Hacker News Reader

Comment by manigandham | Hacker News Reader

The Wired article on Stuxnet remains one of the best long-form stories I've ever read: https://www.wired.com/2011/07/how-digital-detectives-deciphe...

The criticism here seems to be mostly academic about not using the most advanced obfuscation while completely ignoring the actual objective and just how many obstacles were overcome.

The mission used several 0-days and stolen signing keys to get into a secret foreign air-gapped nuclear arms laboratory under a deadline and ruin the machinery while it kept reporting everything was fine. I dont see how this is anything short of amazing.

View on HN

Yep, I worked in Windows Servicing at the time it came out, there were at least 4 separate completely unknown-at-the-time exploits in Stuxnet. They most likely stole the signing certs by dropping USB keys in an office park in Taiwan, all of the stolen certs were from companies which shared a particular parking lot

Kim Zetter's article evolved into the book Countdown to Zero Day

https://smile.amazon.com/Countdown-Zero-Day-Stuxnet-Digital/...

Here's a good documentary about Stuxnet as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGGxqjpka-U

Yeah, with a headline like that, I was expecting an article about the international implications regarding why/how something like Stuxnet is even created and deployed in the first place. The technical merits of the operation are the absolute last thing to be embarrassed about.

I don't understand.

Do you really think that a military operation that avoided nuclear proliferation without killing a single human life or causing environmental damage is something to be ashamed of?

Obama et al did this by signing the JCPoA. No need for computer virus.

Yeah this definitely read to me like a click bait title and article. The shortfalls seem trivial in the grand scheme of what was accomplished.

Is anyone actually claiming it was a nuclear arms laboratory?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com