4 ms·
It is strictly true. Delusional is thinking that the internet is not shared medium for the world. No way. GeoIP is an opinion. Ask that couple in Kansas what t
by randomhodler84 5y ago
It is strictly true. Delusional is thinking that the internet is not shared medium for the world.
No way. GeoIP is an opinion. Ask that couple in Kansas what they think of it.
There was a report (could be fake?) that a U.S. NGO that had some Russian appearing hosts got hit in this malware attack. You cannot restrict malware to a region. Internets man. Internets.
How soon we forget Stuxnet. EternalBlue/WannaCry. NotPetya. You write malicious software to harm systems, any systems, you are an enemy of the internet.
- stuxneteer 5y agoYou really have to be delusional to equate stuxnet with WannaCry and NotPetya. Stuxnet caused zero harm outside of the very specific systems it targetted, there was no collateral damage. In fact, it was designed in a way that rendered collateral damage almost impossible. WannaCry and NotPetya were indiscriminate attacks against the whole world (Well, NotPetya refused to execute if you only had en_US keyboard layout installed).
- randomhodler84 5y agoSay what?? Sorry but it did. It leaked. Caused a lot of trouble. Still around today even. It’s a worm!!! Why would you make that up that it wasn’t a complete cock up of an op?? Did you have some hand in writing it?
- stuxneteer 5y agoUh, a worm that only spreads and then does nothing isn’t causing any damage. > Why would you make that up that it wasn’t a complete cock up of an op?? Did you have some hand in writing it? It wasn’t a cock up, why would it have been?
- randomhodler84 5y agoSomeones gotta clean it up. I can’t believe you are even saying this. Are you a malware dev?
- stuxneteer 5y agoSomeone being told to clean up completely harmless software from their computers isn’t “damage”. Certainly not something a sane person would consider comparable with indiscriminate wiper worms.
- randomhodler84 5y agoWhatever helps you sleep at night, malware developer. You certainly came out of the woodwork with that comment. It must have struck a nerve. Not many people go around defending stuxnet, a malware tale for the ages in bad fucking intelligence operations.
- stuxneteer 5y agoI’m sure the people behind Stuxnet are proud of their work (and they should be!), they significantly disrupted the Iranian nuclear program without hurting anybody, without causing any collateral damage. I’m not sure what special meaning “malware” holds to you that would automatically render their actions immoral. Preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons is absolutely a good cause. > Not many people go around defending stuxnet, a malware tale for the ages in bad fucking intelligence operations. Literally nobody actually working in this field would agree with you. Stuxnet was a very successful operation.
- randomhodler84 5y agoYou keep saying no collateral damage. 40% of systems infected were outside Iran. The developers should be ashamed they took a clean surgical implant and wormed it up. Lots of collateral damage, even if you choose to ignore it. The mission was successful, at great cost. If you have any involvement in such shady business, I encourage you to stop.
- rosndo 5y agoWhat great cost? Stuxnet did exactly nothing to harm systems that it wasn’t specifically targeting.