
US 'launched cyber-attack on Iran weapons systems' - alexanderdmitri
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48735097
======
tastroder
There's four or five lines of pretty unsubstantiated content in there relating
to a "cyber-attack" that might be relevant for HN.

Besides the weird rehashing of "they're building nukes" propaganda, the linked
articles [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-
security/with-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-
security/with-trumps-approval-pentagon-launched-cyber-strikes-against-
iran/2019/06/22/250d3740-950d-11e9-b570-6416efdc0803_story.html) and
[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/22/us/politics/us-iran-
cyber...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/22/us/politics/us-iran-cyber-
attacks.html) seem much more informative in that regard.

------
an-allen
There are a few things that are strange about this. Number 1 - it was weapons
systems they attacked, so I'm going to assume you reach those through
microwave somehow. If thats the case, simply storing your weapons in a faraday
cage until you are ready to use them is a pretty effective countermeasure?

Secondly, why would you publicise you engaged in a bit of cyber warfare -
particularly successful cyber warfare. This literally notifies the enemy to
upgrade/fix/patch/take counter measures, solidifies their defenses, and
provides a clear aggressor.

Amateur hour from the CISA... or perhaps someone needs a public win to justify
another round of funding increases...

Oh look.. [https://www.cyberscoop.com/house-bill-boost-cisa-
funding-335...](https://www.cyberscoop.com/house-bill-boost-cisa-
funding-335-million/)

335 Million Dollars! Such a corrupt system.

~~~
hacknat
You publicize your attacks when you’re trying to start a war. Why is there a
huge US troop build up in the Middle East right now? Make no mistake, John
Bolton wants a war with Iran, he has said so in the past. This is exactly what
happened with Iraq as well.

~~~
cmurf
"I still think the decision to overthrow Saddam was correct." John Bolton four
years ago. He's the guy who got the current POTUS to withdraw from JCPOA. And
he's the guy who got DPRK to withdraw from the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty.

He hates treaties. He believes in ordering countries what to do, and
intimidating or bombing them if they don't comply, and treaties make that
difficult.

He's delusional, not a credible person, and in no way has he been
rehabilitated.

~~~
Fjolsvith
Bolton is the perfect guy to give media shrills something to talk about while
working peace deals in the background.

~~~
cmurf
No he's not. He's the guy you get to sabotage peace deals. That's his entire
history in government.

~~~
Fjolsvith
Huh. That sounds so "deep state-y".

~~~
hacknat
Why is that deep state-y? He doesn’t even make a secret about it. He has
literally said he wants regime change in Iran no matter what.

------
okusername
Is that smart? Isn't that just a free pentest for Iran, so they can close some
holes?

~~~
gruez
Or say you launched a cyber attack, but really you didn't, then they waste
their time looking for non-existent backdoors. Considering the NSA has some
pretty deep implants (uefi level, hard drive firmware level, iot/embedded)
that can pass through airgaps (see: stuxnet), it'll be quite expensive to do a
full sweep.

~~~
sapilla
If they do manage a full sweep, the world is one step closer to spyware-free
consumer hardware ^^

------
berkut
Probably using a continuation of the Suter program:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suter_(computer_program)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suter_\(computer_program\))

~~~
jnurmine
After some googling for what Suter is, it seems to be a system which detects
electronic emissions sources, compares these with the known emitters to ID
them, then somehow it accesses the enemy communications network to
jam/disrupt/monitor the appropriate emitters.

But... I'm a bit puzzled.

The implication of a Suter-style "cyber attack" (not just dumb radar jamming)
is that the target military communications network is compromised enough for
the attacker to intelligently DoS certain nodes in it, send bogus packets or
sniff traffic.

If this was the case here, then the USA basically told Iran that the Iranian
infrastructure used for communicating with some of its military assets is
compromised, and the USA showed how much it is compromised, too.

Pointing out weak spots in your enemy's defences sounds like a somewhat
strange thing to do, since the enemy will no doubt fix those omissions rather
quickly.

One reason I can think of was to prevent enterprising third parties from
exploiting the same weak spots.

