Slashdot Mirror


Iran Allegedly Hit By Computer Virus More Violent Than Stuxnet (timesofisrael.com)

TTL0 shares a report from The Times of Israel: Iranian infrastructure and strategic networks have come under attack in the last few days by a computer virus similar to Stuxnet but "more violent, more advanced and more sophisticated," and Israeli officials are refusing to discuss what role, if any, they may have had in the operation, an Israeli TV report said Wednesday. "Remember Stuxnet, the virus that penetrated the computers of the Iranian nuclear industry?" the report on Israel's Hadashot news asked. Iran "has admitted in the past few days that it is again facing a similar attack, from a more violent, more advanced and more sophisticated virus than before, that has hit infrastructure and strategic networks." The Iranians, the TV report went on, are "not admitting, of course, how much damage has been caused." On Sunday, Gholamreza Jalali, the head of Iran's civil defense agency, said Tehran had neutralized a new version of Stuxnet, Reuters reported. Stuxnet penetrated Iran's nuclear program, "taking control and sabotaging parts of its enrichment processes by speeding up its centrifuges," the report notes. We'll update this story when more details become available.

181 comments

  1. Re: The bit is mightier than then sword by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Funny

    This virus is so powerful it even hacked Slashdot to fuck up your post title.

  2. But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This makes no sense. And I am a republican so I know when things make sense.

  3. Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by sheramil · · Score: 1

    What acts of violence has this virus committed? The linked article was rather short on detail, although it did describe several instances of violent behavior on behalf of various associated meatba^H^H^H^H^H^H humans.

    The most violent thing I ever saw a program do was to toggle the tape selector input relay on the System 80 computer, rapidly, to make a loud buzzing noise, and eventually destroy the relay.

    1. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Cyberweapons and sophisticated hacking pose a greater threat to the United States than the risk of physical attacks, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said Wednesday"

    2. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by radja · · Score: 4, Informative

      Stuxnet managed to do almost the same, but to ultracentrifuges used to enrich uranium.

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    3. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Back in the 80s. IBM brought out a new harddrive they claimed was bulletproof.

      Somebody figured the platter resonance frequency and 'tacoma narrows bridged' it with head motion during a demo.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did that once as a kid. Playing with the light switch until the light bulb is dead. With LED bulbs kids will never know this.

    5. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by cavreader · · Score: 1

      The most impressive thing about the Stuxnet virus was getting it into one of Iran's most secure facilities and loaded into their internal network. A network with no outside connectivity.

    6. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They dropped USB drives in the parking lot and waited for a moron to pick it up and plug it into the network.

      That's not really any level of sophistication or anything that is impressive, that's just basic social engineering on stupid people.

    7. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice theory. The Iranians would like to believe the "moron in the parking lot" scenario rather then acknowledge they have foreign intelligence agents imbedded throughout the Iranian government.
      And there is strong evidence that suggests there was an agent working at that facility. For the hack to work the creators needed to know what type and how many centrifuges were in the target area. They also needed the make and model of the PLC's and SCADA systems used too operate the daisy chained centrifuges. I don't think you gather all that information standing in the parking lot.

    8. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can compromise PLC's you can do all kinds of damage. Before the USSR folded the US allowed a Soviet agent to steal some high end PLC's which Russia proceeded to install them in a pumping station on their Siberian oil pipeline. Problem was the US had compromised the PLC's by embedding a few lines of code in the right instruction blocks. 2 months later there was an explosion at that pumping station so big it could be seen from orbit. It forced a shutdown of one of Russia's most important oil pipelines for 7 months.

      And PLC's are present in almost every piece of automated machinery on the planet.

    9. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the 80s. IBM brought out a new harddrive they claimed was bulletproof.

      Somebody figured the platter resonance frequency and 'tacoma narrows bridged' it with head motion during a demo.

      bruh. grateful you made me look up tacoma narrows bridge. I remember seeing trippy footage of that bridge years ago but I never knew it's name. cheers
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)

    10. Re:Now we see the violence inherent in the system! by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      Ya? But can it get ultracentrifuges to play the Sing Song Serenade like my C64 could do with it's floppy drive?

  4. Re: The bit is mightier than then sword by mutu310 · · Score: 1

    The virus is so powerful, it even hacked Chuck Norris :o

  5. advanced by Andy+Smith · · Score: 4, Funny

    more advanced AND more sophisticated?

    DAMN...

    1. Re:advanced by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Funny

      It wrecks your centrifuges even faster, and smokes a cigarette in a dinner jacket while doing it.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:advanced by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

      That's right. This new virus is so "sophisticated" that it can even damage the centrifuges that are packed away in storage and not currently running. But wait, the next software update will even damage the ones the Iranians have not even been ordered yet. That'll show them!
      /s

      After all, the Iranians would not lie to us would they? Then why would Ayatollah Ali Khamenei worry about a cyber attack on an infrustructure that should not currently be running?

    3. Re:advanced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what i wanna know: who would've been responsible if a nuclear accident actually DID happen tho?

  6. That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    For looking at Burka pr0n on work machines.

    1. Re:That's what you get by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Funny

      For looking at Burka pr0n on work machines.

      OOOh...look!! An ankle.....[heavy breathing]

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re: That's what you get by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      "Ladies everywhere, cover your ankles - except down South; no one wants to look at those."

    3. Re:That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only this is stupid, because people don't wear burka's in Iran, it's also very racist. congratulations, you managed to tell us everything about yourself with just one sentence.

    4. Re: That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yawn, stop being a faggot

    5. Re:That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah dumbass, you told us. islam isn't a race. iran isn't a race. yup sure told us. dumbass.

  7. Those in glass houses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Our entire economy is integrated with computers now. Throwing open the doors on destructive attackâ(TM)s to cripple a govt/economy is just stupid, we are way more vulnerable to this shit and no we do not have adequate protections in place.

    1. Re: Those in glass houses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There will never be adequate protections in place because the surface area is so great, and software is NEVER EVER bug free. The nature of software bugs is that they lay hidden in wait. Developers get shuffled around or leave, others interface with their systems or cobble in new features with imperfect knowledge. Bugs are born. Not to mention the chance , which has been known to happen, where someone is paid to embed a bug. Devs could even embed an obscure bug in hopes of collecting a 6 figure bug bounty in the future as a form of retirement investment. Our reliance and trust on computers is our Achilles heel.

    2. Re: Those in glass houses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pull the cable (go offline) and you'll reduce your "surface area" to astonishing levels. Sure, they can always infiltrate and infect the computers locally by inserting a malicious USB and the like... but then they will actively have to go and do that, as opposed to click a button from the other side of the world. They should still be able to function given than being offline from the internet does not mean you cannot have an internal network.

      This happened to Iran, but we are all exposed given the blind reliance of the world on the internet. Look at medical equipment being hacked... why on earth does it need to be connected to internet?? When you rely so blindly on one single resource... only bad things can happen.

    3. Re: Those in glass houses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will never be adequate protections in place because the surface area is so great, and software is NEVER EVER bug free.

      You have not seen my hello world program.

    4. Re: Those in glass houses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hello > /dev/full ; echo $?

    5. Re: Those in glass houses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda BS=512,count=1

    6. Re:Those in glass houses by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Specifically, all the zero-day exploits in the "arsenal" of the CIA and friends are simply bugs that they could fix to make the USA more secure. They could inform the maintainers, make patches, and close security holes. But they don't, as seen with the vault7 leak. Instead they hoard these things in a hope to use them offensively against others. Who knows who else has found the exact same security holes. It's the part where they choose not to make citizens more secure in exchange for... well... things like this. That's what gets me. Not only are they choosing offense over defense, but every bit of offense they develop is by definition a failure in defense.

  8. Overly Dramatic Headline by Captain+Kirk · · Score: 0

    A computer virus may stop your computer from working but its not "violent" - its not going to walk up and punch you.

    1. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I think my computer might walk up and punch you.

    2. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by butzwonker · · Score: 2

      We're talking about command&control systems of chemical plants, nuclear power plants, hospitals, cars, trains, elevators, etc., not your average home computer. In this case, they've probably destroyed some costly centrifuges.

    3. Re: Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What happens if your bank or pension fund records all go down for a month and you lose access to all your money? Or the stock market gets jacked or transactions get corrupted on purpose and the system has to be shut down? What happens if a dam controls get opened wide up and burnt out or a nuclear facility toyed with so control systems lie to their operators? Software can be violent and or directly lead to pain violence and misery

    4. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Now instead of sending assassins to shoot nuclear physics professors maybe we can remotely hijack university elevators to drop them to their deaths.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    5. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Now instead of sending assassins to shoot nuclear physics professors maybe we can remotely hijack university elevators to drop them to their deaths.

      If you really want to be terrified: look up mass dampers in skyscrappers. Now look up "active mass dampers" and realize there are some in all major cities.

    6. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A computer virus may stop your computer from working but its not "violent" - its not going to walk up and punch you.

      With the "internet of things" now, who knows?

      It may try to microwave you or slam your garage door on you, anyway ...

    7. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or else, hijack their car and make them crash!

      https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

    8. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A computer virus may stop your computer from working but its not "violent" - its not going to walk up and punch you.

      No, but if a foreign country did it to us and it caused enough of a crippling to one of our infrastructure projects or caused enough economic damage you could bet our politicians would complain about it being "an act of war". Even with some of the more minor hackings done by China, and Russia a few politicians have made some such comments. If something as big as Stuxnet hit us, I think the majority would want some form of retaliation.

      However, if Iran retaliates against Israel or the US (or whoever else is to blame) for this, you can bet they will be bombed and blamed as the aggressors.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    9. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by c · · Score: 2

      Stuxnet messed with industrial process controls, and supposedly caused things like centrifuges to spin at self-destructive speeds. Depending on how this new one actually works and what it affects, "violent" might not be as inaccurate as you think.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    10. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Elisha Otis has sent assassins to your location.

    11. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... In stead of do some bombing that will cause lost of casuality's and deaths, let's blast out your brain.
      It causes only one causality and only destroys a few defective brain cells that where not used anyway...

    12. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A computer virus may stop your computer from working but its not "violent" - its not going to walk up and punch you.

      Before you make that assertion you should research the history of computer related problems which have lead to injury or death.
      Remember the last major industrial malware "Triton" was specifically designed to bypass critical safety systems which sounds like it's designed to do something that would often result in a catastrophe.

    13. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make no mistake, it is an act of war. But so is what the US and Israel allegedly did ti Iran. The key here is deniability. Can it be proven who did these things? If you can, you can retaliate. But that doesn't mean that the other side won't hit back again.

      What China and Russia have done isn't minor. China has lept ahead by decades due to the theft of intellectual property on everything from aeronautical tech to micro controllers. This has let their military leap ahead of where it would have been.

      Does the US do it also? Of course, that is what espionage is about. But it doesn't mean you can't complain when it happens. Its not hypocritical, its how the system works. We spy on everyone and everyone spies on us. Its naive to think it works any other way. Or perhaps many people live in a world where they actually believe we can all live peacefully together. That is pure fantasy. Human nature will never allow it.

    14. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your argument about politicians complaining about something being an act of war is very weak. You see the USA actually went to war with Iraq over WMD, when they knew they didn't have them. Yes, they talk big about the aggressions against the USA, and say act of war blah blah blah. Don't worry your pretty head, we hack them back just as much, and we aren't going to war with another nuclear power anytime soon. What do you think the CIA's leaked hacking tools are for?

      You are very mistaken. If Iran responds to this with hacking and computer viruses they will not be bombed and blamed as aggressors. Oh wait, did you mean if they escalate? Well, uh, then yes, then they would be blamed for escalating. But don't worry, we will blame them no matter what we/they do, and they will similarly blame us.

      If you are a small nation surrounded by nations that have tried to annihilate you multiple times in the past, you kind of have to take possible threats seriously, and nukes are a huge threat.

    15. Re:Overly Dramatic Headline by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      This. Humans are far too greedy not to do this. We will never be a world at peace unfortunately. It would be nice, but I don't see it ever happening. We are all too different.

  9. What now? by AndyKron · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How is this not an act of war? Then again, Israel is constantly engaged in acts of war against Iran.

    1. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How is this not an act of war? Then again, Israel is constantly engaged in acts of war against Iran.

      Funny how it's the leaders of Iran who have literally vowed to conduct genocide and "wipe Israel off the map".

      And then Iran created a proxy army (Hezbollah) that actually is trying to do just that.

      Kinda strange how you missed that.

      But hey, you're not an anti-Semite. You just blindly support a medieval bunch of homophobic misogynists in their attempt to kill Jews because the fucking Koran says so.

    2. Re:What now? by fred911 · · Score: 2

      How is this not an act of war? Then again, Israel is constantly engaged in acts of war against Iran.

      Obviously. Their best defense is a proactive offense. Someone has to be responsible for common sense.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    3. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      When Iran is given an approved path by Obama to develop WMDs without any outside interference, this is the kind of thing that happens. Instead of admitting that the problem was with how Obama and Europe dealt with Iran, you turn to anti-Semitism. Apparently you wont' be happy until nuclear weapons are being thrown at people.

      Meanwhile, Trump is attempting to avoid the nuclear war despite Obama and Europe pushing for it (after all it will only kill brown people and Jews so its fine by you as well).

      As for Israel engaging in acts of war, when Iran arms people who launch rockets into kindergartens in Israel, I think they have a right to defend themselves. Its is another point we disagree on because after all to you it is only Jews being killed so it must be ok.

      Yes, I am calling out liberals for racism and anti-Semite behavior, because it is the only logical conclusion if you ignore their words and look at their actions.

    4. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they never said that. It's a mistranslation which, admittedly, the Iranians themselves have propagated.

    5. Re:What now? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

      How is this not an act of war?

      It is an act of war, just as killing people in other countries is war. But: we just don't talk much about it if it is done by countries that we like, or do a lot of business with; or even if done by our own country.

    6. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you also claiming that Hezbollah is a mistranslation? Or are you still looking for a way to internally rationalize supporting terrorists while claiming not to?

    7. Re:What now? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Informative

      Israel gets away with it because they have the most powerful military nation in the world standing behind them. If it wasn't for Western guilt over the atrocities that happened in WWII, Israel would be viewed as a dangerous pariah state by the West, but it's politically "insensitive" to think of them as the bully-state they've become. The attempted genocide guilt does belong to all the West- anti Semitism was rife across most Western nations in the 30's, if it wasn't Germany, it could easily have happened in another country.

      As it is, they get away with violating the sovereignty of countries all over the world carrying out illegal raids and missions knowing their big brother the US has got their back. One would think- rather than continue out the "bully-thy-neighbor" approach they would be better off trying to build friendships. If the US ever stops supporting Israel, one day the guilt of WWII will no longer be so fresh, or perhaps a President who is sympathetic to the Palestinian apartheid will be elected. Would an isolated Israel last long after all the hate, destruction and violation they have performed on their neighbours?

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    8. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hezzabola launches rockets at schools for 5 year olds in Israel (supplied by Iran), not a peep from you.
      Israel uses a computer virus to prevent WMDs from being created and used on them, they are the most evil people ever according to you.

      THIS is what anti-Semitism looks like folks.

      story 1
      story 2
      I went looking for the story I remember a couple years ago, all I could find was it happening TWICE this year, but as long as Jews are targeted you seem to be cool with it.

    9. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they never said that. It's a mistranslation which, admittedly, the Iranians themselves have propagated.

      No, it's not a mistranslation.

      To fundamentalist Muslims, Israel is dar-al Harb , and since it was once dar-al Islam, it's mere existence is an affront to Islam - and it literally needs to be wiped off the map.

      Ever wonder why al Qaeda bombed Madrid while calling Spain "al Andalus" ? Same reason.

    10. Re:What now? by ph1ll · · Score: 1

      "Experts confirm that Iran's president did not call for Israel to be 'wiped off the map''" The Guardian, 14 June 2006.

      There are many reasons to criticize Iran but a constantly quoted mistranslation is not one of them.

      --
      --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
    11. Re:What now? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Israel gets away with it because they have the most powerful military nation in the world standing behind them.

      Erm.. no. Iran will not declare war on Israel not because of it's military might but because the Iranian government, most of whom are Arabs from southern Iraq will lose control over the Iranian people (most of whom are Persian). The thing about Iranians and Israelis is if you put them together on any other part of the world they get along like a house on fire. When the Baha'i and Zoroastrians were forced to flee by the Islamic revolution, a lot of them went to Israel. Any war between Iran and Israel will see families reunited, many Iranians will welcome this and quickly turn their back on the theocratic regime.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    12. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Experts confirm that Iran's president did not call for Israel to be 'wiped off the map''" The Guardian, 14 June 2006.

      There are many reasons to criticize Iran but a constantly quoted mistranslation is not one of them.

      Knock it off.

      This is the exact quote:

      Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.

      "wiped off the map" wasn't an isolated case. The sentiment is repeated in the statement multiple times, so hanging your hat on the exact translation is somewhere between specious bullshit and disingenuous chicanery.

      And even then, that "wiped off the map" has been used and has continued to be used by Iran:

      The Iranian presidential website stated: "the Zionist Regime of Israel faces a deadend and will under God's grace be wiped off the map," and "the Zionist Regime that is a usurper and illegitimate regime and a cancerous tumor should be wiped off the map."[84]

      Iran had used the phrase "Israel must be wiped off the map" previously as well. In 1999, a military parade carried slogans that read "Israel must be wiped off the map" in Farsi and English.[85]

      Joshua Teitelbaum of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs discovered pictures of Iranian propaganda banners that clearly say in English: "Israel should be wiped out of the face of the world."[86][87]

      In March 2016, Iran tested a ballistic missile painted with the phrase "Israel should be wiped off the Earth" in Hebrew. The missile is reported to be capable of reaching Israel.

      Other Ahmadinejad quotes follow. I'll pass on the Holocaust denial ones, because they don't directly address Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's clear calls for and support of the literal destruction of Israel and the genocide required to do that.

      But if you want to argue that Ahmadinejad didn't call for the destruction of Israel - multiple times - go ahead. You'll just mark yourself a bigger fool.

      Those who think they can revive the stinking corpse of the usurping and fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation.

      any freedom lover and justice seeker in the world must do its best for the annihilation of the Zionist regime in order to pave the path for the establishment of justice and freedom in the world

      Israel "has no place in the region."

      The Zionist regime has lost its raison d'être. Today, the Palestinians identify with your name Khomeini, your memory, and in your path. They are walking in your illuminated path and the Zionist regime has reached a total dead end. Thanks to God, your wish will soon be realized, and this germ of corruption will be wiped off.

      ... like a cancer cell that spreads through the body, this regime infects any region. It must be removed from the body.

      This entity [Israel] can be compared to a kidney transplanted in a body that rejected it. “Yes it will collapse and its end will be near.

      Go ahead. Keep trying to defend him with a "mistranslation" defense.

      It's like arguing "Your honor my client didn't murder anyone with a rock! He used a brick!"

    13. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The f*king draft doesn't care if you're secular; they might just decide to pull you out of the theater, give you a gun, and tell you to help their side killing those which will certainly include innocent civilians. As mentioned here before WWI was started by one nobody shooting another. It worked because they were all just waiting for an excuse. That's what happens when the MIC controls your country.

    14. Re:What now? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      From your link: "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time"

      I'd prefer to be wiped off the face off the map than to be wiped out of history. Now what typically happens when something is horribly mistranslated is that someone comes out and says "I didn't say that". Do you have a link to that?

    15. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why Israel and US extremists are pissed about the JCPOA is it deprives them of their casus belli. You have it backwards. Neocons have wanted to destroy Iran for decades, they seek war no matter the justification or means or rationale. It's the same people and interests you're defending that led to the invasion of Iraq and the long list of horrors seen this century.
      These people don't need your help, and it should be evident by now that you can't appease their thirst for war by allowing them one more little war.

      Obama itself is not an appeaser or weakling, save when doing the bidding of the neocons. He is personally responsible for the destruction of Libya, Syria and Yemen but couldn't get away with a possible total war against Iran and it's doubtful anyone else could have. You hate Obama because he only killed one million people and balked at killing two or three millions, hence he's a traitor and weak.

      What are the motivations? To destroy politically independent countries or governments to insure more complete US and globalist dominance, to enrich US weapons manufacturers and this also keep right wing nuts in power in Israel. Obama and Israel both supported Jihad as a tool for this. Bush did full blown invasions (as have done Saudi and UAE in Obama and Trump years). Violent wars are not the only tools used, other countries get meddled in in other ways.
      In Honduras, the US helped a coup. In Brazil they jailed and sentenced the man who would have been elected president, on a minor and made up charge. In the US it's fake Russiagate supported by political and media elites.

      As for Iran engaging in acts of war, when NATO and GCC countries arm terrorists who launch rockets into kindergartens in Syria, and have in their ideology to exterminate Shia among a long list of "heretics", and kill about 100,000 soldiers, police, security forces etc. of their most important ally, and they actually run around beheading people and they carry out terror attacks in Iran proper... This is what Iran and Hezbollah have been fighting against!
      So Iran is an ally in the war against terror, and if that piss you off then you shouldn't have started all this crap in Libya and Syria and elsewhere.

      If Israel wants to be a Western version of North Korea, paranoid and militaristic, and stockpile weapons and regularly test ICBMs but never use them, I would be fine with that. It has lessons to learn from North Korea on how to behave. i.e. don't be the aggressor, don't call for wars of aggression, build all these fantastical weapons so you don't have to use them. This is what a grown up country does. How many neighbors of North Korea were destroyed, vs how many neighbors of Israel? There are other similarities : North Korea was created in 1948, and they suffered a genocide (with huge killings in South Korea at the hand of the South Korean government too, while US personnel pretended not to see what was going on in the next field over). This should explain much of their behavior derided as weird, frantic and paranoid.

      Why can't Israel behave?

    16. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From your link: "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time"

      I'd prefer to be wiped off the face off the map than to be wiped out of history. Now what typically happens when something is horribly mistranslated is that someone comes out and says "I didn't say that". Do you have a link to that?

      GP's claim about "mistranslation" is bullshit. He picked one time where defenders of Iran can say the words weren't translated as accurately as they could have been while completely ignoring all the other times Iranian leaders actually did use "wiped off the map" when referring to Israel.

    17. Re: What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      For literally wiping something off the map, that's usually just Windex and paper towel.

    18. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said only God's chosen people are victims.
      Go home JIDF, mommy's waiting for you.

    19. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1. Koran doesn't say kill the Jews!
      2. Opposing Israel doesn't make you an anti-semite. it just makes you a rational person that hates terrorists, and yes Israel is involved in a lot of acts of terror, as well as Iran and US and Saudi and lots of other countries.
      3. Hezbollah is not wiping Israel off the map! they are fighting for Palestinians, which Israel is trying to wipe off the map.

      You had 4 sentences, 3 of them wrong. Congratulations! you passed the bar to become the next president of the United states.

    20. Re: What now? by liefer · · Score: 1

      So fast to throw the antisemite card, over nothing. He said nothing that justifies you calling him that. I guess this is the world we live in now, everyone accusing each other of being the worst and most extreme thing you can think of, hoping you'll be seen as the victim and still hold the moral high ground despite the unreasonable aggressive response that's inevitably coming. In short: people enjoy being bullies too much

    21. Re:What now? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      Hezzabola launches rockets at schools for 5 year olds in Israel (supplied by Iran), not a peep from you.

