Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Was Russia Behind Stuxnet?

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the from-russia-with-root dept.

Security 281

An anonymous reader writes "Despite the U.S. and Israel being widely assumed to be responsible for Stuxnet, Russia is the more likely culprit, says U.S. Air Force cyber analyst. The nuclear gangsterism of the past 20 years gives it plenty of motive. Quoting: 'So what better way to maintain Russian interests, and innocence, than to plant a worm with digital U.S.-Israeli fingerprints? After all, Russian scientists and engineers are familiar with the cascading centrifuges whose numbers and configuration – and Siemen’s SCADA PLC controller schematics – they have full access to by virtue of designing the plants. ... the observers of the virus could alert the Iranians before full nuclear catastrophe struck. The Belarusian computer security experts who 'discovered' the code seemingly played that role well. They didn't seem too preoccupied with reverse engineering the malicious code to see what it was designed to do.'"

cancel ×

281 comments

Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333012)

Let's all trust the U.S. propaganda machine. It was the Russians.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (2)

Maxhrk (680390) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333020)

According To battlefield 3, Russia is the bad guys. Right?

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333042)

But they took out the TSA in Modern Warfare, so that makes them the good guys in my book.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333056)

What a bunch of niggers.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (5, Funny)

arglebargle_xiv (2212710) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333268)

Let's all trust the U.S. propaganda machine. It was the Russians.

Damn straight it was the Russians! It's all part of the Russian infiltration, Russian indoctrination, Russian subversion and the international Russian conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. Stuxnet is without a doubt the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Russian plot we have ever had to face.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (5, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333286)

Besides didn't some Israeli general upon retirement say something to the effect of "LOL I helped kick some ass with Stux didn't I?". The whole thing smelt like Mossad to me. Frankly I honestly don't blame the Iranians for wanting the bomb as pretty much everyone in that region that hasn't kissed US bankster ass or have a bomb has been stomped on, they have the US Navy practically sitting off their coast and US drones buzzing overhead.

As has been said many times its not paranoia if they really are out to get you and the Neocons made it clear years ago that Iran was on their hit lists. If Iran says something like "We won't accept dollars for oil, only gold" like old MoMo did they'd probably be invaded before the year was out. pretty much the only way to not get stomped on by the US military anymore is to have the bomb. Kinda sad, but that's reality, the MSM is happy to dance to any tune their masters tell them to and its too easy to get the average citizen to believe anything the TV tells them to, just look at that poll where 40%+ thought we went into Iraq over 9/11.

Iran knows the clock is ticking and if they don't have the bomb some neocon is gonna come into power and squash them like a bug, if for no other reason than they don't get along with Israel and too many neocons are of the "Jesus won't come back if there aren't Jews in Zion! Come back Jesus come back!" variety. i don't know what is scarier, the Mullahs wanting a bomb or the fact that one of the most highly weaponized countries in the west have a large power base that believes the ME policy should be based on 1800 year old words written on a sheep's ass by goat herders about some 2000+ year old dead guy and how he needs a certain race in a certain place so he has a spot to park his fluffy white cloud.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (-1, Offtopic)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333350)

Derp.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (3, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333582)

I'd almost trust Iran with the bomb right now - the current regime seems to know well enough that you don't initiate MAD, or else they'd have done so with conventional military already. But governments change, espicially in dictatorships like Iran - it only takes one fanatic who believes Allah will grant victory and that bomb is in the next shipping container addressed to New York. Don't even need an ICBM.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (1)

evanism (600676) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333602)

That was an awesome rant!

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (4, Interesting)

Lord Duran (834815) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333758)

Your rant is pure demagoguery.

What you seem to disregard is that Iran is now ruled exclusively by a religious leader [wikipedia.org] , and that his dog Ahmadinejad doesn't just not get along with Israel, but calls out for the destruction of Israel pretty much any time there's an open microphone nearby. He does so even though Israel has never done anything bad to Iran and the two countries even had strong military relations prior to 1979.

You also forget that Iran spends millions of oil dollars every year funding terrorist organizations whose sole purpose is to harm and kill American and Israeli civilians.

