They're waiting for you Gordon... - by faetal
faetal on 20/3/2012 at 15:11
Actually, only today I was assuring my supervisor that nothing will go wrong in the 6 remaining weeks I have on the project. Cue things probably going wrong in the worst possible way at the worst possible moment. I swear to god that science is where sod's law spends most of its time.
Koki on 20/3/2012 at 15:25
Quote Posted by faetal
Actually, only today I was assuring my supervisor that nothing will go wrong in the 6 remaining weeks I have on the project.
Prepare for...
...Unforeseen Consequences
Sombras on 20/3/2012 at 17:07
Quote Posted by faetal
Actually, only today I was assuring my supervisor that
nothing will go wrong in the 6 remaining weeks I have on the project.
You poked the beast with a pointed stick. Good luck! :D
SubJeff on 20/3/2012 at 19:39
Quote Posted by demagogue
worm virus developed by Israeli & American cyberwar gurus
Is there proof of this yet? I thought it was all speculation. You are talking about Stuxnet, right?
faetal on 20/3/2012 at 19:41
Well, I'm back at the lab after hours and will likely be here until 10 pm. If anything is going to go awry, the rule book of clichés says it will be tonight. I may report in with a superpower tomorrow, or you'll just wake up to news reports of a glowing crater with life forms emerging from it in the Bedford, UK area.
demagogue on 20/3/2012 at 19:59
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Is there proof of this yet? I thought it was all speculation. You are talking about Stuxnet, right?
It's in the gray area of a violation of international law, so not something a state will ever admit or allow proof of ... actually, back up, nobody cares much about that anyway (that didn't hold anyone back admitting killing Osama); they're probably much more interested in strategic secrecy so they don't give away vulnerabilities that would compromise future missions. And obviously the Iranians have an overwhelming interest to downplay it (even then press releases of "technical difficulties and delays" still got out).
If you read all the articles and official responses on it, I think it's clear it happened more or less as planned. There was an article a few days ago in the NYTimes about the challenges of spying in Iran, but it said in the US & Israeli intelligence community there was a debate about how much the operation actually set the nuclear program back (there was another article referencing it today too about the pessimistic wargames with the Iran scenario, much of which turns on how fast Iran gets its program back in operation). So there are uncertainties there, but it made a point that both sides are on board with it setting the program back at least a year. It doesn't make sense to even have that kind of debate as something newsworthy and a major part of Iran policy unless the program was really hit hard.
That said I wasn't there myself, lol. I just had to imagine this guy Farrokh there and it going down or the joke didn't work.
PeeperStorm on 20/3/2012 at 23:42
Fascinating! I never suspected such things could be.
Al_B on 21/3/2012 at 00:08
Yes - but the most sinister part of it for me is that "Farrokh" possibly didn't realise that anything was wrong until it was too late. I'm happy for someone who knows more about this than I do but from the sketchy knowledge I have picked up the virus was designed to infect the controllers and continually spin up and spin down the equipment in a way that would damage it but it would continue to report that it was operating normally.
I'm a little dubious because anyone who has worked with any mechanical equipment soon learns to listen to it (even if it's just to change gear in your car) and the idea of globally releasing a virus in order to target something as specific as a model of PLC controller seems very scatter-gun. Even if that was the plan, singling out that specific target would probably have an adverse affect as it would inspire a backlash so even if it set things back a year the long term repercussions would probably be much worse.
Anyway - I've now retreated to a safe distance from Bedford. Not for any other reason that it's the most sensible course of action to take even if there's no danger.
demagogue on 21/3/2012 at 01:43
By backlash and repercussions do you mean Iranians being even more pissed at the US & Israel (if that were possible)? Anyway, along those lines, that's what was so interesting about the wargames (
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/world/middleeast/united-states-war-game-sees-dire-results-of-an-israeli-attack-on-iran.html) article today. Apparently if they get intel that the program is picking back up, Israel is going to strike sooner or later, Iran is going to lash out at the US whether it was part of the strike or not, then the US has to retaliate, and it all turned out very pessimistically from there. Then the US is worried a showdown like that might be coming sooner rather than later, which is why it's making news now. The story was a downer just because I thought we went through all this last year or so and everybody was on board that war with Iran would royally suck (including Iran), and now it seems like we're inching towards it anyway whether or not we want it. (I don't mean to be hijacking the thread. It's just interesting stuff going on I've been thinking about.)
Al_B on 21/3/2012 at 08:29
Quote Posted by demagogue
By backlash and repercussions do you mean Iranians being even more pissed at the US & Israel (if that were possible)?
Essentially, yes. The posturing that's been going on with both sides is probably necessary from a political perspective. However, a direct attack whether that's physical or covertly via a targeted virus can easily be used to gather support for retaliation.
