logoalt Hacker News

Fast16: High-precision software sabotage 5 years before Stuxnet

174 pointsby dd23yesterday at 8:18 PM44 commentsview on HN

Comments

codezeroyesterday at 9:19 PM

My favorite part of this was:

That kind of notation, called SCCS/RCS, is the equivalent of finding a rotary phone in a modern office. Nobody uses it in 2005 Windows kernel code unless their programming background goes back decades, to government and military computing environments

The astrophysics lab I worked at in 2006 was still using svn and had a bunch of Fortran with references to systems from the 70s and 80s. The code ran perfectly well thanks to modern optimizing compilers and having moved from Vax to Linux in the 90s, it was a surprisingly seamless transition.

It reminds me of a conference talk I’ve referenced before “do over or make due” basically implying rewriting large amounts of mostly functioning code was not worth the effort if it could be taped together with modern tools.

show 5 replies
hnthrowaway0315today at 12:35 AM

Download link for anyone who is curious enough:

https://bazaar.abuse.ch/sample/9a10e1faa86a5d39417cae44da5ad...

I'll probably build a Windows XP VM first.

show 1 reply
tiagodyesterday at 10:08 PM

This is an amazing find. I'm very curious regarding the specific targets of these rules, and in the exact changes to the results. Wonder if they will only make a difference in simulated conditions super specific to nuclear reactors?

Lihh27yesterday at 11:03 PM

heh the key move is the worm. you can't catch it by checking on a second box because there is no clean box.

trebligdivadyesterday at 9:06 PM

Haha it's a fun finding though; The source control comment feels a little off; I'm sure there were SCCS (hmm or did cvs use similar?) still around at that time.

show 1 reply
kittikittiyesterday at 11:12 PM

Thank you for sharing this. I was recently pushing the limits of precision computing and this illuminated a part of my research. It built on top of largely government funded research, where I found a surprising dearth of available precision frameworks with verification. Perhaps national security interests, as elucidated by the original poster, discourages transparency of methods for arbitrary precision calculations.

Retr0idyesterday at 8:52 PM

The submitted article appears to be an LLM summary of https://www.sentinelone.com/labs/fast16-mystery-shadowbroker...

show 7 replies
aaron695today at 3:14 AM

[dead]

_alphageektoday at 1:50 AM

[dead]

jeremie_strandyesterday at 10:33 PM

[dead]

vascoyesterday at 10:22 PM

So that's why China still can't make ballpoint pens? /s

slimyesterday at 9:34 PM

sabotaging science must be the most morally corrupt thing you can do as a civilisation

show 6 replies