What your last paragraph is basically saying is that it's OK for Iran to destroy Israel (even if we assume that they could), because Christianity is false. Even if Christianity is false, nobody has the right to destroy another country the way Iran wants to destroy Israel.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (-1, Flamebait)

Celarent Darii (1561999) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333830)

<quote><p>. Even if Christianity is false, nobody has the right to destroy another country the way Iran wants to destroy Israel.</p></quote>

and what proof do you have of that statement? Why can't they destroy Israel if they wanted to? The US does it all the time, why can't they share in the fun?

As a matter of proof, the statement that a nation can't destroy another presupposes an objective moral system, or a criterion to say what one can do or not. If there is no criterion, there is no way you can object.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333834)

What your last paragraph is basically saying is that it's OK for Iran to destroy Israel (even if we assume that they could), because Christianity is false. Even if Christianity is false, nobody has the right to destroy another country the way Iran wants to destroy Israel.

No is doesn't. What he's saying is that both situations (Iran having the bomb, Israel using theirs) is very scary, but it's unfortunate that it's come down to this.

Iran wants the bomb, not to use against it's neighbours, but as a deterrent so that it's neighbours won't use their bombs against it. This is really no different that the nuclear arms race between the USA and USSR during the cold war that effectively resulted in nullification of both side's "leverage", and indeed was formally ratified in the acceptance of Mutually Assured Destruction [wikipedia.org]

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333808)

This. Just this. Why do I never have mod points when I really need them?

Iran's oil supply is declining (3, Interesting)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333886)

http://crudeoilpeak.info/iran-crude-oil-decline-to-2016 [crudeoilpeak.info]

They'll be able to continue exporting for a few years, 5-10. Then their internal consumption hits production and starts declining. This is when the shtf and people start dying.

So... What choices do they have? Given the history of the external manipulation of their country they appear quite rational.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333962)

We can indeed look at whom stuxnet benefited and bet on a country. Unless it's a deception to hurt that same country, all right.

What the US Government CAN'T do is saying it was LIKELY the russians.
Either you know name and surname of the hackers, or you don't know anything because russia is a few network hops from anywhere in the world. And even if you had every single packet traced, you dunno if the guy posting from a hacked wifi spot is a russian a chinese, the chief of the secret service of your own country.

Flags are sacred for us little people. And it's Right they are, people died for them.
But above a certain threshold flags are things to use to own advantage.
Above that threshold, people decide to make wars and point you to Russian, Chinese, Israeli, Arab little people so we can kill each other. Let no one profit from wars, those who do are the enemy.

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (0)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333322)

Aren't all hackers Romanian?

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333384)

I bet they're after our precious bodily fluids.

Friend Computer says, 'Look, commies'. (2, Funny)

EdZ (755139) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333664)

Citizen! It's always the Commie Mutant Traitors!

Re:Government responsible says, 'Look, commies'. (5, Interesting)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333880)

Any conspiracy theory about stuxxnet has to explain this fact : http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=10596 [net-security.org]

An Israelian general claims to have worked on Stuxxnet.

Oh BOY! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333014)

No comment - this feels like a commentary itself... but if true, crap.

Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (4, Insightful)

douglips (513461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333022)

Centrifuges can't cause a catastrophe, other than of the "oh shit my centrifuge just came apart and shredded my lab" kind. There is not a nuclear chain reaction to go out of control here.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (4, Informative)

MrQuacker (1938262) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333044)

Well, the centrifuge itself doesnt. But if it somehow infects a critical PLC, like say the one that controls reactor rods, or ventilation, or whatever.

Point being, something other than centrifuges could get infected, and that something could be bad.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (3, Insightful)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333184)

I don't know. This seemed like a pretty specifically targeted piece of hardware.

Dumbing it down a whole bunch here, but say that the virus modifies the CENTRIFUGE_MAX_SPEED variable from X to X+100 or something. It's affecting a specific piece of software. It's not as if the ventilation or reactor rod system run on the same software, and even if they did it would be doubtful that they would be affected by the same command.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333216)

You little slut! You dare insult me? You have no idea who you're dealing with, do you? I have the true power under my belt!

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (1)

kno3 (1327725) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333504)

Sorry if I am wrong here, but are you not just producing wild theories here? Surely you don't know what Stuxnet intended to do, so how could you rule that it could not have caused a nuclear catastrophe?

