Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stuxnet/Cyberwar Documentary Reviewer: 'The U.S. Has Pwned Iran' (networkworld.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the war-games dept.

Slashdot reader alphadogg quotes an article from Network World: The new documentary about Stuxnet, "Zero Days", says the U.S. had a far larger cyber operation against Iran called Nitro Zeus that has compromised the country's infrastructure and could be used as a weapon in any future war. Quoting unnamed sources from inside the NSA and CIA, the movie says the Nitro Zeus program has infiltrated the systems controlling communications, power grids, transportation and financial systems, and is still ready to "disrupt, degrade and destroy" that infrastructure if a war should break out with Iran...

For the more technically inclined, the film contains some riveting interviews with researchers at Symantec who devoted their lives to unraveling the code line by line to figure out what it did, how it did it, who created it and what the target was. It was also a bit chilling in that after they figured out that governments were behind the worm they worried that the researchers themselves might be targeted to keep them silent. One Friday night, says Symantec researcher Eric Chien, he said to his research partner Liam O Murchu, "I'm not suicidal. If I should show up dead on Monday, it wasn't me."
In the film former NSA and CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden says "This stuff is hideously over classified."

138 comments

  1. I'm not suicidal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what they all say.

  2. Well, now we know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... why all those officals keep on derping about "cyber threats". They've scared themselves silly.

    So, knowing we too could be "pwned" at any time, why do we insist on running vulnerable systems everywhere? Why do we keep buying software from vendors who for the longest time explicitly didn't care about security anything, and now sit on a completely unfixably insecure software stack?

    1. Re:Well, now we know... by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are aware that Linux had had some recent (within the few years) vulnerabilities that had been around for decades, that were recently found and patched. If the biggest open source OS can have decade old bugs what hope is there to be fully secure?

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Well, now we know... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Defence in depth is the only solution. If one vulnerability in your OS is enough to take over the whole system, or even the whole network, you don't have enough depth.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Well, now we know... by vtcodger · · Score: 2

      "what hope is there to be fully secure?"

      None whatsoever.

      However, unplugging your internet connection would provide a lot of relative security compared to your neighbors. You surely know that. ... and yet you're here using an internet message board that you know damn well is designed and implemented by folks whose mental state and technical competence seems at the very least a bit iffy. ... As am I

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    4. Re:Well, now we know... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Build systems with smaller, simpler, better vetted (older) OSs, or perhaps no OS layer at all - just a collection of certified software components.

      It's not fast, nor cheap, but it can be secure. If you want it to interact with the latest whiz-bang hardware/software from the insecure commercial world, and you want development to proceed on any reasonable sort of timetable, you may need to accept some level of insecurity to do that.

    5. Re:Well, now we know... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 0

      When taken with that attitude, defense in depth reeks of security by obscurity. Not saying it doesn't work, not saying it isn't the most practical solution available, just that piling up six layers of 99.9% secure does not really give 99.9999999999999999% security - when human factors come into play.

    6. Re:Well, now we know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, that sounds great and all, but what the hell does that actually mean? Because I do a lot of work in computer security and what you just said sounds like buzz words spoken by a person who has no idea what they're talking about. And I swear I'm not trying to be inflammatory, what you said just literally sounds like gibberish.

    7. Re:Well, now we know... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's nothing to do with obscurity. It just means that a single vulnerability isn't very useful.

      Remember when Windows XP was so insanely insecure that it would be 0wned within seconds of being connected to the internet? That's because there was no depth. The user ran as admin all the time, so a single flaw in any application or service gave the attacker full control of the machine.

      First line of defence was to enable the firewall. Second line, run as a normal user account so that compromise only gets you user credentials. Third line, sandbox the browser. Forth line, enable ALSR. Fifth line, built in Windows Defender to block known malicious activity. Sixth line, protect critical OS files so that even administrators can't modify them. Seventh line, enable secure boot to check the integrity of boot files, drivers and the kernel.

      By the time you get to Windows 8.1 a single exploit isn't very useful. Say you can execute arbitrary code in a Chrome process. Congratulations, you now have access to one tab and the data in it. Your process is heavily sandboxed. You need multiple exploits to do anything useful, so you can escape the sandbox, bypass user account protection, bypass OS level protections, bypass Windows Defender... That's why most malware these days takes the form of a trojan, tricking the user into executing them willingly.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Well, now we know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if that's true they're rare, and they were at least found and patched. Keep finding those and we're getting there. I'd still place my bets on the probability of finding hidden vulnerabilities in open source eventually than ever finding them in closed ones.

