And this is news why? The NYT has become a treasonous rag. If anything thinks major state sponsored cyber attacks are not being carried out between world powers they're either ignorant or having been paying attention. To call out the US like this is a sham. How about the NYT times writes about the cyber attacks carried out by China, Russia, Iran, NK, and more?
>An additional breach, according to one person briefed on the operations, targeted other computer systems that control Iranian missile launches.
Determining the effectiveness of a cyberattack on the missile launch system is particularly difficult. Its effectiveness could be judged only if Iran tried to fire a missile and the launch failed.
Okay, that doesn't make any sense. If an Iranian IT guy reads the NY times, wouldn't he just go reinstall Windows on the missile launch computers?
These systems aren't just windows systems, you're talking guidance systems / platforms often times controlled by SCADA platforms. While windows is a component, the real effective hacking as with stuxnet was modifying low level code to create values that appear in line, but in fact were false creating an improper outcome. If the US hacked iran, it wasn't a hackers style animation, it was something low level designed to impact things beyond windows. I wouldn't put it past them to even use media to imply they had simply to break down their trust in their systems. It's effective in a post Stuxnet world, where they know first hand it's possible.
It's also very hard for anyone to yell about retaliation when it did not cause deaths (that we know about) and it serves as a deterrent. These stories are going to only continue to be more and more common.
It seems like a counter productive strategy to advertise this kind of attack. Though it may benefit humanity by influencing politics domestically, letting the war hawks feel like something was done to quell the beating of the war drum.
If you have the ability to hack things like a missile control system, it seems almost wasteful to do it when there isn't an immediate concern. It's just a less friendly pen test: now Iran knows which systems they need to do a better job securing (or a subset of those systems)
The article smells of Soviet propaganda machine by claiming to conduct a successful offensive yet providing no way of verifying even the very fact it happened.
Everything we do is okay. At least according to our state department and most of our news outlets. We can’t do anything wrong. It’s the enemies that are terrible. The US stands for freedom.
It could just be me, but I always found US cyber hacks to be much more menacing. Iranian, North-Korean, Chinese and Russian hacks give off the aesthetic of pseudo-gangsters or general bullies.
Russia: "we hacked their social network and created provocative memes"
China: "we used our military cyber intelligence team to steel Google's source code"
North-Korea: "we hacked Sony because they created a film that made fun of us"
While the US hacks always get under your skin.
US: "We delivered a worm that slowly shut down your nuclear reactor over the span of several days and you didn't even notice"
US: "we literally hacked into your missile system"
I can only imagine how Iranians feel right now. Their government signed a deal; they abided by the deal; and now the most powerful country in the world is crushing their economy and threatening war for no reason evident to them. They’re probably begging their politicians to develop nukes ASAP. And making plans to flee the country. I mean, imagine what it’s like, packing your bags, deciding what to take and what to leave. Imagine how that makes you feel about the United States.
War with Iran is - I realize I’m probably preaching to the choir here- the worst idea in a long, sad history of bad ideas.
15 comments
[ 130 ms ] story [ 1123 ms ] threadAlso, you've posted a bunch of unsubstantive comments here. Please don't do that; we're trying for something better than internet default on HN.
If you'd review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the spirit of this site to heart from now on, we'd appreciate it.
Determining the effectiveness of a cyberattack on the missile launch system is particularly difficult. Its effectiveness could be judged only if Iran tried to fire a missile and the launch failed.
Okay, that doesn't make any sense. If an Iranian IT guy reads the NY times, wouldn't he just go reinstall Windows on the missile launch computers?
It's also very hard for anyone to yell about retaliation when it did not cause deaths (that we know about) and it serves as a deterrent. These stories are going to only continue to be more and more common.
The article smells of Soviet propaganda machine by claiming to conduct a successful offensive yet providing no way of verifying even the very fact it happened.
Russia: "we hacked their social network and created provocative memes"
China: "we used our military cyber intelligence team to steel Google's source code"
North-Korea: "we hacked Sony because they created a film that made fun of us"
While the US hacks always get under your skin.
US: "We delivered a worm that slowly shut down your nuclear reactor over the span of several days and you didn't even notice"
US: "we literally hacked into your missile system"
War with Iran is - I realize I’m probably preaching to the choir here- the worst idea in a long, sad history of bad ideas.