Interesting.
This is pedantic and adds no value. In what sense could the precise definition of "nation state" matter? in this context everyone understands the phrase in exactly the way it's meant -- a resourceful national government.
Some people can’t stop fighting “blasphemy,” even if they aren’t in a classic religion.
These are well dispersed throughout the world...
Also French has an official body that authorizes words.
By who? People who never provide evidence for their claims?
> There will other things happening because of this and this could impact other nations in a postive manner.
While it's certainly possible that the FSB is playing 59-dimensional chess, here, hoping for a true butterfly-effect sequence of causality, I think the onus is on you to demonstrate that.
By lots of countreies. The US charged 4 chinese military officers for hacking Equifax.
> While it's certainly possible that the FSB is playing 59-dimensional chess, here, hoping for a true butterfly-effect sequence of causality, I think the onus is on you to demonstrate that.
You seem to think that it would require multiple things to fall into place to benefit a foreign country. Say you want to manipulate the price of the fuel. Increasing the costs of transport would do that.
This isn't even a blip on the radar of global fuel prices. It is completely lost in the noise. [3]
[1] Or the OPM, since it was kind enough to have lists of 'all spies operating abroad' on its intranet. Whoops.
[2] I mean, you could also just pose as a landlord or employer, and ask for credit checks on them, it costs ~$30 per query, but it is what it is.
[3] If the FSB really wants to increase demand for fuel, they should try stalling a junker or two on an interstate bridge... Imagine the fuel wasted from all the cars idling, or taking detours!
End of the story is intelligence agencies around the world have been bulking up for cyber warfare for at least a decade. Russia and China have been been fingered repeatedly for cyber attacks. It is not completely outlandish that one of them is behind it for whatever reason. I'm pretty sure the entire point of these agencies is that we don't know what do or why they do them.
I don't think there's any evidence this was state-sponsored, or even state-approved, but "oh there's better things to do" is not a good argument in the least.
Also shouting 'No Evidence' is a typical tactic the propagandists use to cast doubt and muddy the waters; surely the attackers would love to see what evidence is available, so they can adapt - that's why evidence is largely kept private.
What makes you think propagandists on our side would never use lack of evidence to make whatever they want up, and cite your exact reason as justification?
This is medium-scale hooliganism in the sense that the end result isn't going to accomplish more than a dedicated idiot with a toolbox, and a grudge against gas pipelines couldn't achieve. IT will clean things up, operations will resume, life will go on.
Not to mention that this gives the industry another, rather low-stakes kick in the ass to take IT security seriously.