    9. Re:Well, now we know... by AlphaBro · · Score: 1

      If that sounds like gibberish, you don't actually work in security. Seriously, ASLR is a buzz word? Fuck off before someone accidentally believes you.

    10. Re:Well, now we know... by AlphaBro · · Score: 1

      Oops, wrong post. Regardless, GP went on to describe defense in depth, touching on many proven technologies.

  3. Just watched this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Came here and the story was up with only one comment. Weird.

    1. Re:Just watched this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Note that much of the most "incriminating" stuff in the film comes from an actress playing a "composite character" but they don't tell you that until the end, which is a bit of an ethical lapse, in my book.

    2. Re:Just watched this by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not only that, but they also seem to have ripped a lot of it off "Countdown to Zero Day", an even bigger ethical lapse.

  4. Dedicated their lives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If we consider the date speculated to be Stuxnet's first appearance by some that makes 2005.

    Let's assume most humans only become mildly useful to the coding society around 18 so these researchers that dedicated their lives are 29 years old!?

    That's still less years than they've lived without this so called "dedication".

  5. The fear by dbIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fear of being knocked off by spooks looks more than a little bit ridiculous unless you understand that Mossad was in the mix. The "supergun" guy was assassinated by them but it's still a bit of a stretch that they would go after antivirus people that are only threatening exposure instead of being a threat themselves.

    1. Re: The fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here comes the anti-semite

    2. Re:The fear by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I dunno, they bumped off Dr. David Kelly for less. It really depends how well protected you are, because if the cost and risk is low enough they apparently won't hesitate to murder you.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:The fear by jabuzz · · Score: 2

      Really, Dr. Kelly clearly took his own life after he majorly bigged up his roll in the production of the dossier and this was just about to come out. Basically he threw his career down the toilet and was unable to live up to it. The idea that the UK state had him bumped off is plainly ridiculous. There was no need he was about to be utterly humiliated all of his own doing. People commit suicide for FAR FAR less.

    4. Re:The fear by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Mossad aren't the only murderous spooks on the planet. Arguably, they're some of the more clumsy ones - getting publicly tied to their actions.

    5. Re:The fear by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      I'm just going to say it: this is how spooks should work/be regarded.

      If what I'm doing is directly inimical to the interests of country X, then I *should* be terrified that country X's spooks will 'deal with' me.

      Unlike the CIA, whose reputation is basically incompetent dilettante technocrats who 'missed' the collapse of the single giant entity they were tasked pretty much solely to watch for the previous 50 years.

      Then again, that's exactly the reputation a witchalock would WANT us to believe they have...

      --
      -Styopa
    6. Re:The fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he most definitely did not.

    7. Re:The fear by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      His name was leaked and he was set up as the fall guy, diverting attention away from the intelligence failures by MI6 and other parts of the government. The stress lead to him committing suicide.

      Just because they didn't kill him themselves doesn't mean that they aren't responsible for his death. My point was that they are more than capable of driving someone to suicide, and will do so if they think it is necessary. They almost certainly didn't intend for him to die, but none they less that's what happened.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  6. This is not propaganda. by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

    That's what they all say.

    --
    On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    1. Re:This is not propaganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, Argo also got it;s Oscars because it was such a good movie.

    2. Re:This is not propaganda. by davester666 · · Score: 1

      That's what they all said.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    3. Re:This is not propaganda. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      But for which side?
      For Americans so we feel like we have our hand at the button and in control when those rogue governments go too far?
      Or is it from those countries who have other issues and want to distract those issues because America has a major influence force corrupting them from the inside.
      America is the big dog with a lot of power and influence however we are not all powerful nor have this constant hidden influence trying to keep all the other countries down.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re: This is not propaganda. by Type44Q · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For Americans so we feel like we have our hand at the button

      American, huh. We say "hand on the button..."

    5. Re:This is not propaganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Utterly impossible to tell how much truth there is in such unverifiable statements.

      After all, the US government also benefits if Iran just _thinks_ they're pwned. If they rip out perfectly fine infrastructure that could not be infected, and replace it with new stuff, that creates a chance for the CIA to smuggle in new malware. It also costs them money and distracts them from other efforts.

      But I'm not the only person that can make that deduction, so can Iranian Intelligence. That makes it essentially a double bluff. Is the CIA hoping the Iranians takes the bait or not?

    6. Re:This is not propaganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      agreed and agreed to can't agree more

    7. Re:This is not propaganda. by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      After all, the US government also benefits if Iran just _thinks_ they're pwned. If they rip out perfectly fine infrastructure that could not be infected, and replace it with new stuff, that creates a chance for the CIA to smuggle in new malware. It also costs them money and distracts them from other efforts.

      Well, it appears that once Stux got out in the open and it was discovered and analyzed and tested on the same controllers that Iran used...it seems to have been proven successful.

      The problem, it seems...is that Israel fucked up and on their own, made it much more aggressive and Stuxnet (aka Olympic Games, or OG) then jumped out an infected on a global scale, calling attention to itself, whereas it has earlier been successful, but still covert and confined it appears to only the Iranian targets.

      I think this act by Israel explains a LOT about why obama has been so cold towards them....

      And..I'm guessing the Iranian retaliation on the US infrastructure led to the crappy deal the US took with regard to the nuclear deal with Iran. I'm thinking Iran scared the US enough to take this horrible deal which will essentially let Iran become a weaponized nuclear power in about 8+ years....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:This is not propaganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You name several high profile issues at play here: Israeli modification of Stuxnet, Iranian counterattacks, unfavorable deal with Iran from a US perspective, Iranian rapid acquirement of nuclear weapons.

      Could you please provide a list of the (in your opinion) most reliable sources on these issues? I am not too familiar with US-Iranian affairs and would like to read up on it.

    9. Re:This is not propaganda. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Israel wrote the original Stux. They more or less admitted it on the retirement of the commander (who's name escapes me). No in so many words, but they are responsible and deserve all _credit_.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    10. Re:This is not propaganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit.

    11. Re:This is not propaganda. by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    12. Re: This is not propaganda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cmon... they are using windoze... they are pwned from the get go roflmao...

  7. Re:Islam is an infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interestingly, the leaders of Iran say the same thing about Israel and the US.

  8. "Future" war? by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

    As I read it, all the "digital bombers" are already over the country. The US have already attacked. If any country would do this to the US, the US would certainly see it that way.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
  9. Symantec help hackers say Feds by tetraverse · · Score: 1

    On Tuesday, the law enforcement agency issued an alert that "all Symantec and Norton branded antivirus products" could allow hackers "to take control" of a computer. link

    1. Re:Symantec help hackers say Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      well, it's true.
      because the products are so much shitty. if they were installed on iranian systems they would be an attack route.

      however, this seems like a lot of bullshit just to hype up a few security researchers. the software itself, stuxnet in this case, is trivial. what is not trivial is bridging the airgap and getting some sod to install it on actual machines.

      HOWEVER.. there would be this practical reason to keep the stuxnet government affair secret: FINANCIAL LIABILITY, since stuxnet made it into the wild and if it was known who exactly wrote it, there would be financial and criminal liabilities. never mind the little matter of usa declaring exactly this kind of stuff as an act of war and then committing it without aproval from congress. .

      so is such an attack an act of war or not? is it illegal or not? only makes it further complicated if iran makes it to the same trade tables with international liabilities as usa.

  10. A route to world peace? by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If all countries had such viruses inserted into their critical infrastructure, then none could afford to disrupt the world's peace...

    I THINK I'm joking!

    One of the stranger failures of Islamic terrorism is their not attacking infrastructure assets in the West. Some trivial damage to certain items could do amazing amounts of economic damage. Let's hope they remain unimaginative.

    1. Re:A route to world peace? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not a lack of imagination, it's a lack of terror. Where's the scare when they do a computer attack? People are used to computers acting weirdly, they simply wouldn't care. It's also too easy to claim that it ain't terrorism, it's just "that weird computer stuff".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:A route to world peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Where's the scare when they do a computer attack?

      In the American psyche, apparently, and rightfully so.

      This study shows it as the #2 fear, behind government:

      http://www.livescience.com/52535-american-fear-survey-2015.html

      And another study shows it as the #2 fear, behind ISIS:

      http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/cyberattacks-isis-global-threats-america-survey/

    3. Re:A route to world peace? by jeti · · Score: 1

      It's called MAD for a reason.

    4. Re:A route to world peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the stranger failures of Islamic terrorism is their not attacking infrastructure assets in the West. Some trivial damage to certain items could do amazing amounts of economic damage. Let's hope they remain unimaginative.

      ... Makes you wonder who the top dog really is and what is their true goal.

      If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it probably really is a D.U.C.

