Stuxnet: Target Bushehr?

[davidbfpo]

A detailed explanation of the two versions of Stuxnet; for a layman like moi, just about followed: 'Stuxnet's Secret Twin: The real program to sabotage Iran's nuclear facilities was far more sophisticated than anyone realized'.

There are some, different passages; the best is:

The system might have keep Natanz's centrifuges spinning, but it also opened them up to a cyberattack that is so far-out, it leads one to wonder whether its creators might have been on drugs.

It ends with:

In other words, blowing the cover of this online sabotage campaign came with benefits. Uncovering Stuxnet was the end of the operation, but not necessarily the end of its utility. Unlike traditional Pentagon hardware, one cannot display USB drives at a military parade. The Stuxnet revelation showed the world what cyberweapons could do in the hands of a superpower. It also saved America from embarrassment. If another country -- maybe even an adversary -- had been first in demonstrating proficiency in the digital domain, it would have been nothing short of another Sputnik moment in U.S. history. So there were plenty of good reasons not to sacrifice mission success for fear of detection.

We're not sure whether Stuxnet was disclosed intentionally. As with so many human endeavors, it may simply have been an unintended side effect that turned out to be critical. One thing we do know: It changed global military strategy in the 21st century.

Link:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...tack?page=full

[davidbfpo]

A new thesis about that, to be outlined Tuesday at a security conference in San Francisco, points to a vulnerability in the Iranian facility's supply chain – and may hold lessons for owners of critical infrastructure in the US concerning how to guard their own industrial equipment against cyberattack.

Link:http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Secur...0rTtag.twitter