it's 100% unrealistic because the discussion and the headline can be summed up as "how come this thing is not unhackable as the company promised?" When people

it's 100% unrealistic because the discussion and the headline can be summed up as "how come this thing is not unhackable as the company promised?" When people say "state-level hackers", they appeal to authority like "the state" is something one simply can't win against. And those employed by the state are super-level Uber-hackers. But in reality what it means is: A state is able to waste billions on mistakes and incompetence. The state gets away with most projects failing. In reality forensics and post-mortems show the adversary's understanding of tradecraft, opsec and technical understanding of the space was so bad, it's _not_ skill but luck why they won. There is very little "advanced" about an APT other than unlimited pockets. If you have unlimited pockets you're more likely able to brute-force your way to winning. state-level is such an opaque concept because of the huge numbers of actors in it, that never get credited. People like systems-thinking and the idea of everything being planned and orchestrated like in a Hollywood movie. And they we forget in many "bAd coUntTiEs" it's a collaboration between criminal enterprise and state enterprise. It includes thousands of "criminals" who can be leaned on or are willing to lean on others. There is also the private-public partnership in some of the more functional countries[1] that adds thousands to this group of people. the term "state level" is almost useless. It is the language of PR and propaganda. If taken serious as a concept it just means an entire different country. And this is why it's saying "unhackable": When one expects a security guarantee to defend against such a large group of diverse actors (or not even being able to identify the adversary in the first place) then to fulfill that promise it will have to be "unhackable". [1] Australia has a gag-order where you can't even warn your employer when they force you to implement a backdoor in their products.