    5. Re:A route to world peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets get this right
      The most valuable asset would be to remotely disable all the utes and trucks Isissy is using, or at least reprogram them to stall of let off a starting and running signature to be partnered with say hellfire missiles. Not done.
      The next most would be to target donor supporter money transfers and deposits - this is NOT happening, other than a few stern words. Not done
      Blow up convoys - supply routes - not done, though Russia whacked an invisible 17km retreating column. Fail, capital F.
      Carrying a mobile. Not an automatic death sentence. look how long to find Bin Laughing/bin drinkin. USA Bin Fartin.
      Infrastructure. Well as AEG was refused bidding rights, a lot of GE gear was purchased and perfectly good Russian made stuff scrapped . Can guess what brands NOT to buy - all terms being fair and equal.
      Sabotaging something that should not be sold to them in the first place (and you know the maker). Ok if centrifuges are ok, what other weapons are openly sort of wink wink exported for cash?
      After all the hollywood movies hope Kettering engines still exist.

    6. Re:A route to world peace? by drolli · · Score: 1

      They dont have the means. It took many thousands of man-years of highly educated mathematicians to build the capabilities of the western services.

      It seems that the NSA subverted the crypto infrastructure for several decades now, and penetrated systems on many levels. Heck, the only way that i would be moderately sure that nothing really bad is hidden somewhere in the system would involve Z80s or MOS 6502.

      In comparison to what the NSA does the "cyber-attacks" which most terroristic groups are capable of are like a man with a wooden stick against an aircraft carrier with it's fleet.

    7. Re:A route to world peace? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I hope they also get the tools they used to commit the crime confiscated...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:A route to world peace? by swb · · Score: 2

      Who says it would have to be a computer attack?

      I'm only guessing, but I think a planned and coordinated physical sabotage of power systems could cause chaos on a regional level if the right substations and pylons were knocked out. Knock out some primary feeds, get some secondary ones to overload and go offline and you've got a regional blackout that could days or longer to repair, as not all of the transformers and switchgear could necessarily be just swapped out (depending on the nature of the sabotage).

      Most of that stuff is guarded at best by chain link fences, high voltage power lines aren't guarded at all.

      It's always struck me as odd that we haven't seen that kind of sabotage here. Either the systems are too hard to decipher (thus increasing the risk that the attack would be ineffective at scale) or the actors involved aren't sophisticated enough to run an op like that in a foreign country.

    9. Re:A route to world peace? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Been done, stories in 2004 about an event in 1982:

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

      http://www.zdnet.com/article/u...

      and then, years later, we have the results of counter-information campaigns:

      http://jeffreycarr.blogspot.co...

      hard to know what's truth and what's fiction, and how much has been done but not leaked.

    10. Re:A route to world peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank goodness we have CIP to prevent such an attack.

    11. Re:A route to world peace? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The grid is pretty robust.

      The attack you describe would only work well on one of the hottest days of the year. But on that day it could really fuck things.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    12. Re:A route to world peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you know, maybe all the terrorists you read about are just CIA/MI6/Mossad operations... which would explain why the Egyptian Goddess organization won't travel 100 miles to harm Israel but will travel thousands of miles to Europe. It would also explain why the FBI constantly have to manufacture terrorists...

  11. their lives? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    researchers at Symantec who devoted their lives to unraveling the code line by line

    You know, when you "devote your life" to something it's usually for longer than a season of Game of Thrones. Mayhaps the claim is a bit hyperbolic?

    just sayin'.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re: their lives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Still it feels like an eternity until the next season comes out.

    2. Re:their lives? by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      researchers at Symantec who devoted their lives to unraveling the code line by line

      You know, when you "devote your life" to something it's usually for longer than a season of Game of Thrones. Mayhaps the claim is a bit hyperbolic?

      just sayin'.

      I think it is more in reference to their not leaving basements or showering while surviving off a healthy diet of Mountain Dew and Doritos. I am pretty sure I read a few were known to yell "Mom! Bathroom!" too.

    3. Re:their lives? by bentcd · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, when you actually think your work is likely to get you suicided by the feds it gives the term a whole 'nother meaning wouldn't you say?

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    4. Re:their lives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The diet is much more diverse than that. It includes Monster, Cheetos and Funyans as well.

    5. Re:their lives? by lgw · · Score: 0

      That's just not how the Feds work. They just draft you into the military, whereupon you can be legally required to keep the secret. Happened to a friend of mine (worked out OK for him, since he managed to keep reserve officers pay for many years - good chunk of change, that).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:their lives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      researchers at Symantec who devoted their lives to unraveling the code line by line

      You know, when you "devote your life" to something it's usually for longer than a season of Game of Thrones. Mayhaps the claim is a bit hyperbolic?

      just sayin'.

