid. Thus, you got something that made the bare specification and little else.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Suggesting it "failed" suggests that there is only one possible outcome, and it's the one you want. And that's not diplomacy.
Suggesting it "failed" means there is an outcome agreed upon by many nations as being unacceptable that at this point still seems almost inevitable. It is the outcome that they want to avoid, and have offered many alternatives and incentives to avoid. It is still diplomacy until shooting starts - thats how you tell the difference.
State Sponsors: Iran
Hassan Nasrallah in the Late 1980s: Lebanon Should Become Part of the Greater Islamic Republic Ruled by Leader of Iran, Who Should Appoint all Islamic Rulers
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu Al-Gheit Warns That a Nuclear Iran Would Force the Arabs to Join the Nuclear Race
Hassan Rahimpour Azghadi of the Iranian Supreme Council for Cultural Revolution: By 2022 - Maybe Much Earlier - Israel Will Be Annihilated
Former Senior IAEA Official Yousri Abu Shadi: Iran Is Capable of Producing Nuclear Bombs in Less Than Two Years
Al-Siyassa: Iran Will Have Three Nuclear Bombs by 2013; One Will Go to Hizbullah
Iranian TV: Swine Flu - A Zionist/American Conspiracy
General Commander of the Iranian Army Ataollah Salehi: It Will Take Us 11 Days "to Wipe Israel Out of Existence"
French Comedian Dieudonné M'bala M'bala tells Iranian TV about His New Children's Song "Holocaust Pineapple" and States: Most Slave Traders Were Jews; More Freedom of Speech in Iran Than in France
EXCLUSIVE: Iraq Weapons -- Made in Iran?
Intelligence Officials Say Weapons Responsible for Increasing U.S. Deaths in Iraq
U.S. Says It Will Release Nine Of 20 Iranians Captured in Iraq - Wednesday, November 7, 2007
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
...if the damn thing worked?
As has been pointed out by comments in TFA, it's quite possible that security wasn't a major consideration for the virus. Maybe they didn't care to cloak the code. Isn't what really matters that the attack succeeded? I'd take these criticisms a lot more seriously if the Iranians had thwarted the attack and had tracked down the coders. The article just sounds like sour grapes.
If the US or Israel did it, they'd make it look like someone else did it. This kind of thing has big reprecussions; why would they allow all arrows to point to them?
Makes you wonder who actually did it.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
These errors would never have been occured when Stuxnet were open source.
Open Source Alternatives
So the worm is not perfect, but who is? They may not have had time to build it into perfection due to time constraints. Maybe they deemed it necessary to release something that worked as soon as possible, instead of when it's too late.
Oh please — you Blame America First types are making me sick.
Look, WE didn't put all of that delicious oil under their land, GOD did. So if you wish to cast your lot with those that blasphemed Our Lord by denying us access to his mildly inconveniently placed bounty, then go right ahead, sinner. I will pray for your unworthy soul as I fill my tank with His Love.
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
If I were the Iranians, I would want nuclear weapons, too.
If you want to be sanctioned back to the bronze age for the rest of history.
Table-ized A.I.
Better than bombed there.
The answer is Stuxnet?
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
I really can't decide if you're batshit insane or if it's a parody. Seriously.
Damn you, Poe, and your law.
Hold my beer and watch this!
You've clearly lost your sense of humor, then.
You should probably go find it, else you'll become a bitter, cynical human being. We don't want that, now, do we?
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
So this malware is brilliant at some things but makes rookie mistakes in others.
Maybe it was some very skilled programmers working in a field they were not fully familiar with?
Perhaps US and Israel do not have super skilled virus authors on their payroll? I would actually like that to be true.
Diplomacy succeeds when everybody shakes hands and agrees to do something, generally a compromise between the two positions, and then goes and does what they agreed to do.
A requirement for this is clearly that all sides involved must agree to the final outcome.
If all sides do not agree with the final outcome, diplomacy failed.
In the case of Iran, no agreement has been successfully reached. Therefore, diplomacy has thus far failed.
Does that help your understanding of how diplomacy can fail? It's really simple, but if you need further explanation I can see if I can break it down further for you.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
As if.
My toolkit is clearly biggest and most colorful.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
I think it also useful to point out that
It will be interesting to see what other malware is found in Iran. For it seems very unlikely that stuxnet was the only arrow in the quiver. It seems much more likely that it is just the first of several products to be discovered.
Will
Really? I just read an article about a sloppy Mossad operation:
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201101/the-dubai-job-mossad-assassination-hamas
The answer is Stuxnet?
Yes. It contributed to less spin.
Exactly. I have heard so many times, especially by Americans, that the solution is to overthrow the Iran government and establish a "democracy"... Read some friggin' history! The whole mess started BECAUSE the US overthrew the first good democratic government that Iran ever had, to protect the British petroleum interests (Operation Ajax). If I was an Iranian and had suffered the last 60 years because of that, I would be REALLY pissed, and possibly turn to religion, hate the West, need nuclear weapons to counter the ones provided to Israel, etc etc.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
One department in the ultra-semi-secret world of semi-clandestine operations and general screwing around would have been in charge of building the thing to accomplish whatever task it was designed for, though due to rampant compartmentalization, they probably didn't know where it was being aimed.
Another department was probably in charge of making sure the world found out about it and that the project got plenty of attention so as to continue the psy-ops war against Iran. ("I'm not yet convinced that Iran really is the boogey man we need to spend a trillion dollars going to war against on flimsy evidence made up by a couple of psychopathic war-mongers in England and the U.S.. I need more news stories where Iran is the bad guy.")
And few of the project workers would have been clued into what the other project workers were clued into. Compartmentalization keeps stuff mostly secret but then drops the ball on organization.
Go Team!
-FL
There's an element of diplomacy to this.
"Gosh. You suffered from problems caused by 'EVIL HACKERS!!!'. Well, I'm sure if you work in collaboration with us, we can protect you from 'EVIL HACKERS!!!' and this sort of thing isn't going to slow you down any more."
I've said it several times... Look for the author in his mothers basement somewhere, not in some gleaming government-funded cyber-warfare bunker...
If it were government cyber-warfare we should expect the sites to literally blow up, not just shut down. They would want radioactive pollution in order to make the sites unusable both short term and long term. Just shutting them down for a few days or weeks surely isn't worth the effort.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
" ... Stuxnet could well have been far more effective and difficult to detect had the attackers not made a few elementary mistakes. ... "
If someone can detect your system by making a few elementary mistakes, your system is not secure. End of story. Sounds like they are trying to rationalize it to me.
America, Home of the Brave.
The developers were solid, but not top-notch people and there were budget and/or time limitations. This is not surprising. It is what you usually can do with a reasonable budget. For example, that Stuxnet was too obvious is something that was initially clear. The hype was mostly in the non-specialized press.
Still, take, say, 5 good but not excellent developers for 6 months. This costs very roughly about half a million USD/EUR (including offices, equipment, etc., salary will be only about 50%). This is serious money and probably more than ever spend on developing a virus. Doing this with top-notch people, provided that you can get them in the first place, would probably cost 2-5 times as much. Of course, compared to dropping bombs, this was extremely cheap and very, very cost effective.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
They do have a history of interfering, probably with good intentions, but things never usually work out how you want them.
Get your own free personal location tracker
I will pray for your unworthy soul as I fill my tank with His Love.
Score: 2, Troll
Really slashdot? I am disappointed.
They do have a history of interfering, probably with good intentions, but things never usually work out how you want them.
I guess you can define "good" as serving your own purposes with complete disregard of the rest of the world and absolutely no contemplation on the long run effects that could be worse than your short term gains.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
It is entirely possible they held back on this one so that next time they still have a few more tricks they can use. No point showing them everything you have if you can get away with less.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
they still smirk when asked about blowback.
Now there's a blast from the past.
It's always convenient to start the story at a particular point in history. You choose the early 50s. Others might choose a point a couple thousand years ago when the Persians invaded Greece. Therefore, Greeks need atomic weapons? You might try any point in time. In any case, Persia's never been the same since Alexander, who was followed by the Arabs, and then the Turks, and finally the Brits.
