7 ms·
U.S, Israel developed Flame virus to slow Iranian nuclear efforts, officials say
- DividesByZero 14y agoSourcing unnamed 'western officials' doesn't lend this too much credibility, however this could have grave consequences for how governments deal with communication networks, and therefore the internet
- yaix 14y agoWasn't that kind of obvious after the discovered similarities that suggested "cooperation" between Flame and Stux developers? Pandoras box is open, will be interesting to see what follows.
- excuse-me 14y agoIn other news - "vatican inhabitant with big hat is a catholic shock"
- wahsd 14y agoI guess China is now free to create their own shitware to slow American economic recovery no? The supremacist attitudes in our country are unbounded.
- mc32 14y agoI'm inclined to think that regardless of the actor responsible for this, the only thing that has changed with regard to 'cyberthreats' is that this work which is thought to be the work of a state actor, has become public and that the method has changed a bit. It's not as if the Chinese (or the US or whomever) were not spearfishing each other or using other methods to extricate sensitive information. One other difference is that this is equivalent to low-grade but effective sabotage. I guess we can expect more of this kind of sabotage, yet, it's not as though there aren't state actors and non-state actors attempting this kind of sabotage for either economic, political, military or other reasons on a routine basis. I also imagine there are tacit rules by which they 'play'. That is, some is expected, some frowned upon, but seen as par for the cyber course, but other things might be seen as totally off-limits (like remotely sabotaging a reservoir's gates sitting atop a city). That's to say, this form does not involve collateral killings. So, in some ways, it may be preferable to the 'magnetic' bombs alternative which have been used to slow the Iranian atomic program.
- ryanhuff 14y agoBad example. China benefits from a strong US economy. At most, I would expect China to continue to focus on electronic warfare, and not attempt to undermine their largest customer without provocation.
- excuse-me 14y agoRussia however might decide that it doesn't like competition in the international oil and gas market. Plus it: a) is the only other victim of a state cyber attack, b) has the technical ability to do it AND c) is crazy enough to think that is a good idea .
- mc32 14y agoI think it's believed that Russia has not been shy about engaging in cyberwarfare with what it considers its legacy but renegade sphere of influence. I don't see how this would be "a new development" for Russia.
- excuse-me 14y agoDDos-ing Estonia is one thing, taking out an American/Canadian/Norwegian gas pipeline is slightly more serious
- DividesByZero 14y agoGovernment of Israel and the United States: Rationally protecting themselves with electronic warfare Russia: Crazy enough to launch cyber attacks. Nice doublespeak.
- Gustomaximus 14y agoChina don't want to slow the US economic recovery. They need Americans keeping their factories chugging along while they try to build their own consumer 'middle' class. More likely China will be looking into Flame's technology as to how they can BETTER access US military and business secrets to drive their own capabilities.
- snowwrestler 14y agoChina has been targeting U.S. private and government computer systems for at least a decade now. Not to slow it down, but to steal data and IP.
- cema 14y agoIf USA had threatened China with destruction and had been known to actively work towards that goal, then yes, China would be right to resist. This is not the case, and therefore your question is invalid. (It also smells like the party line of anti-Americanism, which is sad to witness on HN.)
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- magic_haze 14y agoI find it quite ironic that both this article and the nsa one are on the front page at the same time. Something that is supposedly top-secret is leaking all over the place, while something that ought to be open is completely clamped down shut.
- beedogs 14y agoGod forbid some other country in the region acquire nuclear technology. I find it exceedingly hypocritical and pathetic that Israel wants to stop the spread of nuclear arms in the Middle East when it's sitting on the only (massive) stockpile.
- blvr 14y agoMaybe. But it's pretty easy to understand why Israel and the Western world would want to stop Iran getting nukes.
- patrickaljord 14y ago> I find it exceedingly hypocritical and pathetic that Israel wants to stop the spread of nuclear arms in the Middle East when it's sitting on the only (massive) stockpile. Israel neighbors have made it pretty clear that they want to destroy the state of Israel and have tried many times. Iran is the top sponsor of Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah that launch rockets daily on Israel. Israel on the other hand has never called for the destruction of any of its neighbors. So it seems fair that Israel doesn't want Iran to get nuclear weapons while at the same times it's understandable that Israel wants to defends itself by getting nukes for themselves for deterrence reasons. I'm from Syria by the way (half)...
- Volpe 14y ago> Israel on the other hand has never called for the destruction of any of its neighbors. Not true. But this political debate is probably not for HN
- adventureful 14y agoHow about one single quote from a leader of Israel stating that Iran must be completely wiped from the face of the Earth? And that the Muslim people must all be murdered, because they're a cancerous blight. Can't find a quote like that? Didn't think so.
- 14y ago
- dfc 14y agoIs there anything new in the article?* * This is not a disparaging comment, it is a legitimate question.
- jeffgreco 14y agoI think this is the first high level source acknowledging authorship of Flame -- the recent big NYT piece on the Bush/Obama cyberwar only featured official acknowledgment of Stuxnet.
- voodoochilo 14y agook, that's the second dangerous cyberweapon from the two beacons of freedom and democracy. ...but iran is still the rogue state, right?
- acqq 14y agoThe "Israel April attacks" mentioned in the text: http://m.upi.com/story/UPI-85701335473868/ http://m.upi.com/story/UPI-85701335473868/
- seclorum 14y agoSerious question: Why isn't this considered an act of war?
- ajuc 14y agoBecause Iran would lose a war.