Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

Substitute any of a thousand critiques of <any language except Lisp|Haskell>, Windows, Linux, you name it that is out in the world getting its job done.




Uncharacteristically facile. The subtext of Nate's post is that while Stuxnet clearly didn't foreclose on Iran's nuclear ambitions, its careless design may have foreclosed on an otherwise viable nonviolent method of shutting down the harmful industrial processes of other rogue states.

Nate is saying, take exactly one step back and look at Stuxnet and you see that it has two jobs: one†, to retard the Iranian nuclear program, and two, to do so at a minimal cost to future intelligence activities. At that second objective it seems to have demonstrably failed; there are teenagers who have done better jobs of concealing the payloads of malware.

If you believe all the Stuxnet press.


I like your thinking, but the tone of the post doesn't communicate that point as well as your comment.

Now as to point two, I read elsewhere in these comments that one possible advantage of Stuxnet's simplicity is that whomever launched this attack can launch another one with a higher level of stealth.

You are the expert, not I. I only know that in Sports this is often a good strategy. Hold off on your strongest plays until the opposition has proven they can stop your average plays.


The problem with that approach is the game is over once your infection route is revealed. You don't get to play your stronger plays. No one will attach a USB flash drive to any Iranian or North Korean industrial computer now.

Why burn a perfectly good vector when you don't have to?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: