3 ms·
>> doesn't have access to the same tools and procedures as USCC does If she's well connected, she does have access to almost everything that's available, short
by m0zg 8y ago
>> doesn't have access to the same tools and procedures as USCC does
If she's well connected, she does have access to almost everything that's available, short of something that offers no plausible deniablity because it's custom made for a particular system, like Stuxnet, or something that's full of zero days nobody else knows about yet. And the only thing you can conclude in these two cases is that you're _probably_ dealing with a state-level attacker, but you can't say which state unless there's something to further narrow things down, such as unfettered access to controlled nuclear technology in the case of Stuxnet.
Notice also how we are always expected to accept these reports on faith, and no _verifiable_ evidence is ever presented.
- nexuist 8y agoNo verifiable evidence is presented because it shows your hand. If you show the enemy what you don't know, they could figure out what you weren't able to find out, and use that to their advantage. If they can trace the evidence back to a particular source, they can crack down on it and prevent future evidence from being collected through that pipeline. At best this means they change their security procedures, at worst it means they murder your spies.
- m0zg 8y ago>> because it shows your hand Then why talk about it at all? I'll tell you why. It's propaganda. Someone is trying to shit into someone else's head.
- nexuist 8y agoIt is, indeed, propaganda. But propaganda does not always have to be blatantly wrong - even a broken clock is right twice a day, etc.