      Both sides do evil despicable acts. Palestine hasn't been some saintly state in all this- they have muck and blood on their hands too. Some anti Israeli factions are resorting to terrorism to try and free their people. I don't agree with this tactic; however, it is worth pointing out that Jewish factions did the same thing when Britain was occupying the region, retaliating with terrorist attacks on civilians. Desperate downtrodden people sometimes do immoral things.

      Israel uses a computer virus to prevent WMDs from being created

      Israel HAS their own WMD. Should we spread viruses throughout Israel too?

      THIS is what anti-Semitism looks like folks.

      Denouncing evil acts performed by the Israeli state is not anti-Semitism.

      but as long as Jews are targeted you seem to be cool with it.

      Don't be such a ridiculous lying fool. Back this up with evidence! I don't hide under an "anonymous coward" alias. If you're going to make up ridiculous accusations back it up with proof. I am absolutely not OK with Jews being targeted or people of any creed, religion, or race. No one deserves a violent death, to be murdered or targeted with terrorism.

      Israel IS a pariah state in my opinion because it does carry out unprovoked attacks in other countries. Maintains a racist apartheid. Performs illegal operations on other countries, even ones that it nominally calls her allies. Ignores United Nations agreements and acts like it is above the law. Without the backing of the US it couldn't carry on like this. It would have to play by the same rules as every other nation on earth.

      I think this is a bad and dangerous strategy, they should be making friends not enemies. There are a few nations in the region who are not quite as unhinged as the others. They should be pursuing peaceful relations with them instead of making an enemy out of everyone. Give the Palestinians their land back, close down the settlements and Palestine agrees it may never operate an army in exchange- maybe even have Palestine pay Israel a fair fee to defend Palestine's borders (fair fee to be determined by UN) - that would give freedom to the Palestinians- would remove them as a threat to Israel (they'd be less likely to launch terror missions if not downtrodden too)- and it would provide funding for Israel's own defence. Psychotic Islamic dictators couldn't use Palestine as a reason to attack Israel.

      Israel hasn't learnt yet that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    22. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Israel HAS their own WMD. Should we spread viruses throughout Israel too?

      Only credible source for this is Jimmy Carter, the anti-Semite DNC president who has spent most of his life smearing Israel while promoting terrorist. If you agree with Carter doesn't make it non anti-Semite, it mean YOU are an anti-Semite.

      Denouncing evil acts performed by the Israeli state is not anti-Semitism.

      Refusing to denounce attacks targeting children as acts of terrorism IS anti-Semitism. Congratulations, your up to 2 for 2.

      Back this up with evidence!

      I gave you two incidents, with links to different sources. Again you failed to mention attacking small children is wrong because they are Jews. You are now 3 for 3 on your anti-Semite comments.

      Then you continue on with just kill all of the Israelites and give their land to others.

      Yep, you are the definition of anti-Semite. Congratulations, you will go far in the DNC with views like that.

    23. Re:What now? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Iran's government is extremely complicated, combining elements of democracy, republicanism, and theocracy. The Iranian Constitution reflects a deep-seated Shia ambivalence toward authority -- both a longing for it and a distrust of it.

      So the thing Americans on both sides of our political divide tend to miss is that Iran has internal politics too. The Iranian Republic in a way resembles the Roman republic, with a confusing profusion of specialized legislative and judicial bodies, all potentially under the control of rival groups.

      It's a mistake to personify Iran the country or even the government of Iran, because any way you characterize it is bound to represent some faction or another. For American conservatives it is the Revolutionary Guards that represent Iran -- imagine if American evangelicals had their own branch of the military that pursued its own foreign policy. For American liberals, Iranian liberals like Rouhani and Zarif represent Iran. And between those two groups you have Khamenei, who is notoriously uncharismatic and who has dubious qualifications as a cleric. He's done well out of the leadership, estimates are he's raked in a hundred billion dollars, but to stay in power he's got to throw the hardliners red meat while not letting them do anything that would destabilize his position.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    24. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can take that as meaning different things. It could mean the collapse of the REGIME. Not necessarily the people themselves. They might be anti-Israeli government but fine with the Jewish people in general.

    25. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when has Hezbollah attacked Israel as of late? Seems it's Israel attacking Hezbollah in Syria as of late.

    26. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Martin Luther also said to kill the jews, and he's more recent than the Koran.

    27. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel, the only nation that has no WMD but openly tests ICBMs. What's in the warhead, flowers and candy?

    28. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really should check who is bombing who. Iran talks, cause they're pissed that Israel is bombing them and other neighbors. Little fuckers are brave with A-bomb and USA behind them.

      You just ate way 2 much propaganda. Iran is not the agressor. And jews are literally new nazis in their handling of Palestinian genocid.

    29. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But hey, you're not an anti-Semite. You just blindly support a medieval bunch of homophobic misogynists in their attempt to kill Jews because the fucking Koran says so.

      Your argument would have been better without the name-calling and judgmental assumptions.

      Youre just preaching to the choir at that point.

    30. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      READ CAREFULLY! They are saying REGIME. Not necessarily the Jewish people. Regime is different. It means generally "government". You can be anti-Zionist and yet be okay with Jewish people. Just like you can be anti-Communist, and hope the Communist regime in China is wiped off the planet, but be okay with Chinese people in general as well.

    31. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We could say it's offensive enough. US and Israel are wishing for regime collapses often enough, unsubtle about the Iranian regime (and they instilled the derogatory meaning for the word 'regime'). Israel and US are by the way among the countries having only known a same regime. Iran I have no idea how many, the country is extremely old.

    32. Re: What now? by Jahoda · · Score: 0

      Hey, you're not a fucking mossad shill posting as AC to call the dude an anti-Semites when he calls attention to the pig fuckingly illegal actions of Bibi and you pissant little neofascist regime there in Israel.

    33. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    34. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've chosen poorly. I advise you not to accept any packages from your "friends".

    35. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both sides do evil despicable acts.

      Why is it when you point out liberal heroes being bad beyond any ability to spin out of it, you get the "both sides are equally bad"

      In this case one side is putting out computer viruses, the other is literally targeting jewish children. I normally don't bring out the Nazi word, but this is LITERLLY why the Nazi word is brought out and it is "equally as bad" as a computer virus?
      This is a liberal that has gone so far over the edge he should probably be committed.

    36. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      READ CAREFULLY! They are saying REGIME. Not necessarily the Jewish people. Regime is different. It means generally "government". You can be anti-Zionist and yet be okay with Jewish people. Just like you can be anti-Communist, and hope the Communist regime in China is wiped off the planet, but be okay with Chinese people in general as well.

      And just how the hell do you eliminate just a regime, DUMBASS???

      Got the stones to answer that?

      I'm guessing no.

      Especially considering that the tactics of Iran's Hezbollah proxy are pretty much "Kill the Jews wherever we find them!"

      Jesus H. Fucking Christ, I'd tell you to GROW A FUCKING BRAIN, but it would be a waste of time, wouldn't it?

    37. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hezbollah was created after Israel invaded Iran in 1982, and only supported by Iran years afterwards.

      Ahmadinejad had some pretty stupid comments, what you quote is a mistranslation, and either way, he didn't control the foreign policy of the country, that's for the Meijis council and Ayatollah to do.

      Troll much?

    38. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's MANY ways of getting rid of the regime that doesn't involve outright war. US CIA does it all the damn time.

      Maybe you need to grow a brain, because you definitely can't read closely, and distinguish one idea from another. Hezbollah's tactics hasn't been kill jews whereever you see them. Hezbollah states that they OPPOSE ZIONISM, not necessarily Judaism. So grow a fucking brain... You need to separate the idea of Zionism from Judaism, and regime from people.

    39. Re: What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, I support the Palestinian cause, that makes pro-semitw, right? Those Ashkenazi and Russuan jews look completely European to me, not semitic, so whats with this "anti-semite" bullshit?

