CupResponsible797
CupResponsible797 t1_j4lcok5 wrote
CupResponsible797 t1_j4lcln9 wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
As well as you'd expect any war crimes prosecutions to go. The laws of war are not very strict to begin with, gathering evidence tends to be extremely challenging. Even locating known witnesses in such countries for interviews is a tremendously difficult task.
There have been more than a hundred people court-martialed in the US over war crimes during the conflicts you mention.
Some of the famous cases that come to mind were almost certainly not war crimes. Perhaps they should be, but according to the laws of war, they weren't.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4larwq wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
That's up to Iran to decide, just as it's up to other states to decide what actions they will take to influence Iranian decisionmaking.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4lad9r wrote
Reply to comment by kerbaal in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
> concepts of [...] and that the law exists to restrict the government as much as it does us
Such concept has literally never existed. Sovereign immunity on the other hand is an ages-old legal concept.
You're veering deep into sovereign citizen loony territory by even suggesting this.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4l9n0h wrote
Reply to comment by duffmanhb in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
>I had no idea that it was recoded and rereleased into the wild. Could it have been Israel? It definitely doesn't sound like something the US would do. Maybe Iran after discovering it tried to repurpose it?
This didn't actually happen. At best there was some disagreement between the responsible nations about how aggressive the spreading functionality should be.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4l9cr6 wrote
Reply to comment by faux_glove in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
A fuzzer is a tool which automatically feeds semi-random data to another program in order to discover anomalous behaviours.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4l8vfi wrote
Reply to comment by DarthPutler in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
Is that supposed to be a counterargument?
CupResponsible797 t1_j4i2k55 wrote
Reply to comment by ChuckRocksEh in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
I don't think you're entirely wrong, but there exists a strong counterpoint to this.
Many argue that Japan did not capitulate because of the nukes, Japan capitulated because Soviet Union entered the war.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4i05x9 wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
In an ideal world, of course.
But in the end, that has nothing to do with whether or not it is a good thing that US is working against nuclear proliferation.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hykd2 wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
I think most people can agree that fewer people with nukes is better than more people with nukes.
More people with nukes means more nuke usage, everyone having nukes means rather frequent nuke usage.
I personally would strongly prefer to live in a world without nukes. I can't have that, so I'll be happy with the less maximalist goal of nobody using nukes. The most realistic way to achieve that is for less people to have nukes.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hxx9t wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
Where do you think I am from? My comment history makes it pretty clear that I live in the UK, the way I write should make it more than obvious that I'm not a native English speaker.
Anyway, I'm a UA/RO dual national.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hp2t0 wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
I grew up in Eastern Europe you imbecile.
But yes indeed, it is an utter waste of time to attempt to have a reasonable conversation with the likes of you.
What a wonderful world it would be if you got your way and everybody had nuclear weapons.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hni0f wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
So, what you're saying is that only a morally bankrupt person would argue that Stuxnet was the right thing to do?
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hmduv wrote
Reply to comment by TibotPhinaut in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
>Because a crime is still a crime. You can't kill a murderer just because it would make the world maybe a better place.
Yes, but from a legal point of view, this simply wasn't a crime.
It's pointless to debate that, so the more interesting debate to be had is whether or not it was the right thing to do.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hm680 wrote
Reply to comment by abitrolly in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
This is really not a context in which you would normally use the term fuzzer. Stuxnet did not "fuzz" these PLCs, it performed a series of specific steps to identify its targets and cause them to break.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4hgmur wrote
Reply to comment by OwlBeneficial2743 in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
Flame was developed by people involved in developing Stuxnet, no surprise that they would share elements. There's little indication that Flame is "subsequent malware", everything we know indicates that they were developed at around the same time.
Stuxnet development started around 2005
Flame development started at least as early as 2006
In fact, there are strong indicators that the people who developed Flame provided guidance and technical assistance to the less sophisticated Stuxnet developers. It's difficult to imagine that the development of Flame would have hinged on Stuxnet in any way.
>I believe that others used one or more of the zero days in subsequent malware;
Such as?
CupResponsible797 t1_j4h6xui wrote
Reply to comment by ChulaK in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
>Considering the code is now out in the open, is being reverse engineered, and now being repurposed for other attacks?
It's 2023, Stuxnet has been out in the wild since at least the 2010. What other attacks materialized from Stuxnet being reverse engineered?
Duqu isn't a Stuxnet "strain", it's an entirely separate piece of malware developed by some of the people involved in the creation of Stuxnet.
