Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘stuxnet’

Not yet. The virus has damaged so far mainly uranium enrichment centrifuges at Natanz  in Iran. Maybe it has delayed the Bushehr nuclear plant going online. No widespread radioactive contamination yet, no airplane crashes. No erroneous firing of missiles, or just another war in the Middle East. So far.

President Obama, who is in the midst of a re-election campaign, apparently is in need for good news. So, it was him who had ordered cyber attacks on Iran already in 2009. Despite his elaborated, well, hypocritical overtures in Nowruz messages to the Iranian people in 2009 and 2010. Does he know that he might just have opened Pandora’s box? Does he consider the consequences of expected reverse engineering?

As Jason Ditz at AntiWar puts it, “the enormous damage such viruses have caused when they inevitably move beyond the target and start attacking computers worldwide suggest it isn’t exactly a panacea … .” A fiasco so far.

Last modified June 2, 2012.

Read Full Post »

Update below. Update II.

In the absence of constructive talks (those of world powers P5+1 and Iran in January in Istanbul must be considered a fiasco) positions as regards Iran’s nuclear program won’t change. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has established itself independently of the United Nations and cannot enforce UN Security Council resolutions. It investigates the status quo and reports to the latter and the UN General Assembly. IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano’s impatience with Iran might be understandable. But this time he tends to pillory a member state. Amano’s latest report on Iran lists, as a novelty and in greater detail, areas where Iran does not meet its obligations “as indicated in this reports and previous reports of the Director General.”

Well, insisting time and again that Iran has to halt its allegedly (un)peaceful nuclear program isn’t very much diplomatic and definitely won’t lead anywhere. Just ignoring the fact that Iran interprets its withdrawal from voluntarily implemented, but never ratified in the Majles, Additional Protocols and modified Code 3.1 during the period between late 2003 and 2006 and 2007, respectively, when the IAEA had “referred the case” of Iran’s nuclear program to the UN Security Council differently doesn’t make it better. Nor does insisting of giving up uranium enrichment. The latest report may almost be considered as a gruff request for Iran leaving the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) of which the country is a signatory since 1968.

If Iran doesn’t have to hide any military dimension of its nuclear program, something what it doesn’t get tired to emphasize (while the West doesn’t get tired to pretend the opposite), why then not ratify its Additional Protocol and modified Code 3.1 subsidiary agreement which would only help to earn some confidence? That and the immediate lifting of UN sanctions should have been on the agenda in Istanbul; rather than the dead as a dodo nuclear swap deal.  

 

Update. In a letter to the IAEA  Board of Governors in March 2010, Iran’s Ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh had responded to similar language in Amano’s first report on Iran’s nuclear program and explained, inter alia, that design information on nuclear facilities will be provided to the IAEA according to Code 3.1 of the NPT of 1976, i.e., 180 days before becoming operational.

Update II. The most surprising move regarding Iran’s never-ending story about Bushehr’s light water reactor which was about to go online this month happened, according to Amano’s report, on Wednesday this week, when the IAEA  was informed that  Iran would have to unload fuel assemblies from the reactor’s core. A body blow for Iran’s peaceful nuclear program. The news came just one week after inspectors had visited the site. Iranian officials have largely denied that the malware Stuxnet may have infected the Bushehr reactor and caused major damage. The New York Times reports today that Russian experts have repeatedly expressed concern that, if infected, the reactor may run a high risk for a nuclear disaster.

 

Last modified February 26, 2011.

Read Full Post »

Is there anything to negotiate in the upcoming meeting of Iran with members of World powers (P5+1) in Istanbul on Friday this week? A different sound of war drum beats can be heard these days. Stuxnet, probably a joint venture of the U.S. and Israel to bring Iran’s nuclear program to an end, may even have infected the computers which are supposed to run the Bushehr light water reactor in the south of Iran. Russian nuclear officials have already warned Iran that it might soon face a catastrophe like that in Chernobyl in 1986. Iranian state-controlled presstv has hastily denied that alert.

The meeting in Istanbul might end with a surprise result: Iran might give up its nuclear aspirations.

Update. One should not miss Jeffrey Carr’s article at Forbes here. The story is not over yet (although the Iranians are apparently very  nervous).

Read Full Post »

Today, state-controlled Iranian TV channel presstv surprisingly refers to a New York Times article by William J. Broad, John Markoff and David E. Sanger on a close collaboration of US American and Israeli experts at Israel’s nuclear site Dimona when developing the Stuxnet computer malware. It is generally held that Stuxnet has already caused tremendous damage to hundreds of uranium centrifuges in Natanz in Central Iran.

Stuxnet malware targets frequency converter drives. A, well, somewhat cute video has been produced by Symantec, see above.

