4 ms·
They probably have plenty of the same zero-days and using them would be a waste: once someone knows you're using an exploit it'll get patched. It makes perfect
by rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
They probably have plenty of the same zero-days and using them would be a waste: once someone knows you're using an exploit it'll get patched.
It makes perfect sense for an adversarial nation's intelligence agency to undermine the CIA and Americans' trust in their own government.
America is too far away from its rivals and enemies for a conventional war to be fought on its own shores. It makes more sense to use fear (9/11) and propaganda (your CIA is spying on you!!) to get Americans at each other's throats and distracted from the real threats to their wellbeing.
After all, our political parties have been doing that for my whole life, so the groundwork laid is practically an invitation.
- ak4g 10y agoOn one hand, yes, our political divisions no doubt make that kind of information warfare campaign tempting. On the other hand, it's already pissed us off something fierce, and I think the narrative in the mid-term future will ultimately be one where would-be adversaries decide they don't want to be the next poor soul to be made an example of.
- linkregister 10y agoIt's been my experience that given the same binary, two researchers will probably find two different vulnerabilities. Given the complexity of these vulnerabilities, I see no reason why any other nation-state hacking service would lose their own, custom-developed exploits. I agree with your comment in general, except for its confidence in U.S. military capability. Though it would be unlikely for a battle to be waged on U.S. soil, other theaters offer plenty of opportunity for a U.S. loss, especially those that diminish traditional U.S. advantages (such as air and information superiority).