2 ms·
It makes one seem mighty, and it makes the other not seem as incompetent. If the attack was 'unprecedented', or 'unexpected' or 'sophisticated' then the people
by PartiallyTyped 6y ago
It makes one seem mighty, and it makes the other not seem as incompetent. If the attack was 'unprecedented', or 'unexpected' or 'sophisticated' then the people responsible from the victim's team are absolved of their failures and mistakes while the other side gets to look good and mighty.
- slg 6y agoBut doesn't the "we weren't expecting it" excuse work much better for a physical attack? You always have to be vigilant of a cyberattack. It is neither "unprecedented" or "unexpected". Meanwhile the victim usually receives very little blame after a sneak military attack. "Israel launched an unprovoked military attack against a non-military target" seems like it would play better both domestically and internationally than what basically amounts to "they outsmarted us".
- PartiallyTyped 6y agoCertain kinds of attacks really are just that, unexpected, even if they are cyber attacks. See for example the recent attack against the US. The media was quick to praise the attack as unprecedented and sophisticated, when in reality, it wasn't anywhere close to something like stuxnet.