    40. Re: What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Ashkenazi and Russian jews who make up the bulk of Israel's jewish population are not semites. The palestinians and arabs who are native to that region, are actually semitic in origin. Therefore its not anti-semitic to oppose Jewish Zionism. It is anti-semitic to oppose Palestinian freedom, it is anti-semitic to propose that the european jewish colonists planted in the middle east by the british empire somehow have suprior claim to the land than the native palestinians.

    41. Re:What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then again, Israel is constantly engaged in acts of war against Iran.

      And the Iranians continue to fund, equip, arm and train irregular militias, including Hezbollah, which kill Israeli civilians on a regular basis. The promotion of violence by proxy is a classic Iranian tactic and only the weak minded are too dense to make the connection between these puppets and their Iranian puppet masters. The Iranians had it coming and they deserve what they get.

    42. Re:What now? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Only credible source for this is Jimmy Carter, the anti-Semite DNC president who has spent most of his life smearing Israel while promoting terrorist. If you agree with Carter doesn't make it non anti-Semite, it mean YOU are an anti-Semite.

      Actually, Isarali officials have admitted that they have WMD because they even admitted that use against Egypt was authorized when it looked like they were losing the war in the early stages. A strike against Egypt was authorized if they approached Jerusalem or Tel Aviv.

      Refusing to denounce attacks targeting children as acts of terrorism IS anti-Semitism. Congratulations, your up to 2 for 2.

      I do denounce them. I did denounce them. I continue to denounce them. I believe you're just a racist that believes yourself superior and justified for killing Palestinians because you see them as inferior to yourself. If you're not you would denounce what Israel does.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    43. Re: What now? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      The Ashkenazi and Russian jews who make up the bulk of Israel's jewish population are not semites. The palestinians and arabs who are native to that region, are actually semitic in origin. Therefore its not anti-semitic to oppose Jewish Zionism. It is anti-semitic to oppose Palestinian freedom, it is anti-semitic to propose that the european jewish colonists planted in the middle east by the british empire somehow have suprior claim to the land than the native palestinians.

      You're actually on to something. Genetic tests show that Palestinians are closer related to the Hebrew people from 2000 years ago than the average person living in Israel today. Personally, I don't think genetics is really relevant because people are people no matter who their ancestors are- but it is an interesting piece of trivia.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    44. Re:What now? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Both sides do evil despicable acts.

      Why is it when you point out liberal heroes being bad beyond any ability to spin out of it, you get the "both sides are equally bad"

      In this case one side is putting out computer viruses, the other is literally targeting jewish children. I normally don't bring out the Nazi word, but this is LITERLLY why the Nazi word is brought out and it is "equally as bad" as a computer virus?
      This is a liberal that has gone so far over the edge he should probably be committed.

      Killing Jewish children is a terrible thing. Killing any child is a terrible thing. Israeli's kill more Palestinians per year than the other way around. Every time the Palestinians or any other violent group kills an Israeli, they respond by killing a dozen Palestinians per Israeli killed. I think in this case Israel is actually closer to being "the Nazis"- leaders like Netanyahu, use racism against another group of people to help get themselves elected and then increase their popularity by killing another group and keeping another group suppressed. The ruling party is held in power by making the people feel superior to their subjugated people and by uniting the country in hatred. This is the same tactics that Hitler used- to unify a nation by using hate as a tool.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  10. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the Saudis again, probably. They want to make Iran attack them directly so they get Washington to come to their rescue like a damsel rolling on stress balls.

  11. We need more and more features by aberglas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The more features software has the better. Eventually it will become so complicated that even the virus writers will not be able to understand it.

    But writing Stuxnet was an appalling thing to do because it legitimized state sponsored computer attacks as being legitimate and non-military. The west cannot take high moral ground about them having launched Stuxnet against Iran. And Stuxnet only slowed them down by a few months anyway, despite being extremely clever. It also escaped, and was discovered in Russia, by memory.

    So the only thing to do is spend lots more money on cyber warfare. So I guess the Stuxnet team was extremely successful in achieving that, its real goal.

    1. Re:We need more and more features by gtall · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, not even the Russkies would have thought to use something like Stuxnet if we hadn't shown them how.

      Oh, how we may lament the thought of losing the high moral ground in computer security. If we still had that, by gum that'd have stopped'em.

    2. Re:We need more and more features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its not really a question of others having thought about it, its more about flinging the barn doors wide open and wildly engaging in it and begging for retaliation when our own defenses are weak.

    3. Re:We need more and more features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are so moronic to believe that no one thought of using a state sponsored computer programs to achieve geopolitical advantage?

      Do you even understand how the world works at all? There are entire divisions of even the smallest government dedicated to doing EXACTLY this and they have been doing it for hundreds/thousands of years (just without computers for most of it). A Spook has no boundaries and new technology is what they constantly crave and is constantly on their radar.

    4. Re:We need more and more features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more features software has the better. Eventually it will become so complicated that even the virus writers will not be able to understand it.

      I have one word for you. Fuzzers.

  12. Looks like Israel Hadanothershot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He who smelt it dealt it.

  13. Giving the enemy a bigger sword by frith01 · · Score: 1

    Doesn't anyone consider the idea that by deploying this weaponized code, they are giving the iranians a tool to use to retaliate ?

    ie, stick a thumb drive in a known infected computer, airplane trip to the U.S. , drop thumb drive in parking lot labeled "PORN" , etc..

    1. Re:Giving the enemy a bigger sword by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it's anything like Stuxnet in terms of how it operates then the payload will be extremely specific to the environment it was targeting - e.g. require a specific control app, managing, a given make/model of PLC, connected to a given type of mechanical/electrical plant, and so on. What it might potentially do is provide victims with access to one or more zero-day vulnerabilities for those tools/products they may not have been previously aware of if they can successfully reverse engineer them, but they'd still need to repurpose those to their own ends, find suitable targets, and design their own payloads. The clock on that is also ticking, because copies of the code will get out into the security community at large, and once that happens CVE numbers will eventually get assigned and patches produced. Stuxnet might still be revealling hidden depths, but it's highly unlikely that most of the delivery mechanisms it employed would still be effective in delivering payloads anywhere except for locations that have almost no concept of security and the importance of software/firmware updates.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Giving the enemy a bigger sword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go read a little bit about stuxnet it's super modular. More like a metasploit work alike

  14. How Childish by johnsie · · Score: 1

    Maybe people in that region of the world should stop being childish idiots and learn how to get along with each other. I know that would require some common sense. Maybe that's what they are lacking around there?

    1. Re: How Childish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep, they should get along with people, just like our temper-tantrum-in-chief. He gets along great with anyone who strokes his ego.

    2. Re:How Childish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe people in the us region of the world should stop being childish idiots and learn how to get along with each other. I know that would require some common sense. Maybe that's what they are lacking around here?

    3. Re:How Childish by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      Impossible, they have religion.

      Religion is an excuse, not a reason.

      If it wasn't religion it would be culture, political belief, colour of skin, or language. People always find a way to raise their own "tribe" up and to lower and make the other "tribe" seem less human (think of the far-right's current "NPC" catchphrase- the center and left aren't even human anymore, they're viewed as bits of script- makes them easier to hate). There are plenty of religious people in the world who don't hate other religions.

      All groups of people are essentially the same, same needs and desires, they just find artificial things about each other (such as religion) to make themselves feel superior to other groups- because the need to feel superior is another of those desires common to all groups..

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:How Childish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't you get the memo? There is only one tribe. The rest of you goyim need to get back to "paying off" your national debt.

    5. Re:How Childish by Crashmarik · · Score: 0

      I prefer to think of the Left's misuse of the terms
      Fascist to describe Libertarians
      Racist to describe Republicans that actually were active in the Civil Rights Movement (Jeff Sessions comes to mind)
      Hate Speech to describe anything they disagree with
      Cronyism while Obama turned the DOJ into a shakedown artist and slush fund.
      Interfering in elections, a crime that has no statute (rather amazing that must of slipped past)

      NPC by comparison is rather kind.