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (4, Informative)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333970)

Sorry if I am wrong here, but are you not just producing wild theories here? Surely you don't know what Stuxnet intended to do, so how could you rule that it could not have caused a nuclear catastrophe?

There was an analysis by German researchers that he bases his information on.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/07/how-digital-detectives-deciphered-stuxnet/all/1 [wired.com]
http://www.ted.com/talks/ralph_langner_cracking_stuxnet_a_21st_century_cyberweapon.html [ted.com]

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333584)

except it's not CENTRIFUGE_MAX_SPEED it's VARIABLE_SPEED_MOTOR_MAX_SPEED, which was a potential problem for some of the pumps at their nuclear reactor.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333786)

You need to read about stuxnet. The only thing it ever would do is screw with centrifuges. The gp is correct. There was no potential for catastrophe with stuxnet. That is why this conspiracy theory lacks credibility.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333974)

Well, the centrifuge itself doesnt. But if it somehow infects a critical PLC, like say the one that controls reactor rods, or ventilation, or whatever.

Point being, something other than centrifuges could get infected, and that something could be bad.

When it comes to industrial plants one things that is becoming more and more common are completely independent shutdown systems. The SCRAM system for Nuclear reactors is one such system, and is one of the first ones that was well speced and required by regulators. You'll find many refineries without such systems, but you won't find a Nuclear reactor.

The bottom line is that these things sit separately and monitor the plant. Sure you can go in, push buttons, start stretching the operating envelope from the PLC, but when things start getting heated the reactor will shutdown.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (5, Interesting)

FrozenFood (2515360) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333110)

its entirely possible to run an entire nuclear power plant from the control rod insertion to button that opens the front gate off a single Siemens PLC, e.g. their S7-400 with a big CPU. off the CPU comes Profibus which can go directly to input sensors, pnumatic valves, HMIs. The profibus is quite a safe thing, becasue it is just RS485 underneath. The new thing that siemens is touting is profiNET, which as the name implies is just the profibus protocol over ethernet. with control systems running off ethernet is fine, but siemens also do DIN mount 100mb/s ethernet switches where anyone can plug a laptop in and stop/start/upload more code to the entire network with their prodave application.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333362)

Except that's not how you do it. If your PLC is controlling vital equipment you A) use a password . B) Have the PLC set so that online (means when the PLC is running) program changes are not allowed and C) run redundant PLCs so if there is ever a switch of code in one of them (by a worm etc.) that PLC is locked out and measures taken. However when controlling a Centrifuge one probably wouldn't use redundant PLCs. When it comes to profibus vs. Profinet I would say that the fieldbus has very little to do with security. Most modern PLCs have an ethernet connection for talking to higher level systems anyways no matter which bus you use at the field level. Also anyone WHO can write a virus for a PLC is capable of buying one of the many different devices for connecting to a Profibus or MPI port of a Siemens PLC. /Industrial-programmer (not in nuclear area)

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#38334004)

its entirely possible to run an entire nuclear power plant from the control rod insertion to button that opens the front gate off a single Siemens PLC

Sure it is. If you want to run afoul of every government regulation world wide regarding the control of nuclear reactors. Given how much government interest is being taken in reactors recently I doubt anyone is stupid enough to even attempt something like you're suggesting.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333220)

Aren't the centrifuges being used to enrich nuclear materials?

Couldn't a fuck-up with a centrifuge result in too much enrichment at the base of a given centrifuge tube, resulting in a criticality incident? Sure, it's far-fetched, but not outside the realm of possibility.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (1)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333236)

Sure, it's far-fetched, but not outside the realm of possibility.

You sound like those people who think crystal energy is realize because of the quantums when you say stuff like this.

Here's a hint: If you know this little about a technical topic, don't pretend you have any idea what is, or is not, in the realm of possibility.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (4, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333604)

It is. For a start, the centrifuges aren't full of uranium. They are full of uranium hexafluoride, a gas. No possibility of it going critical. The worst case scenario would be that containment is ruptured and the gas escapes - it's nasty stuff, about a ten on the flesh-melt-o-meter, and will quite happily burn though walls and boil the skin off of anyone who gets in it's way. If that happens it'll kill a few workers and completly destroy the centrifuge, but that's all. No boom.

on the other hand. (2)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333972)

typically the output of centrifuges is chained together. the output of the last centrifuge is much more enriched than the first. and where does the output of the last centrifuge go? to some holding tank? what if that last centrifuge has an accident that affects the holding tank? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_centrifuge [wikipedia.org]

we dont know the specific layout of their centrifuge operation. what if they are using some sort of arrangement we dont know about?

yes it is incredibly, massively unlikely. on the other hand.

that is the same attitude held by the various managers and dead people you can find described in this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident [wikipedia.org]

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (1)

donscarletti (569232) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333400)

Well, if your idea of "catastrophe" is becoming critical and levelling a city block, then you are absolutely correct, an enrichment centrifuge cannot do that. However, that centrifuge is filled with uranium hexafluoride, which is a horrible corrosive gas that can burn through metal and will kill you if you touch or ingest it in the tiniest quantities, then I can think of quite a lot of catastrophic things that can happen, especially in a confined space with thousands of workers.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333414)

Thousands of workers monitoring a centrifuge cascade?

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (2)

Zoshnell (573838) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333436)

As long as one of them isn't Gordon Freeman, a cascade event isn't likely to occur...

nuclear catastrophe from a shutdown operation? (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38334000)

how could running an experiment that simulated an 'emergency shutdown' possibly lead to a criticality accident? no, that would never happen.

Re:Full Nuclear Catastrophe? From a centrifuge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333754)

Why not? It doesn't need a nuclear chain reaction to get out of control. Burning down the building with a release of vast amounts of nuclear material would suffice.

"that would never happen" - famous last words (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333938)

may i recommend the following article, for a nice list of dead people who thought "this could never happen in a million years"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident [wikipedia.org]

I blame it on Cthulhu (4, Funny)

BLToday (1777712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333032)

That's the only logical explanation.

Fix the stupid bugs! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333048)

Governments would be wise to focus on securing the code they use rather than attacking the enemy. We already have attack capabilities and adding hack capabilities may not be nearly as valuable to nations with significant resources. On the technical front though ANY tiny nation or group with even few resources can threaten you if your code is bug ridden.

AGAIN? (-1, Flamebait)

kixome (1636329) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333052)

The us once again blames russia/ussr for things that were done/concocted here? I am so tired of USA bullshit. When is the revolution going to start against this bloated bolshavik bullshit govt? They're so vacleft!

Re:AGAIN? (0, Flamebait)

kixome (1636329) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333096)

ok -1 then fuck you fag ass slash fag mods. You don't like the truth and become cunts as soon as it comes out. this is insight fuckers! learn that america is not but a LIE!

Re:AGAIN? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333292)

Bolshevik Government? Either you do not know history and were pulling the first thing that came to mind out of your ass (which I suspect to be the case since you cant even spell Bolshevik correctly), or you are just a moron. If the tea party or the occupy peoples over threw the government, and people with the same interests as are currently in power hijacked/took over the whole mess you could parallel it to the Bolsheviks.

Yeah, Riiiight... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333062)

Cause in case of a sheep missing, you trust the wolf on saying it was really the bear. Riiiight. ^^

The only thing I know for a fact, is that I have not experienced any of it with my own senses, and so everything I think I "know" about this subject comes from other people, probably all of which have also not experienced it with their own senses but gotten it from even more sources, and so on and so on. With everyone in all those chains having their own set of perceptive biases in their senses and brains, and their own interests.
I can choose who to trust and who not. But most people just trust whatever fits their own model of reality best, disregarding that it might be wrong.
And the same is true for everyone of you too.

So unless it has a noticeable effect on me personally, instead of wasting my mental resources on this, I use them for something that has a bigger effect on improving my life and keeping what I have.
How about you? :)

Re:Yeah, Riiiight... (2)

Kagura (843695) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333258)

Cause in case of a sheep missing, you trust the wolf on saying it was really the bear. Riiiight. ^^

The only thing I know for a fact, is that I have not experienced any of it with my own senses, and so everything I think I "know" about this subject comes from other people, probably all of which have also not experienced it with their own senses but gotten it from even more sources, and so on and so on. With everyone in all those chains having their own set of perceptive biases in their senses and brains, and their own interests. I can choose who to trust and who not. But most people just trust whatever fits their own model of reality best, disregarding that it might be wrong. And the same is true for everyone of you too.

So unless it has a noticeable effect on me personally, instead of wasting my mental resources on this, I use them for something that has a bigger effect on improving my life and keeping what I have. How about you? :)

Great, so you don't even know if Mexico is a real country existing south of the US.

Really? (5, Insightful)

Acapulco (1289274) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333074)

Beyond the obvious fact that we will never know for sure who actually created it, it seems pretty naive to think a US 'cyber analyst' would say or even think anything different. After all Israel is a close US ally so it isn't like they would be interested in "telling the truth". It's like the boy who punches the other boy behind the teacher's back, of course he is not going to rat itself.

So how is this a credible source? Maybe if it came from a team of international security researchers with evidence or something I would deem it a valuable piece of analysis.

I kinda see this "research" as the ones conducted by Microsoft to evaluate IE, or Google to do so with Chrome and, oh surprise, they always come ahead. More like a political thing to say than any actual useful information or analysis being brought to light.

Re:Really? (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333108)

Well only if you assume that US citizens are incapable of talking bad about the US.

Considering Slashdot is slight more anti-American than the Taliban that's obviously not true.

Re:Really? (5, Insightful)

MimeticLie (1866406) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333130)

Except that this guy is a US Air Force analyst.

So it's not a case of assuming a US citizen couldn't speak ill of the US; more a case of assuming that if the military is paying him to say this, it wants this version of events propagated (note that the piece doesn't provide any evidence pointing to the Russians. His argument is basically, "Well, they could have. And if we make a bunch of assumptions, they might have wanted to as well".).

I live in Russia (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333088)

And it's unlikely the government could be bothered with this elaborate conspiracy, the modus operandi seems to be to take Iranian money and just never finish the projects since off the record Russia doesn't really like Iran anymore than anybody else does. Probably what really happened is that USA or Israel tracked down some Russians working on the project and gave them some giant piles of money in order to do plant some virus they'd made. After this went through a lot of Russian scientists got scared because Iran was interrogating everyone to try and find out who was responsible.

Having said that a lot of people think Iran wont nuke Israel because that'd kill arabs too, or that they're not insane or that USA/Russia has nukes too so it's no different. The main difference is someone like Putin is primarily interested in being a crime boss, he has no inherent desire to wipe some places he doesn't like such as Washington DC off the map. Iran on the other hand does when not slaughtering their own people does foreign policy things that don't really make sense like bombing some Jews in Argentina which had no practical benefit for Iran. They're rather juvenile as can be seen by the way they make their cute little American flag with skulls instead of stars last week. I think it's more likely they'd try to detonate a bomb through the Lebanese border to make things look more ambiguous than launch a traceable missile from Tehran. Yes that'd kill a lot of muslims too, but so did their chaining soldiers together and forcing them to march into gas attacks strategies during the war with Iraq.

Re:I live in Russia (1)

Talence (4962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333442)

Nuking in general is a losing proposition. The principles of MAD still apply. Nukes are most valuable when never used.

Re:I live in Russia (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333486)

Generally yes, but not always. During the 80s Iran officially hated Israel but bought millions of dollars in weapons from them since Israel was more worried about Iraq then. It's worth noting that the holy ayatollah had more faith in israeli weapons than allah. Some parts of the Iranian goverment are probably satisfied just lording it over their own populace and living the high life. Some of the more irrational ones however who have a history of doing stuff that makes no sense (bombing argentina, denying the Holocaust, trying to kill some saudi diplomat) probably would enjoy the opportunity to forget mad and try bring back the twelth imam to town. The other risk is if the ayatollah or someone finds out he only has a few years to live from cancer or sth and wants some entertainment on his way out. Also as said they might try avoid MAD by some primitive detonation through the insecure Lebanese border.

Iran is really screwed up worse than the corrupt shah could ever do... at least he liberated woman and stuff, all this trash about the green movement that the opposition suddenly was turned into liberal heroes by the western media really forgot to mention that a lot of these guys who got scammed out of some votes were the same guys slaughtering iranians by the tens of thousands during the 80s.

suicide bombers do not care about MAD (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38334010)

and neither did Hitler (the ultimate 'suicide bomber')

we cannot trust any government with nuclear weapons, but every government will eventually have an arsenal. what is the solution?
find a spaceship to fly to another planet, and study the human mind and social organizations so as to create systems which minimize the chance for a repeat of the self-immolation events like World War II, and the coming nuclear holocaust.

Re:I live in Russia (1)

bytesex (112972) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333496)

They're being 'juvenile' because they're playing for their own crowd. Iran's leaders are sitting on a time-bomb of youngsters that don't like 'em very much either. By inventing plots they try to keep 'em still.

Re:I live in Russia (4, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333618)

Having said that a lot of people think Iran wont nuke Israel because that'd kill arabs too

Iran couldn't care less about what happens to the Arabs. Iranians are different ethnically, culturally and religiously (Shia vs Sunni), and there's no love lost between the two. Indeed, it is debatable whether Israel is really Iran's enemy #1 (other than in propaganda), or whether their neighboring Sunni majority countries are that.

Re:I live in Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333914)

At last someone pointing that out. This is only obvious to people from the region who live the M.E. life and not some white middle class M.E. analyst.

Re:I live in Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333824)

So now they can sell them more centrifuges! Brilliant.

Occam's Razor (5, Insightful)

cosm (1072588) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333106)

No.

Re:Occam's Razor (2)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333116)

I don't know, I've thought something similar before. If you consider, who else would have such specific knowledge of the Iranian setup? The Russians would have the easiest job of building Stuxnet. Some of the exploits used were bought from the Eastern European black market. What particular reason is there to think that the US or Israel did it?

Re:Occam's Razor (4, Interesting)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333138)

Well, the NYTimes reports proof that it was tested in Israel [nytimes.com] , which makes Russia unlikely.

And who delivers that proof? (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333960)

That is the problem with conspiracy theories, once you start believing in them, you can't stop believing in them. Why believe one piece of "evidence" over another? To many conspiracy theorists are just haters who hate their own country and believe nothing it says and believe everything the other side says without question.

See the drivel posted by AHuxley below. Russia doesn't like Iran, it has been fighting Muslims for decades. Sure, it might be smiling at the US problems in Afghanistan but that doesn't mean it thinks the enemy of its enemy is its friend.

Proof? Russia supplied planes AND pilots to the countries surrounding Israel. However there was a tiny detail that showed their TRUE reasons for being involved. The planes flown by Arabs were just a little bit obsolete. The modern planes had Russian pilots and flew with Russian orders. Russia has NEVER sold tech it itself couldn't easily defeat (and by that Israel or any western nation) to any country they didn't trust to keep the peace. Why do you think America won so easily in Irak? Irak was fighting with hopelessly outdated tech payed with premium dollars. Only the west is stupid enough to sell current generation tech to unstable nations. The Russians KNOW who their enemies are.

So, selling a nuclear reactor for lots of money but also making sure it is never quite effective makes perfect sense. They been doing that for decades.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333190)

Occam's Razor Part II: The Razoring

What do you think is more likely - that the Russian government deliberately disabled Iran, or that the American or Israeli government bought (or otherwise acquired) insider knowledge from Russia?

Re:Occam's Razor (2)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333282)

Russia sells products and services around the world. Why would they stuff up a project they got paid for and what to get done?
Every project Russia brings in on time, on budget ect. is a great showcase to the world - to buy more nation building Russian or Russian related tech.
Its very simple, you pay Russia, big product arrives and works.
Stuxnet seems to be very well tested by people with a deep understanding of a subset of German hardware and very closed US software with the desire to create many problems.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/01/with-stuxnet-did-the-u-s-and-israel-create-a-new-cyberwar-era/ [wired.com]

Re:Occam's Razor (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333624)

What particular reason is there to think that the US or Israel did it?

Because they have a very obvious motive for doing so?

Re:Occam's Razor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333198)

I was just about to say, the most sensible think you can do with secretive information (we will never get the straight facts) is use occams razor.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333320)

Doesn't work, because my pet explanation is the only pet explanation that explains the facts. Hence, by property of uniqueness, it's the explanation selected by Occam's razor. Rinse, lather, repeat.

Re:Occam's Razor (1)

black3d (1648913) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333230)

Occam's Razor suggests someone who has access to the internals network and workings of the plant, and in fact built it, is far more able to write code to attack the network than a third party unfamiliar with their systems. So.. if we're going to strictly apply the rule, then YES.

