Skip to main content

Really remarkable reporting here by the New York Times.  Political intrigue, just war theory, and high-stakes spy games all at play.

http://www.nytimes.com/...

Soon the two countries had developed a complex worm that the Americans called “the bug.” But the bug needed to be tested. So, under enormous secrecy, the United States began building replicas of Iran’s P-1 centrifuges, an aging, unreliable design that Iran purchased from Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani nuclear chief who had begun selling fuel-making technology on the black market. Fortunately for the United States, it already owned some P-1s, thanks to the Libyan dictator, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.

When Colonel Qaddafi gave up his nuclear weapons program in 2003, he turned over the centrifuges he had bought from the Pakistani nuclear ring, and they were placed in storage at a weapons laboratory in Tennessee. The military and intelligence officials overseeing Olympic Games borrowed some for what they termed “destructive testing,” essentially building a virtual replica of Natanz, but spreading the test over several of the Energy Department’s national laboratories to keep even the most trusted nuclear workers from figuring out what was afoot.

Those first small-scale tests were surprisingly successful: the bug invaded the computers, lurking for days or weeks, before sending instructions to speed them up or slow them down so suddenly that their delicate parts, spinning at supersonic speeds, self-destructed. After several false starts, it worked.

...

Getting the worm into Natanz, however, was no easy trick. The United States and Israel would have to rely on engineers, maintenance workers and others — both spies and unwitting accomplices — with physical access to the plant. “That was our holy grail,” one of the architects of the plan said. “It turns out there is always an idiot around who doesn’t think much about the thumb drive in their hand.”

In fact, thumb drives turned out to be critical in spreading the first variants of the computer worm; later, more sophisticated methods were developed to deliver the malicious code.

The first attacks were small, and when the centrifuges began spinning out of control in 2008, the Iranians were mystified about the cause, according to intercepts that the United States later picked up. “The thinking was that the Iranians would blame bad parts, or bad engineering, or just incompetence,” one of the architects of the early attack said.

I gotta say, my reaction is: Damn Straight!

Yes, its true, like we were the first nation-state to employ a nuclear weapon...we are now the first nation-state to employ a computer virus to enable physical destruction.  But we did it to prevent the further proliferation of nuclear weapons.  To prevent or at least delay a potentially devastating war.

Its resulted in significant damage, confusion, and setback to Iran's uranium enrichment programs, without the inevitable consequences of attempting the same damage via airstrikes.  Buying time for economic sanctions to do their work, and for diplomats to try and sway Iranian negotiators.

Some estimates say that the virus did MORE damage to Iran's enrichement than any conventional airstrike could hope to accomplish, in part because it was able to do its work without immediately alerting to Iranian technicians that anything was going wrong.

Time and again, our Commander-in-Chief has shown there is a 'third way' in pursuing our national security needs.  Hostage scenarios, hunting Al Qaeda, dismantling the Gaddafi Regime.  Neither impulsively jumping into conflict, nor backing down from threats.  Maximizing gains while minimizing risks to American lives & interests.

In the old debate between Hawk & Dove, he is an Owl.

Stick that in your thumb drive and download it Rumsfeld.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  You know this started under Bush, right? (6+ / 0-)

    Here's the link to the full article.

    http://www.nytimes.com/...

    •  And at the same time "Olympic Games" (4+ / 0-)

      was being ramped up, the U.S. was fighting Russian attempts to have cyber weapon control language crafted in the U.N.

      This is a war crime.  How unsurprising that the chickenhawk contingent of DKos would be happy about it.

      The bourgeoisie had better watch out for me, all throughout this so called nation. We don't want your filthy money, we don't need your innocent bloodshed, we just want to end your world. ~H.R.

      by chipmo on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 08:42:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A "war crime?" No, what happend in Al-Houla... (13+ / 0-)

        is a war crime. Whole families butchered with axes by militias with the support of regular army tanks & artillery.