Another problem is the "what ifs" in history. You can assume that any moment of hope would have blossomed into a perfect world, but it almost never works like that. For instance, since the Shah was overthrown, does anyone in Iran talk about Mosaddegh -- or is it against the law since he was a godless socialist?
Iran is never easy to deal with. There is an even simpler option. Iran did it. Why? Because they saw what happened to Iraq. Disable their own tech till things quiet down and avoid loosing face at the same time while blaming their hated enemies. Bonus!
It all seems a little bit to convenient. And from this, it could have been build by outside forces, been detected AND allowed to run free to give Iran a way out.
What sends a red flag to me about it all is that Iran is so open about it all. They are never open about anything but they sure spilled their guts on this. Why?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Mossadegh was not assassinated. Late post, I know, but people get all kinds of crazy things from the Internets. Maybe you're thinking of Allende?
It's not about ancient history, or even about who started what. When a rumour went around that the CIA were plotting from the US Embassy to put the Shah back in power, it did not require paranoia for the students to believe it, since it was known to have been done a couple of decades earlier. Today, it does not appear to be paranoid for the Iranian government to believe that US, Israel, and others are infiltrating their nuclear program, and interfering with the rest of their government as well, and it is not illogical to think that nuclear arms might be helpful to keep the current government in power. No need to ask who started it or who's right or wrong.
I've been dieing to use this little bit a knowledge, so I hope you'll humor me:
Iran is in between Afghanistan and Iraq.
Iran is right to fear the US. The US army has Iran in position for a pincer attack. Add to that the history between the countries, the second highest opium addition rate in the world (caused by it's border with Afghanistan which the US is supposed to be managing), and that the last war we started was founded on total bullshit, Iran would be a fool not to be prepared.
Not me... I wouldn't touch anything to do with Siemens with a 10 foot politician.
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
Lawson concludes that whoever wrote Stuxnet likely was constrained by time and didn't think there was enough of a return to justify the investment of more time in advanced cloaking techniques.
Whoever wrote Stuxnet was right. It had enough tricks to get its payload delivered and to harm the target. Yeah, one could imagine it having been easily discovered, but it wasn't discovered until after the damage had been done. So either the folks behind Stuxnet were making rookie mistakes, or they're just as sophisticated as we all presumed and they prioritized what was important to get the job done, not what would have allowed the worm to evade countermeasures that the Iranians weren't even using, or what would have made them look cooler in the eyes of security researchers. Where's the story here?
"I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
"You choose the early 50s. Others might choose a point a couple thousand years ago when the Persians invaded Greece. Therefore, Greeks need atomic weapons?"
In context of atomic weapons, early fifties are very good start point. Or you claim that atomic weapons was invented "couple thousand years ago"?
What modern Obelix would say today? Of course, "Those crazy Americans!".
That's pretty much the standard CEO definition of "good."
Planning to be moderated ± 1: Bad Pun.
I'd counter with the hypothetical world where a US president loses his job, millions of Americans somehow lose the right to bear arms, China is forced to back down from utterly totalitarian home rule, resulting in more food for its citizens and somehow, just somehow, nobody nukes anybody. If the lives of the majority improve, and a few hundred politicians resign in humiliation, then it's still a success of diplomacy. Diplomacy in strict terms is finding the best case, and it doesn't exclude Spock's "needs of the many" argument. Hell, US law recognises that one.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Even more than that, Iran made an agreement, they are supplied nuclear fuel for their reactor, and they don't build a nuclear enrichment program. Iran has a nuclear reactor which is supplied with fuel per this agreement, but they decided to ignore the agreement and start an enrichment program under the guise of it being for nuclear power. So there was an agreement, Iran just decided to ignore it.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
My guess would be they are pointing to the intimate knowledge of the industrial controllers that were targeted. I doubt that many people know how to code for those units as they are only used in heavy machinery.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
There is a reason it is a homonym of semen.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?