Iran seems like it has been made a demonstration test range for cyber warfare capabilities. Anything that happens there, we can probably expect anywhere else.
I've been at the edges of these issues for a while, and we've become so dependent on our tech that we're effectively cyborgs. If you freeze or starve without electricity, fuel, or a globalized supply chain it's not synergistic, you are as dependent on it as ancient populations were on a well, fields, or fisheries. If someone sabotaged the wells, fields, or fisheries of a population, it would be worthy of a physical response. The era of brushing off cyber attacks is likely over, and I would treat them as the initialization for rapid kinetic escalation.
Attacks on civilian infrastructure in Iran don't have the same effect as they might in the west because Iran's government is a resource cursed economy, so the happiness and consent of the population doesn't make a difference to who is in power so long as they can export oil. Using cyber against civilian infrastructure in a non-democratic state is a waste of ammo, or worse, a tracer round that gives away your position. If the attack isn't a strategic miscalculation, it's a very direct threat without follow through, and that kind of bluster is a signal of weakness. It just seems unwise.
Looking at the incentives, the logical strategic response for cyber attacks is deterrence, which unfortunately means an overwhelming shock and awe level of force.
The goal could be to make the population frustrated by showing how their government is dysfunctional and hope that they eventually raise against it or at least don't support it when there is a coup or something.
That's pure speculation, but I can't think of any other useful outcome of doing such attack at this point.
What's our (the US) motive at this point beyond institutional inertia? The US is in the process of getting out of the middle east, to the point where the Saudis are making weapons deals with the Russians and reaching out to Israel.
Short of hampering Iran's nuclear capability, there's not much motive left under Biden. As a country we're just slowly ceasing to care.
I think it would be foolish to assume that the US no longer cares about the Middle East just because the boots on the ground are moving out. The US conducts shadow operations across the globe to further their interests. Cyberattacks allow countries to continue to wield power without spending the physical resources that were required in the past.
I’m not sure there’s enough evidence in this case to implicate anyone, including the US, but I don’t think they can be ruled out simply on the argument you’ve presented.
So who then? Parent stated it as if it was obvious. The only remaining Iranian enemy I can see with a "world class highly sophisticated cyber warfare capability" is Israel, and I'm not sure what they accomplish strategically by breaking some Iranian gas stations.
All of Iran's other rivals in the middle east are lacking in said capabilities, and China and Russia tacitly support Iran.
> I'm not sure what they accomplish strategically by breaking some Iranian gas stations.
These are most likely just trial probing runs. Iranian gas stations use government networks for payments using a card issued to citizens for the subsidy. It's just a hop skip and a jump from there to critical military and other strategic infrastructure.
Seems rather poor strategy to tip your hand in such a big way for a probing run. With a crisis this large the Iranian authorities HAVE to respond, and could possibly plug whatever holes are being exploited.
Stuxnet worked because it was subtle. This doesn't fit that pattern at all. Granted it could be a probing-run gone wrong.
Assuming a particular attribution, it wouldn't be fantasy to assume this is payback. Or it could be anything else. For all we know, the regime has a fuel shortage and wants to cover it up with a 'cyber attack'.
Yet another argument against government intervention in trade. Buying and selling should be possible without mandatory step to synchronously notify a govt agency.
Also a slight argument against populist fuel subsidies in petrocracies.
I assume the centralisation is to prevent someone taking the subsidized fuel and either taking it out of the country, or selling it back to a refineary to claim the same subsidy twice for the same fuel.
I've been at the edges of these issues for a while, and we've become so dependent on our tech that we're effectively cyborgs. If you freeze or starve without electricity, fuel, or a globalized supply chain it's not synergistic, you are as dependent on it as ancient populations were on a well, fields, or fisheries. If someone sabotaged the wells, fields, or fisheries of a population, it would be worthy of a physical response. The era of brushing off cyber attacks is likely over, and I would treat them as the initialization for rapid kinetic escalation.
Attacks on civilian infrastructure in Iran don't have the same effect as they might in the west because Iran's government is a resource cursed economy, so the happiness and consent of the population doesn't make a difference to who is in power so long as they can export oil. Using cyber against civilian infrastructure in a non-democratic state is a waste of ammo, or worse, a tracer round that gives away your position. If the attack isn't a strategic miscalculation, it's a very direct threat without follow through, and that kind of bluster is a signal of weakness. It just seems unwise.
Looking at the incentives, the logical strategic response for cyber attacks is deterrence, which unfortunately means an overwhelming shock and awe level of force.