Stuxnet, the most advanced computer virus ever discovered (by a long way), generally believed to be the first sophisticated example of a virus being used as an international military weapon, just got an upgrade. Most likely from its original authors.
At least, according to Symantec's analysis lab where a recently found version has been dissected on the operating table, it looks like the versions found in the wild "in Europe" were targeted test runs of a new version that was partly recompiled from the original source code which has so far remained secret.
The new version carries a different payload to the original Stuxnet which, it is generally believed, was intended to shut down or disrupt Iranian nuclear facilities. In fact the new version's actual payload is pluggable. Modules can be loaded dynamically from a command and control server located in India.
Duqu, as the new version is called, can read and write files, execute programs, capture keyboard input (to collect passwords) and generally open back doors for later use by the unknown attackers.
Check out the great article on this by Read Write Web and for a quick recap on the original Stuxnet, check this nicely produced - if creepy - video by Hungry Beast in Australia:
19 October 2011
09 October 2011
Why Programming is Hard
Programming is not hard because computers are fussy. Programming is hard, but not for that reason.
There are plenty of pesky surface details in managing programming projects and programmers regularly find themselves burdened with managing tools and configuration details. More so when using Maven (Zing!).
But this is just work. Annoying repetitive work. It's not what makes programming hard.
In fact, programming is hard because there are so few limits to what you can do.
Certainly there are limits to computability, and there are famous problems and algorithms that define the state of the art in computer science, but for many programmers, knowing about these limits is enough to prevent them from pushing up against the hardness of these limits on a regular basis.
Programming is hard because the only limit is our own mental capability. It's always going to appear to be hard. It doesn't matter how smart you are.
If programming is not hard, then you're doing it wrong. Your brain is not being fully utilised? You are being limited by your tools and you need to replace them.
Any time spent dealing with repetitive details, remembering lots of things or even managing huge amounts of code, this time waste generally can be eliminated with more programming! This assumes you're in a postion to change the system enough and perhaps this is where practical project tradeoffs impose. And perhaps "the business" isn't interested in funding improvements to the open source build tool, or switching from Java to Scala. (Double Zing!) But those are not programming problems.
For me, because software is so soft, the goals can be altered subtly, continuously, destructively. Especially when ill-defined. The hardest thing generally comes down to dealing with the confusion of some form of not being clear what I'm trying to do. Unravelling the "is it this or is it that" trail of mental plans that led to the curent state. When this happens in the large, a software project is almost certain to fail.
But maybe that's just me. Do you think programming is not hard? Do you think it's hard for a different reason?
There are plenty of pesky surface details in managing programming projects and programmers regularly find themselves burdened with managing tools and configuration details. More so when using Maven (Zing!).
But this is just work. Annoying repetitive work. It's not what makes programming hard.
In fact, programming is hard because there are so few limits to what you can do.
Certainly there are limits to computability, and there are famous problems and algorithms that define the state of the art in computer science, but for many programmers, knowing about these limits is enough to prevent them from pushing up against the hardness of these limits on a regular basis.
Programming is hard because the only limit is our own mental capability. It's always going to appear to be hard. It doesn't matter how smart you are.
If programming is not hard, then you're doing it wrong. Your brain is not being fully utilised? You are being limited by your tools and you need to replace them.
Any time spent dealing with repetitive details, remembering lots of things or even managing huge amounts of code, this time waste generally can be eliminated with more programming! This assumes you're in a postion to change the system enough and perhaps this is where practical project tradeoffs impose. And perhaps "the business" isn't interested in funding improvements to the open source build tool, or switching from Java to Scala. (Double Zing!) But those are not programming problems.
For me, because software is so soft, the goals can be altered subtly, continuously, destructively. Especially when ill-defined. The hardest thing generally comes down to dealing with the confusion of some form of not being clear what I'm trying to do. Unravelling the "is it this or is it that" trail of mental plans that led to the curent state. When this happens in the large, a software project is almost certain to fail.
But maybe that's just me. Do you think programming is not hard? Do you think it's hard for a different reason?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)