TED talk on the Stuxnet virus

[sjw]

[syrakusos]

Langner closed his talk by answering a question about who created STUXNET: Was it Mossad? Yes, they were involved, he said, but the origin is the primary cybersecurity source the largest in the world, the United States. He was grateful that we are. "Otherwise our problems would be much worse," Langner said.

I have to agree that generally this is true: we minimize collateral damage; the other guys all maximize it.

Last October at a computer security conference at the University of Mihcigan, Marcus J. Ranum, from Tenable Security, Inc., spoke on "Scenes from the 2010 Cyberwar between China and the US." His thesis was that, yes, China is engaged, but the USA is the number one source of such attacks and, more to the point, China admits its actions while the USA denies theirs and points to everyone else.

Unfortunately, Ranum's talk is not available from the SUMIT 2010 website. He started with a "damn" then dropped an f-bomb and went downhill from there. His first denunciation of the government was amusing to an audience split between governmentalists and hackers. His anti-imperialist tirade soon lost its impact.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Michael E. Marotta

[sjw]

Langner closed his talk by answering a question about who created STUXNET: Was it Mossad? Yes, they were involved, he said, but the origin is the primary cybersecurity source the largest in the world, the United States. He was grateful that we are. "Otherwise our problems would be much worse," Langner said.

I have to agree that generally this is true: we minimize collateral damage; the other guys all maximize it.

Is that before or after we initiate war by blowing up one of their factories?

Shayne

[Mike11]

Interesting video. A lot of it was way over my head though

[syrakusos]

Interesting video. A lot of it was way over my head though

I have been following this off and on for a while. There's a lot I don't understand, either. Whith this video the important things are that:

1. It was a two-stage attack

2. First a technician's PC was infected with a virus.

3.a That virus inserted itself to what the technician's PC was connected to: a centrifuge for separating isotopes.

3.b Not clear to me was the other half of the same virus which also went after another machine.

4. The virus then took over the controller - another computer; no keyboard or screen; just memory and CPU; an industrial controller is just a user-unfriendly computer.

5. The virus gave commands to damage the equipment apparently by over-speeds and then stops.

6. The virus also masked that by giving data downstream that everything was fine.

7. We know - he did not say - that this was targeted to a certain make of Siemens brand controllers used widely in Europe and Asia and less widely in the USA.

8. Allegedly, the virus looked for specific code commands within the Siemens controller to know that this is a target. The testing team could not get it to "take the cheese" for just any controller or even (apparently) a Siemens running other commands.

I agree that there is a lot not said. Langner referred to "decompiling" the code, but to do that, you need to know what it is supposed to look like. So, they must have known or figured out that part of it early. It is like a crossword puzzle or (really) a cryptogram: it is all a jumble until you get the first part, a word, a command and object. Computer languages are languages.

"INT 21" is PC talk the same way that BON JOUR is French. But, again, as you say, there was a lot in that presentation that was not explicit, and probably did not need to be. If you got the fact that the USA crippled Iran's nuclear program with a virus that is now loose in the world, infecting hundreds of machines, you got the message.

Country Infected computers

Iran 58.85%

Indonesia 18.22%

India 8.31%

Azerbaijan 2.57%

United States 1.56%

Pakistan 1.28%

Others 9.2%

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

Shayne: When I say "we" of course I am not in the Pentagon. Nor would I be. But broadly speaking, America has a Lone Ranger or Roy Rogers complex. We shoot to wound, not kill. We bring em in for trial, not hang 'em high for fistful of dollars. We care what other people think of us.

The world's military leaders have more in common with each other than they do with the people of their countries. That is why the Geneva Convention said that they can not make officers do manual labor -- "It just is not done, old man." I do not have much sympathy for the Guardian Mode. I am a Trader. There are always ways to get around a problem like Iran. Sometimes, the chips fall where they do and war happens. Life is imperfect. Ideally, good philosophy prevents problems. And the problems we face now are the result of bad philosophy.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Michael E. Marotta

[sjw]

I find it interesting that some libertarian quarters are all over the public war on Libya because Obama didn't declare it, but have said nothing of this behind-the-scenes undeclared war on Iran.

Shayne

[Selene]

I find it interesting that some libertarian quarters are all over the public war on Libya because Obama didn't declare it, but have said nothing of this behind-the-scenes undeclared war on Iran.

Shayne

Shayne:

My interest would be in the links to those "libertarian quarters."

Additionally, not that it would change why the opposition to Iraq does not have a solid basis for argument, but, Bush II had an overwhelming Congressional authorisation to proceed with the Iraq attack.

Adam

[sjw]

I find it interesting that some libertarian quarters are all over the public war on Libya because Obama didn't declare it, but have said nothing of this behind-the-scenes undeclared war on Iran.

Shayne

Shayne:

My interest would be in the links to those "libertarian quarters."

Additionally, not that it would change why the opposition to Iraq does not have a solid basis for argument, but, Bush II had an overwhelming Congressional authorisation to proceed with the Iraq attack.

Adam

[syrakusos]

I find it interesting that some libertarian quarters are all over the public war on Libya because Obama didn't declare it, but have said nothing of this behind-the-scenes undeclared war on Iran. Shayne

Shayne:

My interest would be in the links to those "libertarian quarters." Adam

[Video of Rand Paul]

Ummm... about those "libertarian quarters" Shayne, I see you and raise you.

Allow me to say that I approve of the disabling of Iran's nuclear enrichment. Let them use Green (the color of Islam) energy like windmills and geothermal. Heck, they have oil. Four years ago, when gasoline was pushing $3 per gallon in the US it was 27 cents per gallon in Teheran which caused protests. Iran is a dangerous theocracy. They are Islamist in a way that the USA or the UK or Germany could never be "Christian." As a libertarian, I honestly believe that in disabling the enrichment plant, our government did what we pay taxes for them to do in protecting us.

Now, does that create a "libertarian quarter" for you, or did you really have something in mind?

[sjw]

Now, does that create a "libertarian quarter" for you, or did you really have something in mind?

I have in mind that the rule of law is actually important, and its breakdown in America is a far worse threat to us than Iran.

Shayne

[syrakusos]

Now, does that create a "libertarian quarter" for you, or did you really have something in mind?

I have in mind that the rule of law is actually important, and its breakdown in America is a far worse threat to us than Iran.

Shayne

That will not do. You said:

I find it interesting that some libertarian quarters are all over the public war on Libya because Obama didn't declare it, but have said nothing of this behind-the-scenes undeclared war on Iran. Shayne

Was it ReasonTV? Was it the LP? Who do you think should be saying what? Who said what? Or failed to say what?

Did you mean here on OL? That we debate and condemn Libya but not the US action against Iran via Stuxnet? Was OL your point? Or were you thinking of "Whiskey and Gunpowder"? Who or what were the "some libertarian quarters"? Or was it just an over-generalization, a misplaced modifier, a dangling thoughtcicle...

[sjw]

I have no idea what you're blathering on about or why. Are you just nuts? And yes, I can find various libertarian quarters, but who the hell cares. You know damn well that plenty of libertarian types are attacking Obama on Libya, saying that there is no Congressional approval etc.

Shayne

[DavidMcK]

Its obvious (and controversial) that a defense is for selfdefense, not the defense of the whole world. As a libertarian and an advocate of intelligent self-interest I am against the actions of the U.S. military in Libya and Irag as well as this attack on an Iranian nuclear power facility. The situation in Afghanistan is more justified since we were attacked; but notice that people who have no concept of what a military is for, or who believe it is for anyone at anytime don't seem to be able to execute a justified war efficiently.

[syrakusos]

I have no idea what you're blathering on about or why. Are you just nuts? And yes, I can find various libertarian quarters, but who the hell cares. You know damn well...

I was referring to the silence over Iran. Where do you think this should come from? You said "some libertarian quarters." Well, which ones did you have in mind?

I understand that you find this uncomfortable. You are dodging a very easy question. Now you accuse me of "blathering" and ask if I am "nuts." You also border on vulgarity. Those are all disallowed in debate; and you know that they are; but you resort to them, perhaps reflexively, because you perceive yourself being backed into a corner.

It was Selene who called you on this first, and you ignored him. I am bringing you back to this.

Libya is in the news. Stuxnet less visible. Also, as noted here, even those who find the action "interesting" do not understand the technical details. I confess my own limitations there, as well, even if I do know some machine code. We do not need to know the technical details of jets, guns, and missiles to comment on the President's usurpation of imperatorial powers. So, the attack on the Iranian nuclear fuel facility needs clarification, if you care to do that. You are certainly capable of that. Feel free to write letters or to comment on blogs. You can bring this into focus if you care to. Your not doing so while you complain about Libya makes you one of those "libertarian quarters" you carped about, without actually identifying.

Now, you can swear at me, call me names, claim not to understand what I have written, or you can meet the call-and-raise and then show your hand. The currency here is rhetoric. Money talks. Bullshit walks.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Michael E. Marotta

[sjw]

OK, nuts it is ;)

Shayne