      Considering how lousy Symantec's AV software is, perhaps they should devote their lives to unraveling its code line by line and fix the all the bugs and bloat. That would *really* be the work of a lifetime.

    7. Re:their lives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what a bizarre mod for a real-life description of what really happens in cases like this.

  12. Maybe I'm missing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But surely the entire point of such a system is that it's unknown until it's needed.

    "Please don't look for it Iran"

  13. Re: Islam is an infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Which is hilarious because we aren't flooding their streets with our men trying to breed them out of existence.

  14. A need for publicity in radical Islam by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Interesting point about their need for it to be terrorism. And there is a strange yearning after visibility; the murders of Lee Rigby in London hung around after the attack waiting to be caught. Let's be grateful.

    1. Re:A need for publicity in radical Islam by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      It's not strange. It's right in the name. Terrorism isn't about killing people, it's about scaring them to achieve a political end. Terrorists choose targets to generate maximum fear, which usually means doing something intensely violent on a small scale.

  15. Movie link? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    TFA does not list one either. Is it bad form to link to IMBD? Here it is http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5446858/

  16. Robert Redford by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Starring? If not, who could ever believe it? That man is ageless, timeless, and witless.

  17. Re:Islam is an infection by davester666 · · Score: 1

    I believe they also include the EU, as well as the UK, regardless of whether it's in or out of the EU.

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  18. "It was also a bit chilling" by Nutria · · Score: 0, Troll

    they worried that the researchers themselves might be targeted to keep them silent.

    No. It's more than a bit stupid, in the same way that anti-Bush whiners always claimed that they were going to "wind up in Gitmo", yet somehow never did.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:"It was also a bit chilling" by quenda · · Score: 1

      Worrying about it does not mean they expected it.
      Are you aware that a number of Iranian scientists have been assassinated?
      If the researchers were a little paranoid, I can understand that. They are westerners, so they'd probably not be killed.
      The sailors on the USS Liberty thought that before they died.

    2. Re:"It was also a bit chilling" by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Worrying about it does not mean they expected it.

      "If I should show up dead on Monday, it wasn't me." means that he more than half-expected it.

      The Government has a much better method of silencing Americans on American soil: the Aaron Swartz Gambit (legally harass emotionally weak people until they commit suicide).

      Are you aware that a number of Iranian scientists have been assassinated?

      I've heard it, and it's irrelevant to whether or not Symantec researchers would be assassinated by Western powers.

      The sailors on the USS Liberty thought that before they died.

      You're comparing American civilians working in America to Navy sailors in a Navy ship. That's... weak.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    3. Re:"It was also a bit chilling" by Lennie · · Score: 1

      They did kill people in Iran:

      http://www.itworld.com/article...

      There were other strange events.

      If I'm not mistaken the guy from MIcrosoft that was going to give a presentation in Germany about Stuxnet had an accident, a car hit him while walking on the sidewalk.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    4. Re: "It was also a bit chilling" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of people have given presentations on stuxnet. Sometimes people just die, sadly. After all, I thought we were all agreed that Microsoft is affiliated with the NSA.

    5. Re: "It was also a bit chilling" by Lennie · · Score: 1

      NSA has many different departments that don't work together. Ha ! Even Microsoft has that. :-)

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  19. Re:Islam is an infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Trump a Muslim, then? (or Farage, Le Pen, Wilders, Petry, you name it. It's not as if we hadn't our local idiots this side of the pond). In that case... YES! Nuke them from orbit!

    On a more sober note: it's the extremists, stupid. All those not tolerating "the others". Muslims have them. Christians have them. Atheists have them. And those extremists make the best allies, taking turns in rocking the boat and making life difficult for the rest of us.

  20. Michael Hayden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is the same guy that formed a cybersecurity consultancy to help companies secure themselves against state-sponsored hackers and speaks freely in public on commuter trains. https://www.theguardian.com/wo... I sincerly doubt this guy knows what should be classified and what shouldn't be. He's probably got Russian, Chinese, and Iranian spies following him non-stop just to see what he'll say next.

    1. Re:Michael Hayden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that was the other one of those assholes..

  21. Why do we keep buying *COMPUTERS* from... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    vulnerable MANUFACTURERS and DESIGNERS?