        This was about PREVENTING war.  Preventing either an Iranian nuclear weapon or a bombing campaign that would kill people and cause conflict.

        Its target was against the specific nuclear facilities against a rogue, terror-sponsoring nation-state that was not meeting its obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it was an explicit and supposedly willing party to.

        Follow Me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/TarantinoDork

        by TarantinoDork on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 08:53:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  War crime? (9+ / 0-)

        You really need to explain, justify and provide some evidence for that assertion, because it certaintly isn't generally accepted as such.

        from a bright young conservative: “I’m watching my first GOP debate…and WE SOUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE!!!!”

        by Catte Nappe on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:01:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think he means "Act of War", which it is (3+ / 0-)

          When the damage was only the loss or theft of intellectual property the concept of "Act of War" was in a grey area. But here we have physical damage being done inside a foreign sovereign state just as if explosives had been attached and detonated.

          As the article says: “Somebody crossed the Rubicon”. It is now clear that Obama was clearly at the helm.

          Between this and the rapidly escalating use of drones as tools of foreign policy, Obama is steering America into uncharted waters.

          •  but if we insist upon calling that an act of war.. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FG, volleyboy1

            ... then we have to do likewise with China's limited cyberattacks against US military and infrastructure targets, which have been conclusively attributed to China.  

            So: how many of the "war crimes" accusers here are willing to follow that principle consistently and go to war against China for doing it to us ?

            "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

            by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:38:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Principle VI of the Nuremberg Charter. (3+ / 0-)

          Crimes against Peace include:
          i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
          ii. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

          Further, the Kambala conference of 2010 defines a crime of aggression as follows:

          Definition of the crime of aggression: Article 8 bis adopted in Kampala defines the individual crime of aggression as the planning, preparation, initiation or execution by a person in a leadership position of an act of aggression. Importantly, it contains the threshold requirement that the act of aggression must constitute a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

          An act of aggression is defined as the use of armed force by one State against another State without the justification of self-defense or authorization by the Security Council. The definition of the act of aggression, as well as the actions qualifying as acts of aggression contained in the amendments (for example invasion by armed forces, bombardment and blockade), are influenced by the UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974.

          "But Stuxnet was not an armed attack!" I hear.  Isn't it?  The purpose of it was SPECIFICALLY to destroy a nuclear enrichment facility.  Physical destruction.  This is what armaments do.  The fact that the weapon is virtual does not change the fact that it causes destructive effects in the world, by design.  It is a weapon.

          Lastly, and this is not a legal argument, but an honest answer is not hard to make: if Iran had created a cyberweapon to destroy a uranium enrichment facility in the U.S., would you question whether or not this was an act of aggression and a violation of international law?

          The bourgeoisie had better watch out for me, all throughout this so called nation. We don't want your filthy money, we don't need your innocent bloodshed, we just want to end your world. ~H.R.

          by chipmo on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:28:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  act of war, yes - war crime, no (6+ / 0-)
            if Iran had created a cyberweapon to destroy a uranium enrichment facility in the U.S., would you question whether or not this was an act of aggression and a violation of international law?
            I have no problem calling it an act of war. Of course we've been in a cold war with Iran since their revolution. Lets remember that the same journalists you're taking at their word with regards to this incident also reported in the past years about Iranian agents providing explosively-formed penetrating IEDs designed to kill Bradley FVs full of US troops to the Iraqi insurgency. How many US citizens died because of Iranian intervention in Iraq?

            I am not an expert in international criminal law, but if an act of industrial sabotage (lets stop adding 'cyber' to everything and acting like its something new) which Iran doesn't even claim harmed or killed a human being is a 'war crime' by some standard than I think the standard for what is a war crime needs to be updated. It devalues serious war crimes like the My Lai massacre to a ludicrous degree.

            "Any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange ... including a public option" President Obama, 7.18.09

            by efraker on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:53:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  excellent point. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              volleyboy1

              What you said: "It devalues serious war crimes like the My Lai massacre to a ludicrous degree."

              "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

              by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:41:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  An interesting different take (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chipmo

            Could Deploying Stuxnet be a War Crime?  He seems to conclude it probably isn't, but largely because the existence of cyber methods is outside the existing rules that are based on old-fashioned physical war threats.

            from a bright young conservative: “I’m watching my first GOP debate…and WE SOUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE!!!!”

            by Catte Nappe on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:54:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yep. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Catte Nappe

              But his arguments for why they are outside the existing rules don't really bear up well, IMO.

              Obviously, given Stuxnet’s distribution beyond Iranian facilities to civilian SCADA systems worldwide, some may question Stuxnet’s compliance with the principle of distinction.  States are supposed to only target military targets, and to avoid using force indiscriminately.  To the extent, that Stuxnet has bounced beyond Iran and infected other SCADA systems, including some in the United States, it does appear indiscriminate.
              Except we have evidence indicating that the fact that it distributed itself beyond Iran was an ERROR, and the intended design was to hit ONLY Iranian facilities.

              As far as the brouhaha over my use of the term war crime, I am not comparing it to My Lai or Benghazi in any way.  But it is an act of aggression that violates terms of peace without a justification of self-defence or authorization of the Security Council.  It violates the spirit of international law and only fails to violate the letter of international law because the U.S. specifically worked to ensure that such international law was never written.  The crimes against peace that I am charging are defined within the very broad realm of actions that are included in the big umbrella "war crime".  If reckless endangerment of public accord and international peace is a preferable term, feel free to substitute.

              The bourgeoisie had better watch out for me, all throughout this so called nation. We don't want your filthy money, we don't need your innocent bloodshed, we just want to end your world. ~H.R.

              by chipmo on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 10:21:14 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  "Crimes against Peace"? (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                erush1345, efraker, G2geek, citizenx

                Hmmm.... that assumes there is peace between nations and that Iran participates in said "peace". Stuxnet was created by the U.S. and Israel to attack Iran's nuke plans. Well what Peace do Iran and Israel have exactly? Aren't there Iranian operatives advising Israel's enemies who engaged in active hostilities?

                What you say there are not? But the Ayatollah Khameinei disagrees with you.

                Earlier this year, Supreme Leader of Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei stressed in explicit remarks Iran's direct involvement in the Palestinian and Lebanese confrontation with Israel, including the Lebanese Summer 2006 33-day resistance against the Zionist regime.

                "Wherever Iran interferes, it announces it in a very straightforward manner. For instance, we interfered in confrontations against Israel, which resulted in the (Lebanese) victory in the 33-day war and (Palestinians' victory in) the 22-day (Gaza) war," Ayatollah Khamenei said, addressing millions of Friday Prayers worshippers on Tehran University Campus in February.

                "In future too, we will support and help everyone who opposes the Zionist regime," the Leader underscored.

                Will you also be charging the Ayatollah with "Crimes against Peace" or will that only be the U.S.?

                Just wondering.

                "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                by volleyboy1 on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 10:44:06 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No, only the US and Israel commit war crimes. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  volleyboy1, citizenx

                  And poor Ahmadinejad is just misunderstood, that's all.  

                  He doesn't really mean "extermination," that was just a translation error that kept getting repeated.  

                  He really is a nice guy after all, if only we would try our hardest to understand him and learn to like him.  

                  /snark

                  "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

                  by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:44:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  O RLY? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FG, volleyboy1, citizenx

        Seems like every time there's news of any successful actions by US military or intel, you're perched on the roof of the barn crowing "War crimes!"

        How'bout telling us what you would have done differently?

        NOTs are cheap, so "I would NOT have done XYZ" doesn't cut it.  Let's hear what you would DO.

        And if you insist on putting limited cyberattacks in the category "acts of war" (as distinct from "acts of espionage" and suchlike) then do you support the US declaring war upon China in response to the numerous limited cyberattacks on US defense infrastructure that have been conclusively traced to China?   Why or why not?

        "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

        by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:23:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  If sending computer viruses a war crime, there (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        volleyboy1, citizenx

        is an awful lot of war criminals out there. Including everyone in Anonymous, for example.

    •  Thanks (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Catte Nappe, Deep Texan, G2geek

      Updated with link, forgot to slip it in there.

      And yes, aware it started under Bush.  The real question is priorities.  The neocon view was this was a waste of time, that we should have declared war yesterday.

      Though I will say, at least on foreign policy issues, Bush started acting somewhat sane in the last 6 months of his Presidency.  Publicly voiced his desire to see Guantanamo closed (though not putting any effort into it)...handled the Georgian crisis mostly with restraint (whereas Cheney AND McCain advocated naked aggression) abandoned Pervez Musharraf as our puppet dictator (thus negating any need to hold off on drone strikes to ante up his political support) and of course signed the SOFA in Iraq with a date certain for complete withdrawal of US troops.

      The last six months of his Presidency, George W. Bush kind of began handling foreign policy like Barack Obama was promising to.

      Follow Me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/TarantinoDork

      by TarantinoDork on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 08:43:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  he had a lot to do with starting the Georgian (0+ / 0-)

        crisis.  Giving them false hope that we would stand behind them against the Russians.  They even named their main highway from the airport to Tbilisi after him.

      •  6 months? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Catte Nappe, G2geek

        Seems to me I remember hearing something about him and Cheney during that time frame..

        I wonder if they had a falling out.

        With Liberty and Justice for the 1%

        by wrights on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:24:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Its clear that they did. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Catte Nappe, volleyboy1, G2geek

          At some point, I'm guessing around the start of the Iraq surge, he stopped paying mind to the neocons, and began listening to the Colin Powell-style moderates.  Starting with replacing Rumsfeld with Robert Gates, and also the departures of Karl Rove and John Bolton.

          Cheney himself points to the moment he wanted a unilateral airstrike on the Syrian nuclear facility we suspected was being built with North Korean help. (Later destroyed by the Israelis in a far more covert way than the neocons would have contemplated)

          With the entire national security team present, Bush asked for a show of hands of support/opposed...only Cheney put his hand up.  The implication being...Bush was letting it be known that the dynamics had changed.

          As Rachel Maddow pointed out...Cheney was conspicuously absent from yesterday's unveiling of Bush's White House portrait.

          I'm not going to say Bush was suddenly King Theoden freed from Saruman's spell...but he began acting rationally and somewhat competently on foreign affairs at some point after the 2006 midterms.

          Follow Me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/TarantinoDork

          by TarantinoDork on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:37:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  understanding Cheney: terror of his own mortality. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Captain C

            The key to the kingdom with Cheney is that he has always had a pure animal terror of his own mortality.

            This is what motivated his efforts to dodge the Vietnam draft.

            And it must have gotten an order of magnitude worse with the early onset of his cardiac problems.  

            All those times Cheney was at an "undisclosed location," I would not be surprised if he was in hospital being treated for panic attacks that could have risked additional cardiac events.

            Cheney's fear of death was also the central driving force in much of our foreign policy acts during the times when he had significant influence.

            Sad, really.  Per recent research on PTSD, he might have been treatable with a combination of MDMA and psychotherapy, followed by a long-term prescription for anti-anxiety meds.  

            "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

            by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:50:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  i would like to believe.... (0+ / 0-)

        .... it was because he felt he could safely shake off the influences of the pernicious neocons at that point.

        "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

        by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:45:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  As usual they wait for the very end (9+ / 0-)

    to hint at the most important bit; the US is by far the most computer dependent/vulnerable nation, and opening this theater of war will likely have unfortunate and ironic, if not unexpected consequences.  This argument has also been made for satellite warfare, and it used to be made for avoiding assassination of foreign leaders.

    •  When the US is blacked out in the middle of winter (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sandino, TJ, Florida Democrat

      and entire cities grind to a halt for days, this may come back to haunt Obama. Blow-back is a bitch.

      Mr. Obama has repeatedly told his aides that there are risks to using — and particularly to overusing — the weapon. In fact, no country’s infrastructure is more dependent on computer systems, and thus more vulnerable to attack, than that of the United States. It is only a matter of time, most experts believe, before it becomes the target of the same kind of weapon that the Americans have used, secretly, against Iran.
      “This is the first attack of a major nature in which a cyberattack was used to effect physical destruction,” rather than just slow another computer, or hack into it to steal data.

      “Somebody crossed the Rubicon,” he said.



      •  If it happens, you'll say its a false flag... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        volleyboy1

        Right?  Not Russia not Iran not China, but some shady plot by the CIA & Mossad...right?

        Follow Me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/TarantinoDork

        by TarantinoDork on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:45:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  the answer to which is.... (0+ / 0-)

        ..... physical separation between critical infrastructure networks and noncritical networks.

        And secure hardware that does not have any end-user-accessible means of connecting data storage devices, whether CDs/DVDs, thumb drives, or whatever.  

        And mandatory INFOSEC training for people whose jobs entail access to critical infrastructure networks, along with criminal statutes that can be brought to bear on those who violate the rules.

        And, and, and.  

        "Oh, but I want to play games on my computer at work!"

        "Oh, but wireless is so convenient!"

        "Oh, but hardened infrastructure costs more!"

        Oh, oh, oh.

        It's probably going to take a regional grid outage and a few thousand resulting casualties before we take this shit seriously.

        Between now and then, the false gods of Convenience and Cost rule the roost.  

        "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

        by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 12:58:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  What goes around comes around. (5+ / 0-)

    Who knows if a similar virus has infected computers in the US?

    For Commerce unit hit by computer virus, hardship of being unplugged has upside

    By Lisa Rein, Published: April 9

    The virus struck in an e-mail 81 days ago, flagged by a federal team that monitors cyberthreats. The target was a small job-development bureau in the Commerce Department. The infiltration was so vicious it put Commerce’s entire computer network at risk.

    To avert a crisis, the Economic Development Administration (EDA) unplugged its operating system — and plunged its staff into the bureaucratic Dark Ages.
    ...
    The number of intrusions into federal systems reported to the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team exploded to 44,000 in fiscal year 2011 from 5,500 in fiscal 2007.
    ...
    Twelve weeks offline and the longest intrusion into a federal network in recent history is still wreaking havoc.

    “We don’t yet have any deeper understanding of what happened,” Commerce Secretary John Bryson said in an interview. “But we have the best resources in the federal government looking into this.”

  •  More of the same old interference (8+ / 0-)

    Yet again showing that on foreign policy there is barely a difference between the parties.  Whether it is a cyber-attack or a drone strike or an invasion, what moral right does the US have to attack another country that has not attacked the US or preparing an imminent attack?  The U.S. should be better than this.

    •  the moral right inheres in... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      volleyboy1

      .... the need to respond to Ahmadinejad's eliminationist rhetoric toward Israel.  

      He talks like Hitler and he starts down the road toward building atomic bombs.  Sorry but those two things can't coexist in the same place.  

      I suppose if we had conducted a drone strike to take out Ahmadinejad, the nay-sayers around here would be saying we should have used a cyberattack against the nuclear weapons program instead.

      Which just goes to show, the emotion of constant dissatisfaction must always find its outlet.  

      "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

      by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 01:08:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh good grief (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Florida Democrat

        So anyone who rattles a sword with puffed up rhetoric renders a war just?

        •  inconsistencies abound (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          volleyboy1

          If Stuxnet was an act of war, then so were the various Chinese cyberattacks on American infrastructure.

          So, if you believe Stuxnet was an act of war, then you'll support declaring war on China.

          Are you so sure you want to go there?

          Your position reminds me of the people in Europe who didn't take Hitler seriously until he invaded Poland.  The difference is that an atomic bomb dropped on Israel would do the whole job in seconds.

          "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

          by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 03:07:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree with you on that (0+ / 0-)

            China's cyber-aggression was an act of war.  I absolutely would support the US imposing economic sanctions on China for its attack on the US.  It does not make sense strategically to attack China militarily, but economically...you bet.  

            •  oh, well at least you're consistent... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Support Civil Liberty

              .... a bunch of folks around here have totally ducked that question.  

              Yes I think we should let the government of China know that they really have to stop mucking about with our infrastructure or we're going to start taking steps to deal with it.  

              Though also, we really need to take steps to fix our stuff, because the usual cause of these things is poorly designed infrastructure and poor security awareness on the part of users.

              "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

              by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 03:58:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  so when we get hit with a cyber attack (8+ / 0-)

    then what, they hate us for our freedom? cry terrorism?  just asking because once again we have given up the high ground.

    I mean we kill with drones without trials, we torture, we invade sovereign nations, now we cyber attack sovereign nations.  Pretty sad state of affairs.

    Bad is never good until worse happens

    by dark daze on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:04:42 AM PDT

  •  " Stick that in your thumb drive... (0+ / 0-)

    and download it Rumsfeld."  Why the cheap shot at Rummy?

    I mean, the guy should be prison but this program was started in 2006, under his watch.  You make it sound like he had rejected it or something.

  •  Quesstion re intro 'graph... (0+ / 0-)

    How do you see this as part of the President's invocation(s) / interpretation of Just War Theory? I don't necessarily disagree, but I think it could use some fuller explanation.

    Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

    by angry marmot on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:31:06 AM PDT

    •  Just that the article recognized... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      volleyboy1, G2geek

      The very real implications of what was undertaken.  Malicious code as a weapon of espionage, and what that could mean for us down the road.  The article addresses it directly as well as discusses internal deliberations about it in the White House.

      Follow Me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/TarantinoDork

      by TarantinoDork on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 09:42:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hmmm... I didn't notice JWT mentioned (0+ / 0-)

        in this particular article, as distinct from the NYT article earlier this week re drones. I see discussion re strategy and the potential for blowback, but little in this particular article on the ethical or legal dimensions (ius ad bellum, ius in bello) of cyber-warfare in light of JWT. No worries...

        Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

        by angry marmot on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 10:09:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  everyone with any background in INFOSEC knows (0+ / 0-)

        ... that this is an inevitability, and the attack vector will be some stupid idiot who wants to play a computer game or watch porn on his machine at work.  

        "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

        by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 01:10:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Better than "Bombs Away"... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    citizenx, G2geek

    Let's see... Computer virus or Killing mass numbers
    people , hmmm which to do?  (/snark)

    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

    by volleyboy1 on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 10:04:18 AM PDT

  •  Just imagine what they could do (0+ / 0-)

    With all the information being collected from the internet and mobile phone traffic.

    Somewhere in the desert, a digital copy of this post will reside mere seconds after I hit the post button.

    But it's all for a good cause. Until the wrong people get their hands on it.

    Awesome.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 10:33:29 AM PDT

    •  as we used to say, "collection is easy... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      koNko

      .... analysis is a bitch."

      Pardon the naughty word but that's what was said.

      They can collect all the infinabytes of data they want, but only the tiniest infinitesimal of it will ever be processed further.  

      None of us is so important that our immortalized data will ever merit a second of anyone's attention.  

      "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

      by G2geek on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 01:14:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Less of a bitch (0+ / 0-)

        If you work in Langley, Va and have the hardware and apps.

        Certainly it is a mountain of crap with a few choice nuggets, but with the right filtering and analytical tools, finding those bits might be easier than you think.

        Fun Stuff

        1
        2
        3
        4
        5

        Conclusion: you are not paranoid.

        What about my Daughter's future?

        by koNko on Sat Jun 02, 2012 at 08:59:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site