    6. Re:How Childish by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I prefer to think of the Left's misuse of the terms
      Fascist to describe Libertarians
      Racist to describe Republicans that actually were active in the Civil Rights Movement (Jeff Sessions comes to mind)
      Hate Speech to describe anything they disagree with
      Cronyism while Obama turned the DOJ into a shakedown artist and slush fund.
      Interfering in elections, a crime that has no statute (rather amazing that must of slipped past)

      NPC by comparison is rather kind.

      Definitely both sides create derogatory labels to put down the other.

        I'm not sure where Fascist comes in to describe Libertarians (I don't think I've ever seen 'faschist' used to describe them)- fascism involves a strong government power that is used to suppress certain groups and maintain a strong police state. Libertarians are the polar opposite of fascists. Libertarians share the same goal as those on the far left, believing everyone should be treated equally but have a completely different strategy on how to achieve that. Libertarians want to achieve it by government backing off and leaving everyone alone to do their own thing equally- leftists want to achieve it by government enforcing equality.

        I could see Fascist used to derogatively describe the alt-right or far right, it would apply better to social conservatives; but wouldn't make sense applied to Libertarians. "Anarchists" would be a better label to apply to Libertarians if you wanted to be derogatory against them. Even "Hippy" would be closer than fascist (although probably not a very accurate moniker for many).

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:How Childish by dryeo · · Score: 1

      It's amazing how many libertarians heavily support Trump, who is very authoritarian. At that, with some libertarians, it seems that they just want the government out of the way so their favorite authoritarian, usually of a corporate nature, can do what ever it wants.
      A libertarian should be against authoritarianism, whether left or right rather then being blind to the authoritarianism in their party.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    8. Re:How Childish by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      It's amazing how many libertarians heavily support Trump, who is very authoritarian. At that, with some libertarians, it seems that they just want the government out of the way so their favorite authoritarian, usually of a corporate nature, can do what ever it wants.
      A libertarian should be against authoritarianism, whether left or right rather then being blind to the authoritarianism in their party.

      Anyone who claims to be libertarian and supports Trump is doing it for one of two reasons.

      1) They think that Trump is better than the democrats, the lesser of two evils.
      2) They're not really Libertarian and they use that term to describe themselves because they don't know what that term means, they've probably heard things like "Libertarians are against Gun Control or drug control and for small government" and ignored the fact that being a true libertarian is also against border controls or anything else that inhibits the movement of goods and people, laws dictating morality, religion mixing with politics, etc. A certain portion of people that claim to be Libertarians are really just conservatives that like drugs and not libertarian.

      For full disclosure- when I was younger I considered myself a Libertarian but as I got older I began to believe that while Libertarianism sounds good in theory- a lot of things don't work in practice.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    9. Re:How Childish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Libertarian ideals lead to "sign the contract, or else". So if you need or want to use an application published on Google Play you need to sign away your rights to Google, if you need wired Internet you need to agree to Comcast's demands ($240/month Internet including a lease for "home security" equipment? sure). Public school abolished? say hello to $10K/year school with "terms of service" (anything goes)

      Did you know what "privilege" means? It's Latin for private law. Libertarians hate democracy and old school laws, they want to replace everything with EULAs, terms of service and privacy policies. Anything goes, employment contracts will get interesting.
      The ideology says the military is exempted from the ideology, so the rump State will consist in the military and the Deep State mandated to enforce your numerous "terms of service". What's not to like?

    10. Re:How Childish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Racist to describe Republicans that actually were active in the Civil Rights Movement (Jeff Sessions comes to mind)

      Citation needed, specifically for Sessions. Nixon pushed marijuana to Schedule 1 so sympathetic cops would have an excuse to lock up hippies and negros. Sessions has repeatedly in his current tenure under Trump expressed his opposition to legalization. What actions by Sessions can you cite to substantiate an alignment with the Civil Rights movement that would excuse his work to keep up an unjust pretense?

    11. Re:How Childish by dryeo · · Score: 1

      1) They think that Trump is better than the democrats, the lesser of two evils

      While I can understand voting for the lesser evil, something I've considered in my country. I still don't understand being proud of it and heavily supporting it.
      Though I think your #2 is mostly right.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    12. Re:How Childish by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Yes, that seems to describe many American Libertarians. Funny enough. libertarianism was originally a left wing thing, the ones just a bit saner then the anarchists.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    13. Re:How Childish by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      The point is not about the demeaning of one group or another it's about accuracy in the label.

      Example
      Calling Ben Shapiro a NAZI https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      Just how a Libertarian leaning conservative qualifies as a NAZI is rather odd.

      NPC however is rather descriptive, it's on the order of Canadians are lousy drivers. Not true for every single Canadian, but the odds favor it.

  15. Saudi gold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone seems to assume it's Israel. The regressive Saudi barbarians are making far more noises at the moment, has anyone considered them as the source?

    1. Re:Saudi gold by johnsie · · Score: 0

      True dat. But Saudi and Israel are all part of the US axis of evil in that region. Either way the finger should be pointed at the US government.

    2. Re:Saudi gold by froggyjojodaddy · · Score: 1

      I don't believe Israel has ever been included in the 'axis of evil' statement by the US. In fact, it's the opposite..

    3. Re:Saudi gold by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Israel has been accused of being in an Axis of Evil. It was called the Protocols of Zion and was just as ridiculous as the Axis of Evil Meme

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    4. Re:Saudi gold by johnsie · · Score: 1

      There is more than one axis of evil in the world. There's US backed regimes in the ME which include Israel and the Saudi dictatorship, Russian backed regimes in the same region like Syria and of course the propped up dictatorships like Honduras in Latin America.

    5. Re:Saudi gold by froggyjojodaddy · · Score: 1

      Ah, I mis-read your original comment. I thought you were saying they were part of the US' "Axis of Evil" as in North Korea, Iraq etc.

      However, I should have read it as "Israel is part of the US backed axis of evil" in the Middle East...

  16. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nitro Zeus?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitro_Zeus

    They talked about that in the Zero Days documentary about Stuxnet. Assuming the sources were actually reliable, they basically said it was a system designed to target just about every aspect of their infrastructure- not just nuclear enrichment. The movie made it sound like it was still under development (or that it had been deployed but not yet activated). The same movie also mentioned that Stuxnet only started spreading after the Israelis fucked with the code- I'm wondering if they got their hands on something related to NZ and pulled a similar stunt, which is why we're only hearing about it just now.

  17. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who?

    Could be anybody.

    Because the crazy mullahs that run Iran do shit like this:

    AMIA bombing in Argentina.

    2012 Bangkok bombings

    2012 Burgas bus bombing in Bulgaria.

    2011 alleged Iran assassination plot

  18. If you buy Intel, AMD, Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    then your system is wide open to U.S. government agencies. Any country that cares about security has to ween their government systems off American hardware and software.

  19. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Pfff, that's nothing compared to the US and Israel.

  20. Israel by Martin+S. · · Score: 1

    I think Israel would be quite happy to be assumed to responsible even if they were not. They would be the fall guy for the US, purely to engender the perception they were capable of this.

    Iran is not short of enemies these days and this would also include the Saudis. Though I would suspect their inhouse capability, I think they would be quite able to outsource this requirement.

  21. Stuxnet was targetted against Germany by ghoul · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It specifically targetted Siemens controllers the Iranians had bought. It ensured that for the future the Iranians would either buy American controllers on the black market or use non-western controllers which there was a lesser chance of the US/Israel having source code to.
    The Germans were pissed about Stuxnet as it killed their market for controllers around the world.

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
    1. Re:Stuxnet was targetted against Germany by gtall · · Score: 1

      More to the point, the Siemens was pissed because it showed they were clueless in terms of security and that now others would notice.

