Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Stuxnet made it "acceptable" to do this. I hope the US government recognizes that.


Actually the Trans-Siberian pipeline made this acceptable, which was a cyber attack in peacetime responsible for the largest man-made non-nuclear explosion in history. Or the Turkish pipeline attack. Or the Enigma Machine hack.

The crucial parts of warfare systems are C4ISR: Command, Control, Communications, Computation, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Recognizance.

Computer systems have been a target of covert ops for as long as they have existed. What's happening now is that middle-weight nations (North Korea, Iran) and non-state actors (Anonymous, al-Qassam) are now able to get in on the game, which is disrupting the status quo established by the USA and USSR.


Unambiguous rankings of explosions is basically impossible, so claiming it was the biggest man-made explosion in history is nonsense. This overly-bold claim was promulgated by former Air Force secretary Thomas C. Reed.

http://seanlinnane.blogspot.com/2014/12/largest-man-made-non...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_artificial...


We can agree it was a pretty large fuel-air explosion caused by the failure of SCADA software? The rest is just details.


Damn. Dominating. Tell me more.


In the Trans Siberian pipeline explosion the KGB stole some Canadian software that had been booby trapped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_pipeline_sabotage


Because when I hack to destroy I always wait for the US Government to do it first.


Well, I think what the parent is saying here is that the United States set a precedent for other nation states to engage in destruction of industry when they see national security or state advantages - while the myth of America being a fair and even handed juror of world affairs is not true, it is pervasive, and it (and the "West") is used as a basis for comparison. It also provides an out for a state actor who is caught and there is an attempt at an international judicial (rather than military) response: they can point at Stuxnet and suggest (convincingly IMO) that the United States should face the same standards of judgement and if they stand up a proportional reprimand. This gives an additional sort of 'insurance'.

I would disagree with the parent that Stuxnet is the same type of activity (it's private industrial sabotage rather than state military sabotage). The papers with the most lip service regarding cybermilitarization (inside the US) try to suggest international norms by breaking types of operations down into an ontology that separates national security operations and military operations from activities that interfere with private enterprise, citizens and from infrastructure.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: