4 ms·
There are a few things that are strange about this. Number 1 - it was weapons systems they attacked, so I'm going to assume you reach those through microwave so
by an-allen 7y ago
There are a few things that are strange about this. Number 1 - it was weapons systems they attacked, so I'm going to assume you reach those through microwave somehow. If thats the case, simply storing your weapons in a faraday cage until you are ready to use them is a pretty effective countermeasure?
Secondly, why would you publicise you engaged in a bit of cyber warfare - particularly successful cyber warfare. This literally notifies the enemy to upgrade/fix/patch/take counter measures, solidifies their defenses, and provides a clear aggressor.
Amateur hour from the CISA... or perhaps someone needs a public win to justify another round of funding increases...
Oh look.. https://www.cyberscoop.com/house-bill-boost-cisa-funding-335-million/ https://www.cyberscoop.com/house-bill-boost-cisa-funding-335...
335 Million Dollars! Such a corrupt system.
- varjag 7y agoYou can't really store your air defense network in a faraday cage. The second point is not surprising: Trump needed something after caving to Iran's show of force. Operational and effectiveness concerns are secondary, it's not an administration renowned for long term planning.
- SiempreViernes 7y agoBecause Trump felt not starting a war looked bad for him, so he published whatever attack he had on hand to prove he’s still a stronk man, that’s my guess anyway. The hope with any attack is that its disruptive effects outweigh the intelligence your adversary gainsfrom observing your actions.
- zaroth 7y agoThe implication is that, like with Stuxnet, the attack caused permanent or difficult to repair damage to the systems. Similar to the Iranian attack against Saudi Arabia banks where 30,000 desktops were encrypted and backup data was specifically targeted. As far as providing a “clear aggressor” well there purpose was retaliatory for a drone which Iran admitted that they shot down.
- pwodhouse 7y ago...which Iran claimed was violating Iranian airspace and the shooting Trump claimed was a rogue general's mistake, not a state act of aggression.
- zaroth 7y agoOf course Iran claimed it was in their airspace. Shooting down a drone in international airspace is an act of war. When Iran decides to openly declare war with the US, they give the US carte blanche to deploy full conventional measures in response. US, for example, could sink every ship in the Iranian navy in 24 hours. The point is that Iran at least took responsibility for the attack this time, versus the tanker attacks in the Strait. And Trump claimed it was someone acting fast and loose because he doesn’t want to fight a war in the Middle East. Now that the US is the world’s biggest oil producer, we have a lot less incentive to be involved. Trump ran on a platform of getting out of the Middle East. He would love nothing more. Iran shooting down drones and mining the Strait certainly makes that difficult. There are powerful interests in the US that want a war with Iran. The President isn’t one of them, as we have clearly seen now with the air strikes having been called off.
- hacknat 7y agoYou publicize your attacks when you’re trying to start a war. Why is there a huge US troop build up in the Middle East right now? Make no mistake, John Bolton wants a war with Iran, he has said so in the past. This is exactly what happened with Iraq as well.
- cmurf 7y ago"I still think the decision to overthrow Saddam was correct." John Bolton four years ago. He's the guy who got the current POTUS to withdraw from JCPOA. And he's the guy who got DPRK to withdraw from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. He hates treaties. He believes in ordering countries what to do, and intimidating or bombing them if they don't comply, and treaties make that difficult. He's delusional, not a credible person, and in no way has he been rehabilitated.