[karajorma]

Of course they have. They haven't gotten caught yet and that's when the whining begins.

[Mikes]

Heh, we might be heading for a new case of virtual MAD.


Except... those programs may be a bit more prone to accidents or to escaping into the wild....  than the average actual cruise missile.
Also a bit harder to figure out where it came from when it lands on your head.

[stinkyFeet]

And it'll be known as the "Flame War".

Anyway, sabotage is nothing new nor is spyware.

[headdie]

Heh, we might be heading for a new case of virtual MAD.

I cant see a MAD situation coming out of this.  So long as no one is hurt as a result of one of these attacks and the target's economy is not affected, though possible, it is difficult to justify going to war over.  In fact I see a situation of widespread targeted use of such attacks acting more as virtual spies.  An attack is detected? lots of angry words, talk about sanctions, expel a few diplomats and fund a combined arms war games for a week, or if you have the capability, knock out on of the attackers hacking centers.

[Ghostavo]

So long as no one is hurt as a result of one of these attacks and the target's economy is not affected, though possible, it is difficult to justify going to war over.

But stuxnet damaged equipment.

If, for example, Iran were to launch a strike against an unoccupied parked US aircraft, I'd wager the US would be mighty pissed. To be honest, if I had definite proof of a government (as opposed to an individual) launching that kind of attack (stuxnet) against a government facility, I'd take that as a declaration of war.

Is it really that different if you damage something using a virus or explosives?

[headdie]

the difference is scale, pursue an individual for hacking and all that is effected is the hacker and their loved ones.

pursue a nation too hard and you risk a war, then many die, why? because on nation disabled a warship for a couple of days just because they could.

edit.

what happens if one nation hacks another's nuclear arsenal and launches a missile at the missile's owner's capital?

[Scotty]

With regards your edit, that simply cannot happen unless the nation with the nuke is literally asking someone else to press the button for them.  Nuclear authorization and launching protocols are more physical than they are digital.  You literally cannot launch one simply by computer.

[headdie]

fair enough

[Ghostavo]

the difference is scale, pursue an individual for hacking and all that is effected is the hacker and their loved ones.

pursue a nation too hard and you risk a war, then many die, why? because on nation disabled a warship for a couple of days just because they could.

edit.

what happens if one nation hacks another's nuclear arsenal and launches a missile at the missile's owner's capital?

So if the warship had been disabled by physical means (say a torpedo) instead of a virus, the reaction would be the same?

[headdie]

the difference is scale, pursue an individual for hacking and all that is effected is the hacker and their loved ones.

pursue a nation too hard and you risk a war, then many die, why? because on nation disabled a warship for a couple of days just because they could.

edit.

what happens if one nation hacks another's nuclear arsenal and launches a missile at the missile's owner's capital?

So if the warship had been disabled by physical means (say a torpedo) instead of a virus, the reaction would be the same?

no because that is a clearly defined act of war and is more likely to cause injury and fatality not to mention the loss of the ship

[NGTM-1R]

So if the warship had been disabled by physical means (say a torpedo) instead of a virus, the reaction would be the same?

There are levels of force, as there are of most things. The use of a torpedo is above the use of a virus for a variety of reasons, among them those headdie listed, others being the proximity necessary, the acceptance of various risks involved indicating a stronger commitment, the greater difficulty of repairing physical as opposed to nonphysical damage.

[Mikes]

Considering the state that the financial system is currently in, a hefty dose of Cyberwarfare "Nuke style" might  be the best thing that could happen to it. :coughs:

I cant see a MAD situation coming out of this.  So long as no one is hurt as a result of one of these attacks and the target's economy is not affected, though possible, it is difficult to justify going to war over.  In fact I see a situation of widespread targeted use of such attacks acting more as virtual spies.  An attack is detected? lots of angry words, talk about sanctions, expel a few diplomats and fund a combined arms war games for a week, or if you have the capability, knock out on of the attackers hacking centers.

In principle I agree... we're not quite there yet. But give it a few more years - or decades - of further networking and interlinking systems.... if you could potentially disrupt a nations entire infrastructure, powergrid and economy for 1-4 weeks...  a sort of MAD situation might develop, no? An unstable one for sure... as anyone who was attacked would have to establish "who'd dunnit" before being able to retaliate.

[Ghostavo]

the difference is scale, pursue an individual for hacking and all that is effected is the hacker and their loved ones.

pursue a nation too hard and you risk a war, then many die, why? because on nation disabled a warship for a couple of days just because they could.

edit.

what happens if one nation hacks another's nuclear arsenal and launches a missile at the missile's owner's capital?

So if the warship had been disabled by physical means (say a torpedo) instead of a virus, the reaction would be the same?

no because that is a clearly defined act of war and is more likely to cause injury and fatality not to mention the loss of the ship

So what about a hypothetical strike against an unmanned military device vs using a virus to crash it into the ground?

[headdie]

the difference is scale, pursue an individual for hacking and all that is effected is the hacker and their loved ones.

pursue a nation too hard and you risk a war, then many die, why? because on nation disabled a warship for a couple of days just because they could.

edit.

what happens if one nation hacks another's nuclear arsenal and launches a missile at the missile's owner's capital?

So if the warship had been disabled by physical means (say a torpedo) instead of a virus, the reaction would be the same?

no because that is a clearly defined act of war and is more likely to cause injury and fatality not to mention the loss of the ship

So what about a hypothetical strike against an unmanned military device vs using a virus to crash it into the ground?

might be easier just to use local signal jamming, also unmanned vehicles apart from when in maintenance are likely unpowered until they are needed and currently they the main use is for entering unfriendly regions which would be the greater act of war