    2. Re:Stuxnet was targetted against Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wouldn't ever want to be seen as defending Siemens, but for the sake of accuracy I would say their security overall is about average for the industry. The problem is that the industry average is incredibly low.

    3. Re:Stuxnet was targetted against Germany by johnsie · · Score: 1

      Seimens are still the leading provider of PLCs in Europe. Of course they were mad that someone targeted their hardware though. They were collateral damage in the US war on stability in the middle east.

    4. Re:Stuxnet was targetted against Germany by johnsie · · Score: 1

      To be fair most PLCs had bad security at that point. The Modbus standard is one of the most unsecure protocols. German companies were among the first to start implementing better security on their products as a direct reponse to Stuxnet.

    5. Re:Stuxnet was targetted against Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US-Israeli war on the Middle East.
      At least give your people their credit when its due. In this case, Stuxnet.

  22. And now we know why Kerry was in Iran by ghoul · · Score: 2, Interesting

    He was handing out infected USB drives.

    No real reason for him to be there given he has no official post in the US govt anymore so maybe hes supplementing his retirement with a little freelance cyberterrorism

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
    1. Re:And now we know why Kerry was in Iran by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I hear he was REALLY upset when his USB thumb drive was STOLEN!

    2. Re:And now we know why Kerry was in Iran by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Yeah he is amazing, that incompetent blow hard persona he projects is just incredible.

      He's a modern day Zorro

  23. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Canada. Canada is the only country that could do this AND get away with it. Who'd think Canada? That's laughable. But it's so ridiculous that it was Canada that it HAS to be Canada.

  24. That's not common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's undercover warfare. Which can lead to hot warfare. Common sense is that you do not attack the infrastructure of other country which are not in the immediate step of attacking you.

    1. Re:That's not common sense by fred911 · · Score: 1

      I would consider a country who inscribed their ICBMs with "Israel should be wiped off the Earth" to be an immediate threat and any means to prevent them from warhead production, (especially passive actions) to not only make sense, but save life and resource.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:That's not common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what an anonymous Jew claimed in this thread and also, they have a fucking Hwasong-7 not an ICBM.

  25. Re:The bit is mightier than then sword by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    The bit is mightier than then sword

    I know bit sure is!

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  26. Re:The bit is mightier than then sword by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

    The bit is mightier than then sword

    I know bit sure is!

    Ahhhhhh FAIL!

    That was supposed to say "My Bit."

    I quit. I'm gone- I offer my letter of resignation. Goodbye Slashdot!

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  27. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  28. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    Canada. Canada is the only country that could do this AND get away with it. Who'd think Canada? That's laughable. But it's so ridiculous that it was Canada that it HAS to be Canada.

    Apparently this message pops up on the screen:

    "Dear User, I'm sorry, but this PC has now been wiped of all relevant data by the "Stuxnet Eh?" virus. I am really sorry I wiped out all your data. Again... I'm really really sorry, PM Trudeau made me write this, and he is really sorry too!"

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  29. Re:The bit is mightier than then sword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can't be any more destructive than whatever mental illness has taken over your brain and reduced you to trolling slashdot.

  30. Re:No computer viruses in FEDERAL PRISON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Weird flex, but ok

  31. It's fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's fine for them, actually. Muslims don't mind any failure in modern systems. They prefer to live in the stone age anyhow.

  32. Rumoured Iranian "virus" by TaleWeaver · · Score: 1

    Stuxnet was a worm, not a virus. "Computer worms are similar to viruses in that they replicate functional copies of themselves and can cause the same type of damage. In contrast to viruses, which require the spreading of an infected host file, worms are standalone software and do not require a host program or human help to propagate." cisco.com.

    1. Re:Rumoured Iranian "virus" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of exactly zero fucks are given about your pedantry.

  33. Re: No computer viruses in FEDERAL PRISON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does at least one person always insist on feeding the troll bot? It is never in context and says the same thing every post. If it were funny or clever or original or god forbid actually had something to say but... that never happens. Please just ignore it.

  34. Dude we've been doing this crap since WWII by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    just not with computers. The shit America's done around the world to destabilize it in the name of our economic interests (oil mostly) is insane. I've lost count of how many Democratically elected governments we've overthrown. By all accounts we just installed a dictator in Brazil (there's strong evidence we helped torpedo their progressive President and paved the way for the far right whack job that just took office). And of course it was us that radicalized Iran. We installed a puppet regime and when the only place the rebels weren't being watched was the Mosques that's where the next rebellion took root, resulting in the current batch of, well, far right whack jobs...

    What I'm saying that wrecking shit internationally has a long, long standing history. Doing it with a computer is no more novel than running a taxi cab service or an auction house with a computer.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  35. Hadashot? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    Israel's Slashdot?

    Or maybe just an editor's confession?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Hadashot? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hadash is the Hebrew word for "new". Hadashot literally translates to "news".

  36. Re: But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Whataboutism. And perhaps you are aware of this little thing we call 9/11? And all the anti-American bobbing going back long before as well as after. The OP has a point. You do not.

  37. Scary by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Okay now THAT is scary

  38. Re: The bit is mightier than then sword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only Bruce Schneier can hack Chuck Norris, but he doesn't because all of creation might suffer the consequences.

    captcha: hacking

  39. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Canada. Canada is the only country that could do this AND get away with it. Who'd think Canada? That's laughable. But it's so ridiculous that it was Canada that it HAS to be Canada.

    Oh, man, I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but it's required by Canadian law ... we'll be deploying a bomber fleet of stealth Canada Geese to your location, with a moose artillery-division in support of the light-infantry beavers ground assault squads (the Queen's Beaver brigade is famous and highly feared among those in the know, and their bushcraft is second to none).

    Yes, of course we know your location, we have a well developed squirrel-based intelligence gathering system which is completely undetectable and has infiltrated pretty much everywhere.

    Don't try to run, they will find you, geese and beavers are relentless trackers, and operate under weapons free conditions at all times. They'll level the building, and then apologise profusely and offer to help clean up the mess -- well, except the geese, they don't worry much about collateral damage, it's not in their mandate, plus they don't have hands.

    We can't have you interfering with national security operations ... er, eh.

  40. Iran is not the enemy by bkmoore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm writing this from the perspective of an American, and I am no fan of Iran. Iran has a terrible religious fundamentalist regime that murders people and exports terror throughout the Middle East, to include attacking Israel. But I am sick and tired of being told by our pols that Iran is our mortal enemy, and represents a grave national security threat that needs to be attacked and destroyed. Especially when those same pols supports a different middle eastern country that has a terrible religious fundamentalist regime that murders people and exports terror throughout the Middle East and occasionally to Lower Manhattan.

    It's about nuclear weapons!!! But we support another Moslem nation that also has nuclear weapons, has live-tested them, gone to war with their neighbor multiple times, supported our enemies in Afghanistan, and is coincidentally where we found Osama Bin Laden's hiding place. So Iran can't have nuclear weapons, but the other one can? At least we know who's in charge in Iran. I'm not too sure who's really in charge in that other nuclear-armed Moslem country, it could be the military on Monday and Thursday, the civilians on Tuesday and Wednesday, and the clerics on Friday. They all take the weekend off.

    Maybe it's human rights??? But our "allies" just dismembered a journalist and have been waging a criminal bombing campaign in Yemen. No big deal, according to our President, who reminded us that Journalist was a moslem immigrant (green card holder), and then proudly exclaimed how much money our "friends" were spending on weapons, basically putting a price on the head of that journalist, anyone with a green card (including my wife), and all Yemenis. The President never struck me as especially intelligent, but he knew the price of those weapons down to the last nickel, so maybe he's a "stable genius" after all, especially when it comes to people giving him money.

