U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told the Associated Press on Saturday that the U.S. military launched cyber-attacks on Iran after the downing of an unmanned U.S. surveillance drone in Iranian airspace on Thursday. Two officials said the cyber-attacks were approved by President Trump; a third official outlined the scope of the attacks.
According to the officials, the cyber-attacks – a contingency plan developed over weeks amid escalating tensions – disabled Iranian computer systems that control its missile and rocket launchers. The attacks specifically targeted Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps(IRGC) computer system. Earlier in the year, the U.S. designated the IRGC as a terrorist organization, a first for a foreign government’s military.
The Associated Press reported one official saying the cyber-attacks were provided as an option after Iranian forces blew up two oil tankers earlier this month. The only “evidence” the U.S. military provided to make that claim was a grainy black and white video of a boat alongside one of the tankers, Tehran has denied the accusation that they attacked the tankers.
No Iranian officials have yet responded to the claims of this cyber-attack, Iran’s Fars news agency said on Sunday. The news agency said it was, “still not clear whether the attacks were effective or not,” and suggested the U.S. media reports were a “bluff meant to affect public opinion and regain lost reputation for the White House” following the downing of its drone.
In 2010 Iran’s nuclear facilities were infected with the so-called stuxnet virus, which is believed to have been a joint U.S.-Israeli creation. Since that cyber-attack Iran has disconnected much of its infrastructure from the internet.
These cyber-attacks are the latest in U.S. aggression against Iran. On Friday President Trump said he restrained from launching an aerial strike on the country but has promised more sanctions.
Dave DeCamp is a freelance journalist based in Brooklyn NY, focusing on US Foreign policy and wars. He is on Twitter at @decampdave.
All this for an unmanned drone in Iranian airspace. And you know it HAD to be in Iranian airspace or the attack that was called off would have certainly went on as planned. This is worse than Iraq2 since they are doing it in slow motion right before our very eyes.
Yeah, slow motion train wreck on repeat. It’s like the tracks are built that way no matter the train driver. Would Trump have any idea that going through the same motions will have the same outcome each & every time, that is, more waste of lives, money and moral? There doesn’t seem to be a way back unless someone somewhere decides on a game changing move. Which more often than not means simply another tragedy.
This is exactly what will happen. It is the ordinary people with no decision making powers that will pay. All the decision makers, their enablers, and mouthpieces always think that they will come on the top, and act as if they bear no responsibility.
A game changing move, or just a blowback — means that nobody will be able to control either outcome or the duration of the moment when earth throws up, people, things, soil.
Just because we do not understand the gratitude and are incapable of being thankful for what we have. We are not guarding our peace jealously.
Peace is a blessing and war is a curse, we all should remember that things could get worse, people are dying while we feed our face, to continue this madness, Is now our disgrace.
Wait- we consider ‘cyber attacks’ to be acts of war, so…… does the same standard not apply to OUR ‘cyber attacks’? Ohhhhh silly me, forgetting that whole ‘exceptionalism’ thing.
Starting a “cyberwar” with Iran isn’t smart. The US is far more vulnerable to Iranian hackers than the reverse. We have more assets in more places they can hit – and the bigger your organization the more vulnerabilities you have. Hackers always have the advantage over defenders in computer security (and in conflicts generally for that matter.) So the US can damage Iran’s systems, but so can Iranian hackers do damage to the US.
Not to mention every other Muslim hacker who doesn’t hate Iran for religious reasons can join in attacking the US.
The US can’t seem to do anything but escalate conflicts as it’s SOP.
Very well said… I have been writing the same for years using the concept of “siege theory” to demonstrate the vulnerabilities of the defender in such attacks…
Next headline, “Iran launches cyber-counter-attacks.” Outrage will follow at that “act of war.”
Except the press will act like they’ve forgotten that the US launched cyber attacks first, thus their headline can’t acknowledge that Iran’s actions were counter anything, it was just aggression. Those details might get buried in the article, just not the headline.
True. Yet this time it is not a mere suspicion. The White House announced we did it, with pride and a big show. There is no deniability here, just memory loss.
time to take down the US defense department
“the US defense department”
What an Orwellian name.
A blatant example of doublespeak that could not of been written better by Orwell himself
If true, all this does is enable Iran to further harden its systems while sending the US back to the drawing board. The vulnerabilities they exploit and their signatures are now known. All new malware and vulnerabilities to exploit are needed.
Iran says the recent US cyber attacks against Iranian missile control systems have failed to cause any disruptions.
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/06/24/599275/Iran-Minister-of-Information-Communications-Technology-Azari-Jahromi-US-cyber-attacks-missile-system
It would be better to say that US “claimed” to carry out cyberattacks. When intel agencies carry out real cyberattacks they don’t talk about it. When they talk about it, we can be pretty sure the talk is a distraction.
US says it cyber attacked Iran, Iran says it didnt work. LOL!!
There is no reality to anything. This may be just hot air. Or a real attack, with no known consequences, Because Iran has hardened their networks and do not want anyone to know just what happened — whether it worked or not. But denying consequences, they are acting predictably—letting us guess if braggadocio is grounded in reality.
The problem is — we are being perceived as not caring about any rules of war that
were meant to protect civilians, As leaders of Western alliance, our attitudes towards international law, especially conduct in war — sets the tone, the example for the globe to follow. Having advantage in military, if not accompanied by leadership, example setting role — sets a foundation for permanent LOSS OF TRUST. It may look cool to our immature leadership to throw their weight about, To talk about using “little” nukes to “win”.
How far will it go — poison peoples’ water and soil? How many ships and planes with passengers aboard to be destroyed? And blamed on somebody else, with brainless media just acting as a megaphone for shrill madmen. And heading into unknown territory by extending our laws to other countries, threatening them with anything that can be threatened without harm to ourselves, but essentially saying to the world — do not assume that all current systems if international trade and finances are really international —,we can disconnect you from them, unless you do what we say. We will particularly go after journalists who provide technology for whistleblowers – — and countries that are our vassals will obey. Puts UK in a very unflattering light, no matter their cheerful attitude.