Meir Dagan, Mossad’s outgoing chief has recently conceded that Iran might be another four years behind its capability of manufacturing an atomic bomb. In The New York Times, Broad et al. write,

“The Dimona complex in the Negev desert is famous as the heavily guarded heart of Israel’s never-acknowledged nuclear arms program, where neat rows of factories make atomic fuel for the arsenal.

“Over the past two years, according to intelligence and military experts familiar with its operations, Dimona has taken on a new, equally secret role — as a critical testing ground in a joint American and Israeli effort to undermine Iran’s efforts to make a bomb of its own.” (Emphasis added.)

President Obama, when asked by former Dean of the White House Press Corps, Helen Thomas, who has recently been fired for anti-Semitic rants, whether he knew of any country in the Middle East possesses nuclear weapons he responded that he won’t “speculate.”

Israel is not a signatory of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). Its former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had indirectly admitted in 2006 that it possesses nuclear weapons. International estimates are about 400 nuclear warheads, including thermonuclear.  Israel is the main obstacle for a nuclear-weapon free Middle East. To collaborate in Israel’s nuclear program is, for an NPT member state, a blatant violation of probably even Article I of the treaty.

What Broad et al. describe in The New York Times is a scenario where, at Dimona, P-1 centrifuges were tested in order to develop the malware. P-1 centrifuges had illicitly been sold by Pakistan’s father of its nuclear bomb, Abdul Qadeer Khan to North Korea, Libya and, well, Iran. While the alleged nuclear collaboration of Israel with the Americans had already been launched under President G.W. Bush who had, also according to the New York Times, authorized a covert program to sabotage the electrical and computer systems in Natanz in early 2008, this program was apparently sped up when Barack Obama took office in January 2009.

Last modified January 16, 2011.

Read Full Post »

A new careful analysis of (and, as usual, wild speculation about) an IAEA safeguards report on Iran’s nuclear program earlier this year by David Albright, Paul Brannan and Christina Walrond of non-governmental, Washington D.C.-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) suggests a dramatic and highly deleterious effect of the mysterious Stuxnet worm on the large number (1000) of operating centrifuges at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP)  in Natanz between November 2009 and February 2010. It seems that in particular module A26 was affected. On February 18, 2010 the International Atomic Energy Agency’s new Director General Yukiya Amano had delivered his first report on Iran and had used, for the first time and in contrast to his immediate predecessor Mohamed ElBaradei, more articulate wording that Iran does not cooperate with the agency in the desired way. Well, at that time, the public had rather scrutinized the report as to whether Iran is in breach of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which it is not.

Thanks to Albright et al. now one might further speculate whether Stuxnet had hit Natanz just before Amano’s first report. There had been other estimates as well. Already in June 2009 the number of fed and spinning centrifuges at FEP had sharply dropped, and on July 17, WikiLeaks wrote on its page, according to Frank Geekheim:

“Two weeks ago, a source associated with Iran’s nuclear program confidentially told WikiLeaks of a serious, recent, nuclear accident at Natanz. Natanz is the primary location of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. WikiLeaks had reason to believe the source was credible however contact with the source was lost. WikiLeaks would not normally mention such an incident without additional confirmation, however according to Iranian media and the BBC, today the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, has resigned under mysterious circumstances. According to these reports, the resignation was tendered around 20 days ago.”

That Mr. Aghazadeh was rather fired is most likely. That Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was fired last week, when on a diplomatic mission to Senegal, who had most probably signaled some concession in the nuclear stand-off with world powers P1+5 on Iran’s nuclear program and that he was succeeded by the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi might reflect the immense frustrations the expensive but malfunctioning centrifuges in Natanz may cause among the Iranian leadership.

What Stuxnet actually does with frequency converter drives can be seen on Symantec’s page here.

Ralph Langner, the German software and security engineer who has extensively studies Stuxnet, writes,

“Many reporters these days ask about cyber warfare in the wake of Stuxnet, and what kind of Stuxnet-inspired attacks we should prepare for. Here’s one very easy answer. The next full-scale Stuxnet-inspired attack, let’s call it Stuxnet 2.0, will likely hit targets in Natanz, Fordow, and Bushehr. That’s right, the very same targets of Stuxnet 1.0. How is that? Simple: After having recovered from Stuxnet 1.0, which will probably be somewhere in 2012, Iran will attempt to continue its nuclear program. Since the first cyber strike worked so well, it would be outright stupid to send the B-2s next time. As long as another cyber attack has any chance for success, it will certainly be attempted.

“The nuclear threat from Iran, should it exist, has been significantly reduced by a software-based DoN attack that appears to be reproducible (DoN = Denial-of-Nukes).”

Well done, I suppose.

Last modified December 23, 2010. 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.