Recent comments in /f/Documentaries

UsecMyNuts t1_j4h3ujw wrote

>it was unauthorised access to computer devices

In an attempt to stop a terrorist state getting nuclear weapons.

Im sure your cat videos and micro dick pics are much more important than nuclear attacks.

5

ChulaK t1_j4h3ifr wrote

>Would the world have been a better place without Stuxnet

Considering the code is now out in the open, is being reverse engineered, and now being repurposed for other attacks? There's already been other "strains" of Stuxnet, such as Duqu, so much so that it was nearly identical.

If the gun is the great equalizer because men, women, and children can use it to attack or defend regardless of physical strength, then this virus is also an equalizer. A much poorer nation now has the ability to attack or defend regardless of strength and numbers of their military war machines.

Sure it was used to hamper Iran's nuclear program, but in doing so we released an equally deadly weapon that can bring down entire nations. So I guess pick your poison?

Releasing Stuxnet was pretty much giving everyone a "nuclear weapon." There's no longer a nuclear deterrence but a viral deterrence. Launching cyber attacks assures mutual destruction.

−4

ramriot t1_j4gwnsb wrote

It's easy to scoff from a position of ignorance, go read the rest of thread & wikipedia & all contemporary sources before you shitpost next time.

−22

CupResponsible797 t1_j4guo06 wrote

In the same vein you presumably believe that the US should refrain from all foreign intelligence activities, right? This seems like a horribly naïve take.

> It was unauthorized access to computer devices, it was intentional destruction.

DoD is obviously not bound by these laws, otherwise just about everything they do would be criminal.

Keep in mind that the alternative to Stuxnet was a pre-emptive strike by Israel, the US worked hard to avoid that.

12

CupResponsible797 t1_j4gtxo4 wrote

Because Israel unfortunately has nuclear weapons, the US should not seek to prevent other states from getting them? How do you imagine that policy leading to a positive outcome?

In the end everybody would have nuclear weapons, leading to at least semi-regular use.

3

kerbaal t1_j4gtozw wrote

It was unauthorized access to computer devices, it was intentional destruction.

Iran owns their land, they own their uranium, they have every right to develop nuclear power. I really do think its the height of arrogance that we should be screwing with them when us screwing with them created the regime that has existed for the past 45 years.

−17

MagnetsCarlsbrain t1_j4gsrx9 wrote

I haven't seen the doc but I've read Countdown to Zero Day and I'm not sure I agree (or maybe I'm misunderstanding). The worm was designed to spread as aggressively as possible, but to remain imperceptible on any system except for the target system.

While they probably planted it in close proximity to the target, they had to know that it was going to spread throughout the world. I don't think that was the result of taking it a step too far, rather it was a result of the core strategy.

9

CupResponsible797 t1_j4gqei2 wrote

It seems wholly unsurprising that malware targeting a specific airgapped network would also spread through other networks through whichever means are used to breach the airgap.

> Later "public" appearances appear to be from proximal but unrelated sources & showed variations in code content that suggest a lower skilled operator had altered the original code.

What modifications are you referring to? This documentary makes a vague claim that Israelis modified the spreading code to be more aggressive, but doesn’t really substantiate it.

The documentary certainly doesn’t claim that the changes made by the Israelis weren’t necessary for the operation to succeed.

10

ramriot t1_j4gpbr8 wrote

Specifically it would need to be to go unnoticed inside the Iranian facility's air-gapped network.

The supposition from evidence presented is that before it was ever seen in the wild it was introduced into possibly inadvertently via a single compromised thumb drive containing a required update to the windows Scada control programming software brought into the facility by a 3rd party engineer.

Later "public" appearances appear to be from proximal but unrelated sources & showed variations in code content that suggest a lower skilled operator had altered the original code.

4

lariojaalta890 t1_j4gomzs wrote

Countdwon to Zero Day is a great book that takes a deep dive into the event and those that preceded and followed. Highly recommended reading if you’re interested.

44

CupResponsible797 t1_j4gnnqs wrote

Why do you think this was a crime? And more importantly, why do you think this was wrong? Would the world have been a better place without Stuxnet and the setbacks it caused for the Iranian nuclear program?

32

CupResponsible797 t1_j4gnhkz wrote

>Though had it not been misused after initial targetting we would most probably have never heard of it.

How was Stuxnet “misused” after initial targeting? It was inert outside of the specific systems targeted.

8

ramriot t1_j4gl0fi wrote

Not off the top of my head & I'm not rewatching & rereading my research paper collection after 20 years. Just know that no documentary can tell the whole story here.

But if you push me one aspect is, I don't believe they fully describe the original exploit in sufficient detail so a viewer can understand how it was specifically targetted for release inside an air-gapped network. Only later was it altered & indiscriminately released in a way that made it look like a broader infection.

Though had it not been misused after initial targetting we would most probably have never heard of it.

64