Re:Occam's Razor (4, Insightful)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333284)

No, Occam's Razor suggests that the obvious enemies of Iran are the obvious culprits, namely US/Israel.

Inventing fairytales about Russian double indirection to damage America is way too complicated, and believing an American intelligence analyst about the fairytale existence of a double indirection by Russia just to attack America's reputation (ie not even a real attack) is even more complicated.

KISS.

Re:Occam's Razor (2)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333324)

The code was too sloppy to be Russian.

Oblig XKCD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333134)

Oblig cu.nniling.us (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333726)

http://cu.nniling.us/865/ [nniling.us]

Try it. You'll like it.

Propaganda (5, Insightful)

da8add1e (1244554) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333136)

all i needed to see was "An anonymous reader writes:" and the-diplomat.com, this is blatant propaganda -100 score It has no newsworthy merit is inaccurate in many ways as has already been pointed out by others (centrifuge's causing meltdown???) i know america is pissed about getting caught red handed with this, and also about the missile shield debacle http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/24/us-russia-medvedev-missiledefence-idUSTRE7AN1NE20111124 [reuters.com] that's currently ongoing but how is aggravating Russia going to help in either matter?

Re:Propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333214)

Yeah, it's propaganda because it doesn't fit your world view. Just because your puny narrow mind can't perceive of anyone else in the world being tricky or devious doesn't mean they aren't.

Re:Propaganda (4, Insightful)

Dails (1798748) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333238)

I'm pretty sure that nobody was caught with a hand of any color, which is basically why stuxnet was such a significant piece of work. You negate your own credibility by calling this inaccurate propaganda when you, in one poorly-constructed sentence, make inaccurate and baseless accusations.

Those PLC controllers (1)

bytesex (112972) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333144)

Were bought with money from an ATM machine, by an employee of the department of redundancy department, who almost forgot his PIN number.

So what (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333150)

better way to maintain U.S. interests, and innocence, than to plant a worm with digital U.S.-Israeli fingerprints that look Russian made?

The Iranians wrote it themselves . . . (3, Insightful)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333180)

Their scientists are under a lot of pressure from the government Mullahs to finally get that bomb finished. Faced with insurmountable technical problems, the scientists decided to make it look like their project was sabotaged by their enemies: Israel and the US. So they wrote a virus and infected themselves with it.

So now their scientists have some more time, and the Mullahs are happy, because they can play the thing up with their own people and the international theater.

Ditto on that US drone thingie.

If you don't like that one, I'll half-bake another wacko conspiracy theory the next time this story pops up again.

Maybe I could make the "27 Club" responsible . . . ? Robert Johnson, Brian Jones, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse are not really dead, but are writing viruses on Marlon Brando's island near Tahiti . . .

Re:The Iranians wrote it themselves . . . (2)

black3d (1648913) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333224)

Considering they have told their people that carrion birds circling over their decimated, poorly irrigated land are "zionist vulture spies", this would hardly surprise me.

Still haven't gotten over 1945... (0)

LanceUppercut (766964) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333188)

It is not news to anyone that we are currently living through a massive wave of anti-Russian propaganda cooked by the rampant Nazi lobby inside the GOP. However, I have to admit this particular piece is too primitive even for those guys. "U.S. Air Force cyber analyst"? Sounds like John "Adolfie" McCain to me...

Re:Still haven't gotten over 1945... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333234)

Yeah, McCain is a Nazi and the GOP has a "Nazi lobby."

What the fuck is wrong with you?

P.S. The "anti-Russian propaganda" you speak of is actually anti-Putin propaganda. Who is a very powerful runner up behind Putin's party? Just FYI, it's not any party that would ever ally with the west. Find the name for me. Then tell me who is cooking up all of that anti-Putin propaganda.. then tell me who runs the news rooms of the west. I'll give you a headstart; they're not Nazi's.

yeah. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333710)

Just FYI, it's not any party that would ever ally with the west.

and thats the reason behind the anti-russian, anti-putin propaganda.

