Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 28th May 2012 23:32 UTC
Privacy, Security, Encryption "A massive, highly sophisticated piece of malware has been newly found infecting systems in Iran and elsewhere and is believed to be part of a well-coordinated, ongoing, state-run cyberespionage operation. The malware, discovered by Russia-based anti-virus firm Kaspersky Lab, is an espionage toolkit that has been infecting targeted systems in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, the Israeli Occupied Territories and other countries in the Middle East and North Africa for at least two years. Dubbed 'Flame' by Kaspersky, the malicious code dwarfs Stuxnet in size." Since I'm not particularly well-versed in the subject, maybe someone can answer this question for me: if country A creates a malware infection like this to spy on and/or harm computers in country B, can it be construed as an act of war under existing international law?
Thread beginning with comment 519847
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Act Of War
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 29th May 2012 10:18 UTC in reply to "Act Of War"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

And I still can't figure out why European's hatred of America and Israel makes them side with those who openly state death to all non Muslims and the objective of turning Europe into a Sharia governed Caliphate.


...wat?

I dislike all acts of aggression, and let's face it, us westerners don't have a particularly clean track record there. How many nations has Iran invaded?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Act Of War
by adinas on Tue 29th May 2012 12:12 in reply to "RE: Act Of War"
adinas Member since:
2005-08-17

I didn't say Iran invaded anyone (though Iran's Hezbollah militia have taken over Lebanon effectively making it occupied Iranian territory). Iran does arm Shiite groups throughout the Middle East who do carry out attacks on Sunni civilians.

Where in Western countries like the U.S. there is at least an internal debate on how moral their actions are and no intentional killing of civilians, Iran officially supports the spread of Shiite beliefs through violence against civilians. And this is what give the U.S. the moral high ground.

Edited 2012-05-29 12:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Act Of War
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 29th May 2012 12:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Act Of War"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Right, saying "we don't want to kill civilians" yet still be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of them this past decade alone makes it alright.

Amazing.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Act Of War
by Loreia on Tue 29th May 2012 13:29 in reply to "RE[2]: Act Of War"
Loreia Member since:
2012-01-17

...And this is what give the U.S. the moral high ground.


No, it gives them only a cheap justification.

P.S.
I kind of thought this would be about computer virus, not politics.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Act Of War
by Soulbender on Tue 29th May 2012 23:49 in reply to "RE[2]: Act Of War"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Where in Western countries like the U.S. there is at least an internal debate on how moral their actions are and no intentional killing of civilians


Iran Air Flight 655.
Yeah, that's some moral high ground. Funny how you seem to think you're above accepting responsibility for your screwups.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Act Of War
by phoehne on Tue 29th May 2012 23:43 in reply to "RE: Act Of War"
phoehne Member since:
2006-08-26

Iraq. They fought a bloody, ghastly war for something like 10 years. In that time they tried to shut down the Persian gulf by threatening to shot anti-ship missiles into vessels.

Reply Parent Score: 2