    What's the difference? One chants "death to Israel" so much that it has become cliche and supports Hezbollah, lobbing mortars into Israel and occasionally funds a suicide bomber. The other one exports Wahhabism, brainwashing one person at a time, including Mohamad Atta and a few hijackers who came to America and took up flying. The cynic in me believes the difference is one country is good for business, the other is not. I hope some day people will realize Iran is not our enemy and never will be our friend. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan are not our "friends" or our "allies", but shouldn't me made into enemies. We need to get realistic about the Middle East and above all else be consistent. Either we're for human rights or against them. But we can no longer have it both ways.

    1. Re:Iran is not the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never is a long time. If we can befriend Britain and Germany, a theocracy-free Iran would hardly be more difficult.

    2. Re:Iran is not the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hm? We spell it "Muslim" for more than 50 years now. And Pakistan is not in the Middle East. And the fact that the post made it to +5 Insightful is another sign of the downfall of Slashdot...

    3. Re:Iran is not the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that from 1979-81 the Iranians took American civilians hostage and extracted humiliating concessions from the United States in exchange for their release. They also killed our marines in Beirut in a most cowardly fashion with truck bombs. Since that time they have neither apologized nor compensated the former hostages or the families of the marines whom they killed. Until such time as Iran formally apologizes for their hostage taking, agrees to compensate former hostages and the families of the marines whom they killed and renounces hostage taking and terrorism as methods of statecraft we should continue to shun them. I strongly support the decision by President Trump to abrogate the terrible nuclear deal and reimpose the sanctions. President Obama and Secretary Kerry were wrong to reward their continued bad behavior by offering the deal in the first place.

    4. Re:Iran is not the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are two differences.

      One is that Pakistan *already has* nuclear weapons. That is a disaster but we can't turn the clock back now. Now that they have nuclear weapons, our freedom wof action with respect to them is drastically limited.

      The other is that Iran chants "death to America" until it becomes cliche. Yes, that is something the US should care about, particularly as Iran enriches uranium and develops ICBMs. Yes Iran *also* chants "death to Israel" but that's beside the point. Not everything is about the j00z...

    5. Re:Iran is not the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Word.

  41. This is how the world will end. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some fool country launches a biological agent against their enemy and it spreads to the rest of the world.

  42. Why Israel does not mind Trump's anti-Semitic supp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why Israel does not mind Trump's anti-Semitic supporters

    It is in the interest of Israel for Jewish Americans and Jewish Europeans to feel unsafe.
    Nora Barrows Friedmanby Nora Barrows Friedman
    31 Oct 2018 10:21 GMT

    President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump visit a memorial outside Pittsburgh's Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh on October 30, 2018 [AP Photo/Matt Rourke]
    President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump visit a memorial outside Pittsburgh's Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh on October 30, 2018 [AP Photo/Matt Rourke]

    The massacre of Jewish worshippers on Saturday by an avowed anti-Semite in Pittsburgh reveals a clear, straight line between Trump's sustained dog-whistles - against Jews, black people, Muslims, immigrants and members of the LGBTQ community - to the violence carried out by right-wing white nationalists.

    Robert Bowers, apprehended after a shooting spree that killed 11 people, explained he wanted "all Jews to die" and described immigrants and asylum-seekers as "invaders" of the United States. Instead of condemning far-right nationalism, Trump reinforced this hysteria, tweeting on Monday that a caravan of asylum-seekers coming from Honduras should be considered as an "invasion" and that the US military "would be waiting" for them. Last week, Trump proudly embraced the "nationalist" term.

    Bowers had consumed and regurgitated the lethal rhetoric of far-right extremists who want to rid the US of non-white, non-Christian people, and of a government which constantly incites hatred and vilification of all marginalized groups.

    Three days earlier, a white supremacist in Kentucky set out to kill black people. He eventually murdered Maurice Stallard, 69, and Vickie Lee Jones, 67, in a grocery store.

    There is no question that these killers were motivated by the white nationalist extremism the Trump administrations has adopted and encouraged.

    After Saturday's synagogue massacre, curiously, Israeli leaders offered their condolences but refused to address Trump's responsibility for fuelling such anti-Semitic violence.

    Instead, they scrambled to provide cover for the US president while Israel advocates attempted to blame the rise in anti-Semitism on left-wing, anti-racist and anti-fascist activists who campaign for Palestinian rights.

    Why would they do this, especially when American Jewish support for Trump is overwhelmingly low, and while Israel claims to be the protector of all Jewish people? To whom - or to what - were they speaking?

    The unwillingness by Israeli leaders to confront such modern-day Nazism and the political forces pushing state-sponsored bigotry and hatred exposes that state's unsettling alliance with Trump and his agenda.

    For Israel, Trump has been the ideal partner in its efforts to crush Palestinian resistance and deny rights to African asylum-seekers while entrenching apartheid and systematic, unchecked violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip.

    Trump has, in turn, looked to Israel to model his policies of intensified militarisation of the US-Mexico border, his authoritarian threats against asylum-seekers and immigrants, and his open embrace of nationalist figures and right-wing legislators.

    Notorious white supremacist Richard Spencer, speaking about his dream to make the US a European ethno-nationalist state, for example, has said he sees Israel as the ideal model.

    Spencer has even dubbed his project for an Aryan state "white Zionism."

    Brazil's president-elect, Jair Bolsonaro, a far-right extremist who has promised to treat social movements as terrorist organisations and wage a war on poor and indigenous communities, has also embraced Israel and says he will - like Trump - move his country's embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

    Israeli flags were prominently waved during rallies celebrating Bolsonaro's win on Sunday, a chilling symbol of Israel's popularity in fascist political movements.

    But there is another reason Israel is

  43. Re: The bit is mightier than then sword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chuck Norris can compile any program in Visual Basic, running in Windows ME.

  44. Our allies determine our enemies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is that Iran is our enemy because SA and co. are our friends. You're right, though, that basically none of them are really people we should be comfortable being friends with. There are no great people to be friends with and they love to stab us in the back, as you pointed out with Obama taking out Osama in Pakistan.

    That said, the fewer nuclear weapons in the hands of crazy people, the better. From the perspective, I can understand not wanting more mortal enemies to have nuclear weapons. We don't really need more groups that might agree to mutual annihilation. But you're right, it's pretty arbitrary and I don't blame anyone for hating it.

  45. Re:Way to rewrite history you genocidal Zionist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and I have a fuck ton more money than you, because i'm a jew. good luck with your shit.

  46. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    "Dear User, I'm sorry, but this PC has now been wiped of all relevant data by the "Stuxnet Eh?" virus. I am really sorry I wiped out all your data. Again... I'm really really sorry, PM Trudeau made me write this, and he is really sorry too!"

    And by Canadian law, you forgot to add:
    "Cher utilisateur, je suis désolé, mais le virus" Stuxnet Eh? "A effacé de ce PC toutes les données pertinentes. , Le PM Trudeau m'a fait écrire ceci et il est vraiment désolé aussi! "

  47. Re: But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about facts, 9/11 was Saudi Arabian citizens and financing.

  48. If Iran is not the enemy, who is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course Iran is the enemy.

    1.We can't attack Saudi Arabia.

    We can't afford to attack Saudi Arabia because we desperately need Saudi to sell its oil in US dollars.

    2. We can't attack Pakistan.

    If we attack Pakistan they will lob nukes on India which will lead to hundreds of millions of Indians flocking into the United States of America to escape the radiation.

    We Americans are not ready to use the word 'needful', at least not yet.

    3. We can't attack China.

    If we do our farmers' crops, like wheat, corn, and soybeans would have no market.

    Plus, many of our whitetrash / rednecks like to fuck those cute chinadolls .

    If we attack China there will be no chinadolls anymore, and without chinadolls to fuck those whitetrash / rednecks might end up fucking our precious elite girls.

    4. We can't attack Russia.

    They have huge stockpile of nukes, that could keep America radiated for centuries to come.

    In other words, Iran is the only choice we've got left.

    If we don't attack Iran, we will no longer have any enemy, and we, the Americans, desperately need enemies so we can hate someone.

  49. Re:But who? Who would purposefully do that? Any wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That IS funny :-)