4 ms·

This is clearly an approved leak from the administration. The number of sources and specifics make it very easy to catch whoever leaked this information. If t

This is clearly an approved leak from the administration. The number of sources and specifics make it very easy to catch whoever leaked this information. If this wasn't approved, the leaker is going to be sitting next to bradly manning within a week, and there is no moral cause to leak this information, so it is safe to assume this was an approved leak. The real question, is why did the administration leak the story, and why now? Is it politically motivated because Obama wants to seem tough on Iran in an election year? Is it to trick the Iranians into thinking the program is over? Maybe versions 2, 3, and 4 are already in place, and it will be demoralizing to Iran's program if they keep getting setback.

salimmadjd 14y ago
I agree...or Sanger has another agenda by leaking this. But either way, this is more purposeful than just trying to break a story.
conradev 14y ago
Flame hit the mainstream news not too long ago, that may have something to do with it.
- jcampbell1 14y ago
  Great point, that makes sense to me. Derivative malware is being created, and the administration went public to send a wakeup call to domestic industries to be vigilant. Rather than telling sensitive companies and organizations like Los Alamos, and waiting for a leak, the administration leaked the info to the NYT to control the message. Now that the story is out, the CIA/NSA can work with sensitive industries to contain the fallout of derivative malware like Flame. The timing makes sense.
  - gaius 14y ago
    "That thing we're illegally doing to other countries, they might do to us, it's not fair!"
    - chii 14y ago
      life will be fair (for you) when you have the biggest stick. So aim to be the person with the biggest stick. When (if?) the world has to be this way, i rather be on the side of the biggest stick.
grandalf 14y ago
Good points. I think the tough on Iran story is probably part of it. Also I think it could be a way to test the public/media reaction to news of US cyber terrorism against other nations.
jsz0 14y ago
The real question, is why did the administration leak the story, and why now? The latest round of multi-lateral talks on Iran's nuclear program just concluded a few days ago in Baghdad. I think they're trying to send the message to Iran that they will never be able to have a clandestine nuclear weapons program. The world is going to know about it. So if a nuclear power option is on the table for Iran this might give them a little extra motivation to accept all international regulations/inspections as a precondition. What are they actually going to be able to hide? Not much apparently. The other goal here is to make Iran's position that they only want nuclear power, not nuclear weapons, even more difficult to accept. They are enduring sanctions and refusing to accept all of the regulations/inspections for what purpose exactly? They could have had nuclear power years ago if they were willing to accept these conditions. The longer they hide behind 'nuclear power only' the harder it is to believe. At some crucial point I have no doubt we'll be leaking detailed information about their weapons program. When that happens Iran will have to probably admit they do want nuclear weapons and from there the war question pretty much resolves itself.
- jcampbell1 14y ago
  Great point. After reading the article, I completely forgot that Iran was still claiming that they didn't have a weapons program. This now proves that claim is complete nonsense and now that this is public, the US can show the UN security council and infinite amount of data that shows Iran has a weapons program.
nitrogen 14y ago
...there is no moral cause to leak this information... From the article: "Last year, the nation announced that it had begun its own military cyberunit..." One could argue that a nation's citizens have a moral right to know that their government is exposing them to potential retaliation by sabotaging the facilities of another sovereign nation via cyberattack. Also from the article: "But there has been scant evidence that it has begun to strike back." Wasn't the DigiNotar hack used by Iran to obtain fake certificates for Google domains?

salimmadjd 14y ago

I agree...or Sanger has another agenda by leaking this. But either way, this is more purposeful than just trying to break a story.

conradev 14y ago

Flame hit the mainstream news not too long ago, that may have something to do with it.

jcampbell1 14y ago
Great point, that makes sense to me. Derivative malware is being created, and the administration went public to send a wakeup call to domestic industries to be vigilant. Rather than telling sensitive companies and organizations like Los Alamos, and waiting for a leak, the administration leaked the info to the NYT to control the message. Now that the story is out, the CIA/NSA can work with sensitive industries to contain the fallout of derivative malware like Flame. The timing makes sense.
- gaius 14y ago
  "That thing we're illegally doing to other countries, they might do to us, it's not fair!"
  - chii 14y ago
    life will be fair (for you) when you have the biggest stick. So aim to be the person with the biggest stick. When (if?) the world has to be this way, i rather be on the side of the biggest stick.

grandalf 14y ago

Good points. I think the tough on Iran story is probably part of it. Also I think it could be a way to test the public/media reaction to news of US cyber terrorism against other nations.

jsz0 14y ago

The real question, is why did the administration leak the story, and why now? The latest round of multi-lateral talks on Iran's nuclear program just concluded a few days ago in Baghdad. I think they're trying to send the message to Iran that they will never be able to have a clandestine nuclear weapons program. The world is going to know about it. So if a nuclear power option is on the table for Iran this might give them a little extra motivation to accept all international regulations/inspections as a precondition. What are they actually going to be able to hide? Not much apparently. The other goal here is to make Iran's position that they only want nuclear power, not nuclear weapons, even more difficult to accept. They are enduring sanctions and refusing to accept all of the regulations/inspections for what purpose exactly? They could have had nuclear power years ago if they were willing to accept these conditions. The longer they hide behind 'nuclear power only' the harder it is to believe. At some crucial point I have no doubt we'll be leaking detailed information about their weapons program. When that happens Iran will have to probably admit they do want nuclear weapons and from there the war question pretty much resolves itself.

jcampbell1 14y ago
Great point. After reading the article, I completely forgot that Iran was still claiming that they didn't have a weapons program. This now proves that claim is complete nonsense and now that this is public, the US can show the UN security council and infinite amount of data that shows Iran has a weapons program.

nitrogen 14y ago

...there is no moral cause to leak this information... From the article: "Last year, the nation announced that it had begun its own military cyberunit..." One could argue that a nation's citizens have a moral right to know that their government is exposing them to potential retaliation by sabotaging the facilities of another sovereign nation via cyberattack. Also from the article: "But there has been scant evidence that it has begun to strike back." Wasn't the DigiNotar hack used by Iran to obtain fake certificates for Google domains?