    Seriously, anyone who is not extremely concerned by Intel/AMD/ARM ring 0 management processors should really read up on what they are capable of, how little they have been independently audited, and the full ramifications if a nation-state actor had that level of access to your computer system. This isn't just a rootkit you *MIGHT* get online, this is the rootkit you buy and pay for with no way to remove, short of replacing it with an older system that hopefully is simple enough to not contain similiar capabilities, and bug free enough to not allow other easier and perhaps just as well documented compromises of your system.

    We are at a point in the Information age where it will either liberate, or enslave us. And unlike the pendulum swinging, this is more like a dam in drought season flowing away your rights, never to be returned.

    1. Re:Why do we keep buying *COMPUTERS* from... by DMJC · · Score: 1

      You could switch to Chinese CPUs... apparently they're the fastest now.

    2. Re:Why do we keep buying *COMPUTERS* from... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are tangent issues and yes they are valid to point out too. Do you understand they way they intended to keep society paid? It is not peaceful. The currency is so out of wack (severe minus value) that it is not money it is debt. A national credit card trillions upon trillions charged up already. Who pays?

      read this.
      http://ftmdaily.com/preparing-for-the-collapse-of-the-petrodollar-system/

      Basically this is one reason for the sneak of globalization they call it. Spy agencies didn't have an actual plan because it can not work. They just started it and thought oh well we could be dead and in Hell anyway before it fails. Fun to play Pinky and the Brain take-over-the-world until you can't.

      The problem is both Jesuit and Jew with the US government, and it is also international. It is an expand and rob strategy that needs to expand to rob more. If it does not expand it fails. The end. Period.

  22. Sadly by lapm · · Score: 2

    Problem is, industrial systems are weakly protected. And stuxnet proved how easy it is to attack them, now everyone knows it. It even proved that targeted attack like this can spread all over the world very very easily... I think its only matter of time before we see terrorist use this sort of stuff instead of suicide bombs. Why kill docent people when you can poison thousands by messing water purification systems.... Whats even more worrying is people dont realise those industry systems need protection...

    1. Re:Sadly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "stuxnet proved how easy it is to attack them" Someone had to physically carry a USB drive into one of Iran's most secure facilities in order to launch the attack. I hardly call that easy. And the Stuxnet variants found in the wild only contained the transport mechanism and not the actual payload that effected Iran's centrifuges.

    2. Re:Sadly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, a centrifuge plant (and I would hope other nuclear systems) is likely more protected than the average industrial infrastructure.

      I have seen many enormous security holes in industrial control systems in the past, some requiring almost no knowledge to exploit: telnet to the right IP on the right port, enter valid command, press enter. This often happens when an older system that has a serial port for control is connected to the Internet using a TCP/IP to UART gateway. The original software for communicating to it doesn't support authentication. After all, if you can access the physical serial port you can disable the system much easier with a hammer. Thus, the IP gateway is also wide open, relying only on a secret port number.

    3. Re:Sadly by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      And in the 1960s the water supplies were going to be laced with LSD...

  23. Correction.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ring LESS THAN 0. If only slashdot defaulted to no-HTML by default.

    As an unrelated thread, since these submission waits are annoying:
    If the U.S. has Pwned Iran with a bunch of infrastructure hacks, what does that say about Iran bringing down that US drone a while back with the GPS spoof/hack?

    1. Re:Correction.... by cavreader · · Score: 1

      If they did do it I would call it beginners luck. However, just because Iran said they brought it down doesn't mean they are telling the truth. Remember these are the same idiots who tried to pass off a model plane as their new stealth jet fighter. And the US has flown thousands of drone sorties in that part of the world and if Iran could actually do what they claim there would be drones falling out of the sky all over the place.

    2. Re:Correction.... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      There's an active drone development community in Iran, I wouldn't doubt that they were trying to bring the drone down with a GPS hack and that the drone did indeed go down. I also wouldn't be surprised if there was zero causal relationship between the two coincidental events.

  24. Act of War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US has already declared that it would interpret similar actions against them as an act of war and react accordingly. The American president really is the biggest war lord there is, isn't he.

    1. Re: Act of War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you dumb faggot, he isn't. If he was, you and your family would be dead. Too bad he isn't.

    2. Re: Act of War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for telling the truth. Millions of families in Iraq and Syria dead or driven from homes due to U.S.

    3. Re: Act of War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Due to the U.S. or due to the unwillingness to fight for their country? The U.S. aren't the ones killing people, burning them alive, or forcing them from their homes. I suppose you could argue that ISIS exists because we pulled out of Iraq too early, and were ineffective in Syria, but even there the responsibility was with the local citizens to fight for their country and they failed in that regard.

