unoptimized

This analysis of Stuxnet, courtesy of Symantec, is quite interesting. The level of resources and competence to make this happen is indicative of far more than hackers or criminals. I have said it before. Let there be no mistake. Welcome to the world of state sponsored information warfare.

A short point on the resources needed to make this happen from the above paper:

“In order to achieve this goal the creators amassed a vast array of components to increase their chances of success. This includes zero-day exploits, a Windows rootkit, the first ever PLC rootkit, antivirus evasion techniques, complex process injection and hooking code, network infection routines, peer-to-peer updates, and a command and control interface.”

and

“Attackers would need to setup a mirrored environment that would include the necessary ICS hardware, such as PLCs, modules, and peripherals in order to test their code. The full cycle may have taken six months and five to ten core developers not counting numerous other individuals, such as quality assurance and management.”

and

“In addition their malicious binaries contained driver files that needed to be digitally signed to avoid suspicion. The attackers compromised two digital certificates to achieve this task. The attackers would have needed to obtain the digital certificates from someone who may have physically entered the premises of the two companies and stole them, as the two companies are in close physical proximity.”

What this means is that the team that pulled this off used multiple vulnerabilities not known in the wild, stole 2 digital certificates from Taiwanese companies and most probably had a mock setup of the industrial control systems of the target plant. This is non-trivial.

Let me leave you with this thought from the paper: “Also, the attackers likely completed their initial attack by the time they were discovered.”

cheers.

1. 9/27/2010: “A Justice Department investigation has found that FBI agents, including several supervisors, cheated on an important test covering the bureau’s policies for conducting surveillance on Americans.”

2. 9/27/2010: “The troubling review of the exam on surveillance rules follows Fine’s report last week on the FBI’s scrutiny of domestic activist groups. That investigation found that the FBI gave inaccurate information to Congress and the public when it claimed a possible terrorism link to justify monitoring an anti-war rally in Pittsburgh in 2002. That IG report also criticized the factual basis for opening or continuing FBI domestic terrorism investigations of some other nonviolent left-leaning groups.”

3. 9/27/2010: “U.S. Wants to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet” and “Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.”

4. 9/24/2010: “F.B.I. Searches Antiwar Activists’ Homes” and ““It is rather patently political,” said Ted Dooley, a lawyer who represents Mick Kelly, a food service worker at the University of Minnesota and one of those whose homes was searched. “My client denies any wrongdoing.””

1. and 2. from: AP

3. from New York Times

4. from New York Times

from the genius at: A Softer World

“The FDA says it cannot require a label on the genetically modified food once it determines that the altered fish is not “materially” different from other salmon – something agency scientists have said is true.

Perhaps more surprising, conventional food makers say the FDA has made it difficult for them to boast that their products do not contain genetically modified ingredients.”

…

“”Extra labeling only confuses the consumer,” said David Edwards, director of animal biotechnology at the Biotechnology Industry Organization. “It differentiates products that are not different. As we stick more labels on products that don’t really tell us anything more, it makes it harder for consumers to make their choices.”"

from: The Washington Post

by Fareed Zakaria (Newsweek, 9/4/2010)

“In the past, the U.S. government has built up for wars, assumed emergency authority, and sometimes abused that power, yet always demobilized after the war. But this is a war without end. When do we declare victory? When do the emergency powers cease?

Conservatives are worried about the growing power of the state. Surely this usurpation is more worrisome than a few federal stimulus programs. When James Madison pondered this issue, he came to a simple conclusion: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germs of every other … In war, too, the discretionary power of the executive is extended … and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.

“No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual war,” Madison concluded.”

see here for the full article.

Good breeding can go along way. Still, flossing regularly is strongly recommended.

President Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Prize winner, has now authorized the assassination of an American citizen.