> If the gun is the great equalizer because men, women, and children can use it to attack or defend regardless of physical strength, then this virus is also an equalizer.
Not really, the exploits get fixed as soon as they become public knowledge. Stuxnet had already been fired, and the exploits burned. All that was left was a spent cartridge.
>Releasing Stuxnet was pretty much giving everyone a "nuclear weapon." There's no longer a nuclear deterrence but a viral deterrence. Launching cyber attacks assures mutual destruction.
This is a weird take. The "dangerous" parts of Stuxnet became irrelevant as soon as it's existence became public knowledge, Microsoft issued patches and Stuxnet was rapidly reduced to nothing but a curiosity.
How do you "patch" nuclear weapons?
Stuxnet isn't the nuke-like capability here, it's the team of people sitting in Fort Meade ensuring a steady supply of 0days.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4guo06 wrote
Reply to comment by kerbaal in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
In the same vein you presumably believe that the US should refrain from all foreign intelligence activities, right? This seems like a horribly naïve take.
> It was unauthorized access to computer devices, it was intentional destruction.
DoD is obviously not bound by these laws, otherwise just about everything they do would be criminal.
Keep in mind that the alternative to Stuxnet was a pre-emptive strike by Israel, the US worked hard to avoid that.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4gtxo4 wrote
Reply to comment by DarthPutler in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
Because Israel unfortunately has nuclear weapons, the US should not seek to prevent other states from getting them? How do you imagine that policy leading to a positive outcome?
In the end everybody would have nuclear weapons, leading to at least semi-regular use.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4gqei2 wrote
Reply to comment by ramriot in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
It seems wholly unsurprising that malware targeting a specific airgapped network would also spread through other networks through whichever means are used to breach the airgap.
> Later "public" appearances appear to be from proximal but unrelated sources & showed variations in code content that suggest a lower skilled operator had altered the original code.
What modifications are you referring to? This documentary makes a vague claim that Israelis modified the spreading code to be more aggressive, but doesn’t really substantiate it.
The documentary certainly doesn’t claim that the changes made by the Israelis weren’t necessary for the operation to succeed.
CupResponsible797 t1_j4gnnqs wrote
Reply to comment by kerbaal in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
Why do you think this was a crime? And more importantly, why do you think this was wrong? Would the world have been a better place without Stuxnet and the setbacks it caused for the Iranian nuclear program?
CupResponsible797 t1_j4gnhkz wrote
Reply to comment by ramriot in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
>Though had it not been misused after initial targetting we would most probably have never heard of it.
How was Stuxnet “misused” after initial targeting? It was inert outside of the specific systems targeted.
CupResponsible797 t1_iy4woq0 wrote
Reply to comment by emibalestr in [homemade] potato terrine by emibalestr
I'm not sure how a reasonable person could read my comments and think I'm offended.
CupResponsible797 t1_iy4vufp wrote
Reply to comment by emibalestr in [homemade] potato terrine by emibalestr
Oxford dictionary is not a good source when it comes to food. Two quick examples:
According to the dictionary, a pizza must be round and have both tomatoes and cheese.
>a dish of Italian origin, consisting of a flat round base of dough baked with a topping of tomatoes and cheese, typically with added meat, fish, or vegetables.
And mole is apparently expected to contain chocolate (most do not)
>a highly spiced Mexican sauce made chiefly from chilli peppers and chocolate, served with meat.
>All the recipes I saw were literally named “potato terrine (pavé)”, so I assume they’re used interchangeably
That seems to be a common mistake on recipe spam blogs, but it's certainly a bizarre way to describe a dish that doesn't even vaguely resemble anything else you'd refer to as "terrine".
CupResponsible797 t1_j4mizvh wrote
Reply to comment by kerbaal in Zero Days (2016) - Stuxnet, a piece of self-replicating computer malware that the U.S. and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately spread beyond its intended target. [01:53:51] by Missing_Trillions
>Sure if you ignore the concept of rule of law or the very common phrase "nation of laws, not a nation of men".
Those do not mean what you think they mean.
These concepts are generally understood to mean that all members of society are considered equally subject to legal codes and processes, but the state is explicitly not a member of society.
>And one that deserves to be nothing more than a footnote in the history of bad ideas that only ever served the people in power to the detriment of the people that they were supposed to be serving.
There's a reason it has survived everywhere in the world for thousands of years, sovereign immunity is simply necessary for states to conduct their duties.