  25. Europe is broke, apparently? by profke · · Score: 2

    I've been trying for 30 minutes now to watch this legally. http://theoatmeal.com/comics/g... Europe does not have any money, or whatever... according to: - Amazon - google play - youtube - 30+ minutes in... I quit. I will start my bittorrent client now... Thank you, international movie-business, for saving me money!

  26. Already a terrorist state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given how US has given themselves the right to hack others on the planet, I already have USA in the state terrorism category.

  27. Why only Iran? by aglider · · Score: 1

    If that's been so effective, why should USA deploy it just in Iran? I'd bet there are many instances sleeping everywhere waiting for the alarm clock to wake them up!

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  28. propaganda also known as bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many fools really believe the US has everything and knows everything, especially stories like this ?

    and then 9/11 happened, strange how this could happen when the NSA knows all...

    or how it took them 10 years to get Bin Laden....

    1. Re: propaganda also known as bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop using your brain, and get back to watching Fox news! Believe everything you hear without any question, and accept it as fact. Bow down to the almighty flag. They say jump, you say how high?

    2. Re: propaganda also known as bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then they shoot you for being a smartass and not just jumping.

  29. This is why they think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    everyone could be doing it. Cause they do it themselves -.-

  30. Re: Let's Be Honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The anti-Semitic hat trick is complete. There's only one country in the middle East that doesn't behave like 8th century savages when it comes to foreign relations and it's treatment of women. Forgive me if I don't wish to remove the only counterbalance we have in that part of the world

  31. Why WIndows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is very confusing that most countries would allow their infrastructure to run on Windows. Windows is a proprietary piece of software controlled by the United States.

    Why aren't the individual countries (or blocks of allies) working on their own LInux distros, monitoring source code, etc?

    1. Re:Why WIndows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do sound confused. Linux is no more secure than Windows when a well funded state foreign intelligence service comes a calling. And the US is hardly the only country playing in the cyber warfare arena. And the United States does not control Windows any more than it owns any other OS that was primarily developed in the country. And there are plenty of countries using Linux distros or at least trying to with various levels of success. And here is another tidbit that always gets lost in the background. The whiny Europeans complaining about the NSA always ignore the fact that it was their own security agencies who collected their personal information and shared it with the US. The new data sharing agreement recently implemented targeted the US while completely ignoring that the most serious threats to their personal information was homegrown.

  32. Lawsuit by jasper160 · · Score: 2

    I wonder how much of a chance the government of Iran would have in suing the US gov in a US or in the international courts?

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished.
    1. Re:Lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like all of the countries constantly suing us for cruise missile and drone strikes?

  33. Re: Islam is an infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And in one place they hang homosexuals from lampposts, while in the others you're free to live without fear of roving gangs of religious Sharia police who can arrest you for having too short a beard.

    Fuck off.

  34. Re: Islam is an infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    68 percent of Muslims polled worldwide believe that EXECUTION is the appropriate punishment for leaving Islam.

    Tell us more about minority extremists, dipshit.

  35. Re: Wisdom follows, pay attention! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He also failed to mention the inconvenient fact that Iran funds terrorist groups in Israel and elsewhere. If Iran could get rid of their crazy ayatollah etc. it would be a successful country. Most of the Iranians I've met (in the U.S.) have been quite nice.

  36. Re:Let's Be Honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have a winner for the most ignorant comment on the Internet this week! The displayed level of ignorance of events past and current is breathtaking in its scope and depth. Additionally, I think this hits every wacko conspiracy theory in circulation.

    Very good effort for a Monday. Well done troll, well done.

  37. Did It Ever Occur To You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that these defects are intentional ?

  38. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Linux had an exploitable bug in gethostbyname(), which was for some funny (or not so, imo) reason executed inside the kernel.

    So opfor inserts a "bad url" containing malware into a website you visit. Boom - machine pwned. And all your funny firewall "defense in depth" is useless.

    American computers and software are only safe if you disconnect them from any electronic network.

    Ask yourself why.

    1. Re:Meh by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      That's an example of a failure of defense in depth. Why shouldn't gethostbyname() be executed in the kernel? Seems like a reasonable place to execute system calls no? The reason is, you want to execute everything with the lowest possible privileges. If there is an exploitable bug, the exploit doesn't get you very far.

    2. Re:Meh by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Microkernels are more secure. At some point we just need to pay the context switch overhead and get on with it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  39. In Other Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not use any popular U.S. operating system if you want to store a secret.

  40. Re: Islam is an infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    68 percent of Muslims polled worldwide believe that EXECUTION is the appropriate punishment for leaving Islam.

    Source...?

  41. Oh Boy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all the nutters listened to their intel and security experts, the world would have much less war and conflict. Israeli intelligence heads are on record suggesting talking instead of permanent war in the middle east.

    But alas, Nutanjahu and lots of amateurs have not got the memo.

  42. Re: Let's Be Honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your nice ally Saudi Arabia ?

  43. Re: Let's Be Honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only asses use the term "anti-semitic".

    And yes, you smell quite foul.

  44. Cheaper solution by theendlessnow · · Score: 1

    Pokémon Go.... Iran! That should disable just about everything.

  45. Re: Islam is an infection by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

    See this Pew survey. Search for "Penalty for Converting to Another Faith". Globally, it's not as bad as the GP says, but it sure isn't good; Egypt in particular is horrific.

    --
    The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
  46. Re:Let's Be Honest by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

    Dude, all that stuff happened in the fifties. And sixties. Okay, and seventies too. Israel hasn't been actually invaded by a coalition of their neighbours, bent on annihilation, in, like, decades!

    A cynical person, or one older than 40, might say that their strategy is working.

  47. Stuxnet Consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've got good news and bad news.
    The good news: Stuxnet crippled Iran's nuclear program and now Israel is safe.
    The bad news: Stuxnet escaped into the banking system and now all the Jews' money is gone.

  48. History teaches us... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iran colonized Britain and the USA. America was going to have a democratically elected Prime Minister, but when Britain and America nationalized their oil, Iran had the elected leaders overthrown. Iran was behind the Iraqi invasion of USA and Britain in the 80's. Heck, Iran even supplied Iraq with chemical weapons to be used against USA and Britain during the 8 year war back in the 80's. So we know Iran is dangerous.

  49. idiots get re-incarnated to the other side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *idiot* hahah I backdoored $COUNTRY
    * god reincarnates idiot to be $COUNTRY citizen
    *idiot* hey!
    *god* you're way out of line!

  50. Reserachers should not have revealed this info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would not have given this info out because Iran or other hostile nations could use this info. I still feel like Iran will one day send a nuke our way. So, something that prevents this from happening is good in my book. So, I think it was wrong for Symantec and other security researchers to reveal this information just so they could make a name for themselves. Unless, they got permission from the government to do so. Or maybe another idea, what if it wasn't the US but another hostile nation trying to cause the nukes to explode or launch on purpose? Not good. So, Iran claims they have no nuclear weapons... I doubt the US really can find out for sure because Iran has moved this stuff underground I am sure so as to not be seen via satellites. But hey, this is my 2 cents.

    1. Re:Reserachers should not have revealed this info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, ok Shlomo. We get it. Keep hating Iran.

  51. Any documentary about NSA and CIA will be lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will be a couple obvious truths sprinkled with brand-new-to-you-lies that you won't readily know the difference. Fuck this movie and fuck the NSA and CIA.

    Citizen Four is what you should watch. Ed. Mother Fucking. Snowden.

  52. So the US has admitted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to either a) acts of terrorism and sabotage or b( acts it deems to be an act of war?

    I think even the merkins arent daft enough to boast about those.

  53. Take my word for it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or not. If Michael Hayden says something, try to figure out why he said it, because it sure isn't to provide information to the public.

  54. American, huh. Insightful, huh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    American, huh. Insightful, huh. We say " finger on the button..."

    FTFY

  55. Alternative strategy by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Whilst you are of course right if jihadism is committed to terrorism, but the question is whether it must be. The alternative of doing massive amounts of economic damage to the USA until it does what they wants is one that they haven't attempted yet, which is what I'm getting at. A serious and sustained attack on the vulnerabilities of the rail network of a major city would probably be more debilitating and therefore effective in changing the mind of the general public than a spectacular terrorist attack. It's easy to get people to stand up to terrorism after a one off incident, but if it's meaning their commute EVERY morning is a mess?

  56. Context by dbIII · · Score: 1
    Context: They were the only murderous spooks in the operation.
    It's not as if the far more murderous Russian spooks were involved.

    Arguably, they're some of the more clumsy ones - getting publicly tied to their actions

    French spooks were clumsy and got caught. Mossad let people know they are involved and spread the fear without getting caught.

  57. One great big advertisement by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Make a movie about something Symantec supposedly found. Buy our software that we can't even give away anymore because it sucks so bad. The real joke is, it'll slow their machines down big time.