Re:Still haven't gotten over 1945... (1)

Dails (1798748) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333246)

This would, in fact, be news to everyone. This sentence:

a massive wave of anti-Russian propaganda cooked by the rampant Nazi lobby inside the GOP.

is SO ridiculous that it sounds like something you'd say while playing the Steve Jackson game Illuminati, where you frequently say things like "The FBI, using the Boy Scouts, will try to control the South American Nazis aided by 10 million dollars from the Swiss Bankers."

What terrifying is that you might actually believe your point of view to be common sense accepted by everyone. Yikes.

tinker tailor soldier spy (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333272)

Could this be part of a marketing campaign?

"In the bleak days of the Cold War, espionage veteran George Smiley is forced from semi-retirement to uncover a Soviet agent within MI6's echelons." http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1340800/ [imdb.com]

Just joking...

Hahahahahaha!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333318)

The fox says it's the hen house....

Why assume a nation-state is behind this? (5, Interesting)

Darth Cider (320236) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333382)

It's just assumed that Stuxnet is SOOOO advanced that only a nation-state could devise this zero-day infiltration into the centrifuge system of Iran.

Why assume that nation-states are behind it, and not corporations? A lot of companies would be hard hit if Iran became a threat to stability. Even major defense contractors, who profit from building weapons, would see little upside in a conflict with Iran.

The news and the internet buzz all say that it has to be a government backed thing, but what if it is simpler than that? It is far simpler to imagine that a private concern is behind it. They can pay for the talent. They have as much at stake as any government.

Re:Why assume a nation-state is behind this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333432)

It's just assumed that Stuxnet is SOOOO advanced that only a nation-state could devise this zero-day infiltration into the centrifuge system of Iran.

No. It's assumed it was a nation because of the evidence and because it's nations that have an interest in this.

Why assume that nation-states are behind it, and not corporations? A lot of companies would be hard hit if Iran became a threat to stability. Even major defense contractors, who profit from building weapons, would see little upside in a conflict with Iran.

No, the defense industry loves wars because they're profitable.

Re:Why assume a nation-state is behind this? (1)

Darth Cider (320236) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333516)

No, there is a kind of conflict that even weapons dealers don't profit from. The kind that sends the stock market crashing to new lows. The kind that ruins all of one's trading partners. A conflict with Iran would be terrible for business for everyone in the free world. If my point wasn't clear, that's my point again - that the ones who really have the most to lose in a conflict with Iran would be private enterprises, not nation-states.

Re:Why assume a nation-state is behind this? (1)

Darth Cider (320236) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333536)

Wrong. A conflict with Iran would not profit even defense contractors. The war in Iraq was different - it was profitable because there was no threat to international security. A conflict with Iran, which would be presumptively nuclear, would be an armageddon scenario, and markets would crash. Weapons builders would not fare better in such a conflict than if there had been no conflict. I don't think it's clear to people that private enterprises have more to lose than governments in such a scenario. They have more to gain from Stuxnet than governments do.

Re:Why assume a nation-state is behind this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333790)

Why assume that nation-states are behind it, and not corporations?

Looking how US congress is run, the "nation-state" and "corporation" is the same entity.

Oblig. :-3 (0)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333388)

In Soviet Russia, our cyberwarfare mean it stux to be YOU!

Great conspiracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333446)

All down to the subliminal URL http://the-diplomat.com/2011/12/10/was-russia-behind-stuxnet/?all=true

It was me! (1)

FenixBrood (760690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333552)

How do you know it was not me? That I created stuxnet and make it look like the US/Israel so everybody thinks it was the Russians. Nobody would not suspect it. I didnt try to reverse engeieer the program and the Siemens parts can be bought over ebay.

US troll machine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333628)

Stopped reading at "says US airforce"

nuclear gangsterism? (3, Insightful)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333876)

Really? "nuclear gangsterism"? This is a pretty specific phrase, out of a specific book. It doesn't exist anywhere else on the internet but in summaries about that book, and in this slashdot article. Anyone care to comment on how this phrase ended up in the slashdot summary?

Ewoks to the rescue! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38333908)

Send in the chimps!

as far as you could throw one (1)

nibbles2004 (761552) | more than 2 years ago | (#38333950)

its quite funny speaking from Europe, as the majority of the post's so far seem to portray Russian as some benign country and the US as evil. As a european we distrust the Russian's a lot more than the American's, i.e never accept a cup of tea from a Russian.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...