Skip to content

Comment on US and Israel were behind Stuxnet claims researcherparent

Comments

I've heard the issue discussed by interested parties, though certainly not international law scholars. It seems the commonly held opinion is also a rather simple one - an electronic attack that causes a building to explode would be the same as bombing the building, stealing classified documents electronically is espionage, and so fouling nuclear enrichment would be sabotage.

The critical difference is proving who did it. If you want to prove who bombed your building often there is some physical evidence that can be pretty conclusive. Chemical signatures of the explosives, photographs from customs, caught on video, what type of plane it was etc.

Electronic attacks often fall more in the lines of having circumstantial evidence. Even if "everyone knows" who did it, it probably falls short of proof unless someone takes credit.

Is sabotage an act of war? I'm not sure if there is a set standard. In practice it often seems to get a pass - the CIA was apparently responsible for sabotaging a pipeline in Siberia in 1982 without any international outcry. Especially in the realm of non-proliferation the international community seems to be mostly united. Even overt action like the Israeli bombing of Syrian nuclear sites in 2007 received a muted response at best.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.