Apple are doing a sensible thing here I think. You won't find much about the craft of attribution engineering on the internet, but it's an important topic. In

Apple are doing a sensible thing here I think. You won't find much about the craft of attribution engineering on the internet, but it's an important topic. In some DEFCON and CCC videos you'll find accounts of "attribution engineering kits" in the NSA toolbag. Some hacks are not done to extract information, sabotage or compromise systems... but to make it look like somebody else did. It's painful to watch official media reports announcing so eagerly that the "Chinese did it" or "the Russians did it". Unless representatives of those countries literally called and claimed responsibility you're probably wrong. The article says that when people read "state actor" they may jump to unhelpful conclusions. Probably true, and there's deeper points behind this. Does it actually matter? Some people want to know who did it far more than what was actually harmed or remains weak. From a security stance that's a distraction. It also leads to the idea of equality before the law. Should it matter whether a criminal gang or government or corporation broke into your system? They should receive the same treatment by the courts under international law.