~~~
berkut
Suter actually (or at least used to ~13 years ago) compromise the CaC / FC
systems from the radar point-of-view itself as the entry-point, so it's not
necessarily over or via conventional networks (i.e. TCP/IP). Older Russian
tech for SAM sites and the such had microwave controllers between the
different components (i.e. multi-static radar), and it was possible to
intercept/gain access/control from here in a shockingly convenient way.

It was essentially similar to (but via radio spectrum as opposed to light)
gaining access to a police speed camera by firing light at the camera sensor,
gaining control of it, and then re-programming it to either do nothing useful,
or even in extreme cases take license plate pictures of police cars going
under the speed limit. Sounds impossible (and likely is for my camera
example), but...

I imagine in the mean time more modern Russian systems are now much more
hardened to this type of attack, so maybe the situation is different...

------
mpweiher
The part I don’t get is the “in retaliation for shooting down a drone”.

If the drone was operating over Iranian territory, Iran is well within their
rights to shoot it down. What would the US do with an Iranian drone operating
over US territory? Over sensitive military sites?

~~~
onewhonknocks
If.

------
hacknat
Publicizing a low level attack on a weapons system is a ham fisted attempt at
ratcheting, and it will probably work. I think it’s fairly likely we end up in
a war with Iran, since Bolton has pretty much said that’s what he wants.

------
1337cyb3rD00D
On some level, you have to figure any country operating in an atmosphere of
sustained, overt adversity would have long since divested themselves from any
amount of trust placed in areas of technology that one might consider "cyber"
oriented.

------
discordance
I wonder how effective they were after the learnings Iran would have made
after Stuxnet

------
quotz
To europeans its quite strange how easily the US would go to war... I guess
this is a product of big oil and weapon lobbying, because theyre the only ones
that benefit from this

~~~
mynameishere
Yeah, right. Try Israel and (to a much smaller degree) the Kingdom.

~~~
quotz
To be honest, Israel is very very aggressive in terms of warfare and they’re
only doing it so that they take more land... On the other hand the UK is just
a puppet of USA... and this is coming from someone who lives in UK

~~~
wbl
You might want to look again at 1973 or the Southern Lebanon wars. Israel has
been very restrained compared to what the US would do if Mexico was shelling a
border town now and again.

~~~
quotz
Luckily for the mexicans, theyre not being invaded by their neighbours, and
their land has been just fine since recent history

------
lota-putty
Majoritarianism.

People will talk pro-USA if they're in majority here.

------
ncmncm
Joke's on the US: Iran has no need for its weapons systems. They have no
enemies except the US, which prefers to wage economic war, aside from its
"death from the sky" drones.

(No, Israel doesn't count. That's just a grudge.)

~~~
flyinglizard
Huh? Iran is involved in at least four armed conflicts at the moment.

~~~
Udik
Wikipedia lists two: Syria civil war and Iraq civil war. In both instances in
cooperation with the legitimate goverment of the nation, and against ISIL.

~~~
flyinglizard
They are sponsoring the Houthis in Yemen, Hizbollah in Lebanon and some of the
Palestinian organizations in Gaza (Islamic Jihad if I’m not mistaken).

I’m not even counting the allegations EU nations made against Iran for
attempted terrorism in EU mainland.

~~~
Udik
Sponsoring. So you count USA as participant in the Yemen war, in the Gaza
blockade and in the illegal occupation of Palestine? They're sponsoring Israel
and Saudi Arabia and supplying them with money and weapons.

~~~
ceejayoz
> So you count USA as participant in the Yemen war, in the Gaza blockade and
> in the illegal occupation of Palestine?

Absolutely, yes. Why would you not?

------
bin0
It's about darn time. Regardless of the whole "nuke" situation, Iran has been
a thorn in the side of companies for years. Between them and North Korea,
civilian operations are regularly crippled and data stolen. I even know a
company that got ransomware twice, both times from the North Koreans (company
paid the first time, so they went back after them). Most of the time,
companies don't widely disclose this (except to affected parties), so you
don't hear about it, but it's very much out there and widespread (according to
the FBI agents involved in this case and what I have heard). China and Russia
do it too.

The FBI classifies such things as acts of terror, yet we have done nothing to
protect our own companies. If Iran wants to keep attacking our nation to
compensate for lost oil money, it is about time we start crippling their
infrastructure until they simply have no way to send a packet to the outside
world.

